So they finally opened the can of worms and their September 5 issue of
ESPN the Magazine has Michael Vick (in all of his facets) as the cover story.
I opened up this can of worms two years ago, and was banned from posting anything on ESPN as a result!!
(Protip: If you don't think this doesn't mean that they want Philly to win the damn Super Bowl with him as MVP, you're fooling yourselves...)
Well, somebody went and did the same thing that effectively got me banned and asked the question in a very intelligent article:
What if Michael Vick were white?
You can read the answer that they put in the magazine at the link.
Here's my answer:
- He would have had less of a chance of being raised in a culture in which violence is about the sole means of societal advancement.
- Hence, he probably would've had less of a chance to be involved in anything such as dog-fighting.
- At the same time, however, we probably never would've heard of the guy. As the article correctly points out: "When Michael Vick plays, I see streetball. I don't just mean that sort of football where you have to count to four-Mississippi before you can rush the quarterback, nearly everything breaks down and it's all great fun."
Basically, he would not BE Michael Vick if he weren't black. (The article by Toure:
"All of that is why, to me, Vick seems to have a deeply African-American approach to the game. I'm not saying that a black QB who stands in the pocket ain't playing black. I'm saying Vick's style is so badass, so artistic, so fluid, so flamboyant, so relentless -- so representative of black athletic style -- that if there were a stat for swagger points, Vick would be the No. 1 quarterback in the league by far.")
Unlike many people, I believe his entire persona, and the crimes, were products of a racial-cultural divide which has not made blacks inferior, but less desirable to society -- specifically unless that society sees value in them.
And if you don't believe me, read this part of the article for yourself:
Toure says: "
The problem with the "switch the subject's race to determine if it's racism" test runs much deeper than that. It fails to take into account that switching someone's race changes his entire existence. In making Vick white, you have him born to different parents. That alone sets his life trajectory in an entirely different direction. Thus when this hypothetical white Michael Vick ... wait, I can't even continue that sentence in good faith. I mean, who would this white Vick be? That person is unknowable. When you alter his race, it's like those Back to the Future movies where someone goes back in time, inadvertently changes one small thing about his parents' dating history and then the person starts to disappear. If Vick had been born to white parents, you wouldn't even be reading this right now. That Vick would have had radically different options in life compared with the Vick who grew up in the projects of Newport News, Va., where many young black men see sports as the only way out.
This is not to say there aren't insights to be gained from hypotheticals. One pertinent question: Would a white kid have been introduced to dogfighting at a young age and have it become normalized to the extent that he builds it into his life after he joins the NFL? It's possible, but it's far less likely because what made Vick stand out among dogfighters is less race than class. The deep pockets of an NFL star led to a kennel that was too big not to fail eventually. But if it did, though, would this white kid have been busted?"
It is this divide which has me shaking my head at these feral black-on-white robbery/lynch mobs which have come up all over the country -- and that mentality comes from the same place as Michael Vick's, as a dog-fighting thug piece of shit and a football player.
The vast majority of the players (Rapistburger is one counter-example to be mindful of, yes...) who are running afoul of the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy and a lot of the NCAA violations are black. Increasingly, Roger Goodell is taking the mantle from David $tern: A white man marketing a black man's game.
If we are going to "clean up sports", we have to deal with this divide. We have no choice but to do so. These things come from the same place that druggists and gang leaders in Florida allow
little kids in the Florida youth football leagues to make money (while gambling on their games, no less!!!) to play football to keep roofs over the heads of their parents.
Michael Vick is a piece of shit who should never have been allowed to walk the streets again for dog-fighting.
Michael Vick is a street thug.
Michael Vick is also a hero to many aspiring black street thugs all over the nation.
But that is NOT simply because he is black, but because of his
conduct. The problem is that it would a naive idiocy to not believe that his race and his conduct are not somehow intertwined.
AnarchAccountant says it well in the comments to this article:
"Here is the real answer to this question: If Michael Vick were white, he would not have been hailed as the jesus-like all conquering hero by ESPN, both before and after his dog fighting issue.
The dog fighting part is just window dressing, could have been any crime, which one is not important. What is pushing such questions and controversy is the four-letter networks undying need to create a hero, particularly one with "swag", one where they can sell the attitude and the danger. Same way it was done with Allen Iverson who was mentioned in the article.
No-one wants Vick to be white. Not the worldwide leader, not all the companies marketing products to the black community, and certainly not all the writers and commentators who never cared that Warren Moon was a great quarterback and so desperately want Vick to be an affront to America."
I believe the Philadelphia Eagles, as of the pre-season, are going to be rigged to win the Super Bowl. Michael Vick, his crimes, and who the league is marketing to (this inner-city thuggish mentality which appeared to start with the likes of Ray Lewis, Rae Carruth, and the Madden series of about the last 10-12 years) all point in this same direction.
