Kaepernick and Nike have created a cycle of oppression while claiming to fight against oppression. While I don't necessarily doubt Kaepernick's desire to stamp out [a-little-existent-in-the-US] oppression, he isn't doing a very good job at it. I certainly do, however, question Nike in the matter. Not all of their employees of course, but this is definitely a play for free publicity.
Let's spell it out via a logic train:
1) Kaepernick performs various controversial actions to bring attention to [a-little-existent-in-the-US] oppression.
2) These controversial actions do indeed bring the desired media attention.
3) Nike sees this controversy and decides to hire Kaepernick since he is gathering media attention and it can further their desire to appear to be against oppression.
4) Nike hiring Kaepernick expands the controversy involved.
5) The perpetuated, and now amplified controversy brings more media attention.
6) Media attention is functionally free advertising for Nike.
7) Free advertising is a money saver for Nike, as well as a means by which to improve sales.
8) This inherently increases revenue for Nike - again, saving money on advertising and/or improving sales.
9) Increased sales creates an increase in demand.
10) Increased demand requires an increase in production to meet the demand so that sales can continue.
11) Nike's production is primarily done in China and other incredibly oppressive countries where the workers are paid atrociously low wages and treated terribly because it's a cheap means of production.
Being that the cycle above is being followed, Kaepernick and Nike are inherently perpetuating the same oppression that they claim to be battling.
As the saying goes, "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions".
-Mike H