THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS

I just watched a movie by Robert Townsend called, "Phantom Punch," a docu-drama on Sonny Liston--written by Ryan Combs, directed by Robert Townsend.  Here's a history on a Heavyweight Boxing Champion of the World, on which little is known--and whose end occurred under very mysterious circumstances.  He came out of the streets, a little rough around the edges (like many us--the ones that they love to hate), to become on of the fiercest boxers this world has ever known!  I strongly suggest that you see it, because it is part of our legacy--one which brings home the political side of boxing: that is, its promoters and their affiliations.

     Through watching this film, I was able to discover how, despite your "God given talent," there are many other factors which go into making your success.  In the case of Sonny Liston, it was the Mafia and Liston's talent, versus Liston's troubled past.  Far too often, all three factors play a part in the Black athlete's/ artist/actor's life--his/her joy and pain and/or their demise. Very often, talent comes from the most disadvantaged areas of our community, and assistance may come from an outside source in order to help   promote it.  Disadvantages often places people in compromising positions--some make the appropriate decisions and some don't; often weighing their soul down or leaving themselves open to exploitation and dead ends.

   Promotion doesn't have to be from outside of our own community or ethnicity--but very often it does.  And when this happens, the phenomena raises several issues:  Chief amongst the issues, "Why don't their own people provide the type of assistance that our type of talent needs?"  If the talent comes from an impoverished area, its' hard to find people who can provide the necessary help, but poverty's not the only reason, however.  The community may be able to throw fund raisers and support all his/her affairs en masse--but nothing more.  There will be some from the area, who will hate its own talented members, simply because they believe their talented think they are better than they are.  Then, amongst us, there are those of us who have bought into the idea that we are a cursed people, and therefore don't believe in other Black folks--always finding something bad to say about everyone who came from their environment--especially if they're on their way to being successful.  The next significant question will probably be, "So why won't the more wealthier, affluential folks of the Black community support the talent of their own ethnicity?"

   This answer would take volumes to explain, but the practice of having another ethnic group managing and sponsoring our own Black talent often puts us in a vicarious situation: One in which their talent alone, may not ensure the progress of our people, due to all the elements present.  Suffice it to say, that amongst our own affluential groups there's a certain amount of disconnect between them and the other classes of our people: one that has its roots in trying to move away from the pain associated with fitting into American mainstream society.  The efforts by those who achieve some modicum of success are individualistic, and are not socially responsible acts from those who achieve it.  They do not perceive as Frederick Douglass did--that the efforts made by individuals is like a pay off; rendering their singular moves ineffective.  It is called tokenism, because a handful achieve a modicum of success, while the masses, with their ethnicity and culture, does not advance.  When others outside of our group becomes culturally responsible for our people's talent (as in sports, entertainment, and the arts, etc.), advancement becomes a dependency based upon others outside of one's ethnicity, social group, and intimate circles. This means the situation becomes something not only based upon managing talent, but indirectly manipulating our ability to control our destiny.  This difference between races creates a certain amount of unfamiliarity, due to cultural, customs, classes, economic, and/or ethnic/race differences.  And although the aspect of managing, promoting and producing exotic talent may not always manifest as "organized crime promoting a prize fighter," as in the case of Sonny Liston--there are many factors which play their part in the success and/or failure of a talented person; one which can have nothing to do with the athlete's ability; factors which should be modified or eradicated as soon as  possible.

    Let's take the game of professional football:

   How about the NFL East and the Philadelphia Eagles?

   The Eagles have had several Black quarterbacks on their team over the years:  There's Randall Cunningham ('87), Don McPhearson ('88) (non-starter), Rodney Peete ('95) (non-starter), Donovan Mc Nabb ('99), Jeff Blake ('04) (non-starter),  Michael Vick (2010).  This ratio between starting Black quarterbacks and non-starters on the Philadelphia Eagles--sort of mimics the way it is for Black quarterbacks all over the NFL.

   As a matter of fact, there has been steadily increasing amount of starting Black quarterbacks, since the NFL inception:  There's Marlin Briscoe ('69), Joe Gilliam ('74),  Vince Evans, Doug Williams ('78),  Warren Moon ('84), Kordell Steward ('97) eras.  Yet very few of these Black quarterbacks ever get to consistently play--or stay--in the league. Right now, there's only 6 Black starters over 32 teams in the NFL. Yet despite their often outstanding, spectacularly mobile plays and wealth of talent--many Black quarterbacks seem to flounder an awful lot--as they vie for the NFL's number one spot: The leader of the offense.

   Amongst the talented Black quarterbacks out there, there's Steve McNair ('95), Charlie Batch ('98), Shaun King ('99), Aaron Brooks ('99), Daunte Culpepper ('99),  Akili Smith ('99), Quincy Carter ('01), Michael Vick ('01), Byron Leftwich ('03), Seneca Wallace ('03), David Garrard ('04), Jason Campbell ('05), Tavaris Jackson ('06), Vince Young ('06), Jamarcus Russell ('08), Cam Newton ('11),  Russell Wilson ('12), and Robert Griffin III (2012).  These are the creme de La creme of the NFL College Draft, usually canvased amongst the top ten.  Now bear in mind, there are many colleges in America who have football teams, whose players never see hyde nor hair of the draft.  These players represent some of the National Football League's most talented athletes in the game of football--yet for most of them, their careers usually become short-lived--eventually floundering from the doubts of public opinion, the media, then casted into oblivion; not lasting half as long as lesser talent amongst their White counterparts in the league.  The most recent addition to this casualty list is Donavon McNabb.

   But these quarterbacks above are just the ones we've seen on the TV screen.  In 2011, there were only six Black quarterbacks starting for the NFL; down from eight starters in the 2008 season.  In my years of watching, I thought knew a lot about football, the Black quarterback, and what's going on in the NFL--but I see I was sadly mistaken.  There's a lot more Black quarterbacks in the NFL than I knew about.  Actually, there are a substantial amount of Black quarterbacks within the NFL, who were selected in the NFL draft--yet few of us never, ever seen them.

   That means talented players purchased, but never utilized: Shelved greatness. Wasted talent.  Amongst the vintage there's James Harris of Buff. ('68),  Mr. Eldridge Dickey of Oak. ('68),  Tony Robinson of Wash. ('87), Andre Ware ('90) Det., Anthony Wright ('99) Pitt., Cleo Lemon ('02) Balt.,  Shane Boyd ('05) Tenn., Quinn Gray ('05) Jack., and DJ Shockley ('06) Atl.,  Then there's Brad Smith ('06) Buff., Darrell Hackney ('06) Clev., Troy Smith,('07) Balt., Pat White ('09) Mia., Josh Freeman ('09)  Tampa, Dennis Dixon ('09) Pitt..  Also Joe Webb ('10) Min., Terrell Pryor ('11) Oak., and Tyrod Taylor ('11). This may seem like a lot, but not when you consider that, in 2011 over 65% of all starting college quarterbacks were Black!  So once again, why aren't there more Black quarterbacks starting in the NFL?!

Why is that?

   Before I go in, let me state this first:  When you pay for someone to work for you, you are entitled to get your money's worth.  Meaning, if you are going to spend the money to get the right talent, you have every right to expect to get what you pay for.  In the West, the Golden Rule is this: "He who has the Gold makes the Rules!"  If you don't like these politics, start your own game and make your own rules!  Even more succinct and direct to the point, is the quote from Gary Bartz that I included in my article "Growing Up As A People" Part II: "I say bluntly that you have had a generation of Africans (Central Asians) that actually believe that you can negotiate, negotiate, negotiate and eventually get some kind of independence.  But you are getting a new generation that has been growing right now, that are beginning to think with their own minds, and see that you can't negotiate up on freedom nowadays.  If something is yours by right, then fight for it or shut up.  If you can't fight for it, then forget it." -- excerpts from "The Warrior's Song.

   

   When a man pays for something, he does so, knowing full well what he wants--and wanting what he asks for!  He does not want to get only what you're willing to give him. . .  It's audacious to tell the person whom you work for, how you think the game should be conducted, or how you want to do things--particularly when he's paying you the salary to have it done specifically his way!  That's like telling a person, whose paying your salary, how to spend his/or her money!  Did you buy it?  Is it yours?  If not, then don't freak with it!  As mom Dukes use to say, "I'm not begging and crying--I'm begging and buying!"  Some of us come into an organization, wanting to tell the person we work for, what we want, how we want, and where we want; without being asked for our opinion (as, unfortunately, is the case with Allen Iverson).  This is not only presumptuous, but very immature--not to mention foolhardy.  It is the promoter's show!  By right, the promoter should get what he paid for.  You may attempt to persuade him, when you are negotiating your contract, but ultimately it is the one who produces who has to be rewarded on his investment or there will be no deal.   And if he knows what he wants and you are receiving  money to provide it, you should expect to do it that way--that's just being a good businessman!  Nothing personal.  If you want to be sentimental and do what you like--say that up front, and see how far that gets you.  See who he would recommend you to.  Cooperation is the name of the game; either that, or get your own.  After all, no one is indispensable.

   America is the world that the disgruntled, risk-taking, entrepreneurial Europeans made or created for themselves!  They came here to colonize and bring back riches to the many European royal companies who made the trip possible (like Queen Isabella of Spain).  When we talk about American team sports and their owners, we are talking about a microcosm of a macrocosm. This land is made--not for you and me--but for the European nations who came to colonize it!  That's just the way it is.

That's just the way it is.

   In the case of American Football, the NFL is a league proliferated with rich American team owners of European ancestry, purchasing players to play for their respectable teams.  They have their ways, ethnicities, social behavior, traditions, proclivities and idiosyncrasies.  The owners are a social class of businessmen and women which pay the salary of the coaches, managers and general managers, medical personnel, trainers, pays taxes and some times luxury tax; sometimes purchasing arenas (with box areas for their elite to view their team like royalty).  With all of this outlay, you should know that he/or she obviously expect to get what they pay for.  Many under bid, just for the opportunity. They buy whatever they want, as long as they present the terms and they are ethical (as far as their country is concerned);  and sometimes not even then. They have the right to say what they want, and our talent has the right to refuse and/or start their own (but most don't).

   I could have said, "There are rich, White NFL team owners, who are drafting players for their teams, or employing players for their teams"--but I don't think that statement properly reflects the true experiences:  These players are like Roman gladiators, or like Christians in the den with lions in the coliseum.  In many, many ways, working for someone outside your own ethnic group, is like indentured servitude or slavery.  The reason being is, because these situations bring about the highest opportunity for unethical conditions to occur underneath the surface of business/employment transactions.  America (during the 1850s) had children way under 15 years of age, holding down adult jobs in the states. Children worked around dangerous equipment, for long hours and without being required to go to school.  It took until the 1900s, before the American Labor Laws evolved enough make things fair and ethical.  But employers expect to  determine the terms of your employment with the company (the company policy or employee handbook).  In other words, their expectations are specified in the employee handbook, and when you violate those terms--they have grounds to terminate your employment.  Simple as that!  If you enter into this arrangement, this is what you should expect.  Yes, employees have rights and slaves don't--but in terms of the employer's rules--there is no difference (unless the expectations are unconstitutional).

    When a person plays Madden Football (a sports video game), they pick the available players according to their featured ability.  The same goes with playing the game of chess: When a person plays chess, they select the type of piece or pieces that are most capable of performing the types of moves that fit the strategy he or she wants; right down to the type of protective capability needed--to secure the areas that are captured for that person's side.  But (as in real life), the owner, or one who put these things together, is the ultimate controller and mastermind--and the team follows his philosophy; they are his tools.  Just in case you haven't noticed, during free-agency or at the termination of a contract, when players are traded, or go to other teams--players judge their words very carefully--knowing their situation is very precarious: Therefore, they do not want to offend the rich owners who belong to the league (which is the same as it is with Blacks, other non-Whites, and the European nations within the League of Nations). . . Because if he offends a member of the league, it is  a good chance that he  will never play professional sports again: a.k.a., you better recognize on which side your bread is buttered.

   Football is a game, where the owners purchase the players necessary to carry out their designs--that is, according to their team's type of warfare.  In this respect, the owner is hiring servants to play "his game of football" for him.  It is like the army, in the sense that he doesn't want them to think for him, just follow instructions.  He picks "his players" to play in the NFL, which is a football league that is mainly owned by (as far as I know) White owners, which play against other White owners.  These owners select coaches which will carry out "their type" of game and guide that team according to the owner's style (otherwise he fires them).  This is the way of  the NFL: Their game and their rules.  If we play in this game and they pay us to perform, we will have to play by those rules, if we want to play the game at all (and stay in their company and the league).  If "this game" is your type of "game," and their type of game meets with your approval, then there is no conflict (at least from your point of view).  If you are playing the game just to get paid (or get what THEY got), and you don't care about how your actions effects others of your ethnicity or group--or whether or whether not  it compromises your values; then most people would have call you would have been considered a prostitute or a "sell-out," back in the day.

    In America, during the Segregated Period, Blacks wouldn't have had even the chance to play in these games, whether they wanted to or not! Sort of like the Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer story, if you don't object to the fiction. . .  Back in those days, there were Black and White leagues; and never did the two mix--except for the "Exhibition Games," where the Blacks would usually win.  During those times, we had a league of our own and they had theirs.  Yes they played with the same rules but the owners were black: There were no players trying to negotiate with a people they had little in common with.  The ethnicity was the same.  For example, in Baseball--their was The Negro Leagues.  The Negro League had referees, penalties to regulate the game, coaches to spearhead the game, and fans to give public opinion--and they were all Black.  It was the Blackman's idea of himself in major league baseball.  In Kwanzaa, this principle is called Kujichakalia or self determination.  The right define things according to your standards (similar to autonomy and determination: the process by which a country determines its own statehood and forms its own government).  Now just imagine a town where the mayor, the banker and the businesses were all Black. . .  Children could aspire to do the job their parents did one day--hired by people who had the same or similar cultural ethnicity or similar values.  So many things could have been done with this type of scenario--if we had gone the way of fighting for human rights, instead of civil rights.  But people often hanker for things denied to them. . .

   Of all the ways represented in the struggles for Black power in the 1960s, it is the struggle for civil rights which created the current scenarios we live under today (both societies are united under the rule of those of European descent). . .  This was the consequence of having chosen civil rights (having rights within a single society) overtop of human rights (being viewed equally; as a man or woman because they are both human being for example). Civil rights are the rights of citizenship versus the struggle to recapture our culture and self identity, as a group of people living amongst other ethnicities within the wilderness of North America.  Before the Civil War, the North took advantage of the South's raw materials; the South seceded, and the North won the war.  The result was both reunited under the jurisdiction of the North: something the South still does not accept (many still fly the Confederate flag in protest).

    Choosing another people's ways, instead of establishing our own in North America, has left us dependent upon that same culture for direction and/or distinction.  Somethings--like freedom--is non negotiable at any sum of money or any acquisition.  I hope you get this story's allegory--metaphor, innuendo, implication and point.  The ones who used to own some of us, now judge us--according to how well we play the game!  In America--for example--you can only object within the guidelines of being a team player or citizen (civil rights), but not according to certain ethnicities being persecuted and discriminated against, within a country (human rights), like the Bosnian conflicts (known as the Bosnian war).  At least, there would have been more economic and political control once the United Nations or League of Nations helped to resolve the conflict. . .  We rely on them to "get it together," but it's their game, and their code, their rules; when you are playing as an America.  Don't like it? Then work with your own to make alternatives. . .

What does this all mean?

   What I think we, as Blacks in America have the tendency to do, is forget the reason why most Blacks live in America to begin with.  Since most of us do not know, what particular land we came from within Central Asia, most of us do not have a particular identification to a nation, country, or culture within the motherland.  Nor do many of us have a sense of being so-called "Afro-centric" (African/Central Asian-centered), or living a Afrocentric perspective--one which would gather our ethnicity and traditions together.  Most of us identify to the ways, culture and customs of those who held us captive--those who made us slaved for them for free.  Some of us think that all of that is in the past, and it's ok to embrace an American lifestyle, and assimilate American ways; a.k.a. just fit in: Forget about our previous lineage, heritage and culture.  Many believe that the original terms of servitude made for Blacks--propagated by the slave master's mentality--would not have an impact on the current day's assessment of us by Whites in America. A lot believe that the past has nothing to do with White's ability (those of European descent) to act with racial equality towards all non-White people in America. Well, it would be very hard to prove, or disprove their ill-conceived contempt--beyond all this appearance of political correctness, a.k.a. camouflaged opinions.  That is just another form of diplomacy and political control, while keeping your real feelings to yourself.  Yes, there has been some advancements since the slavery of the Blackman in America: Yes, there has been some advancements for Blacks, above of what Blacks had in the 1960s--but it's not commensurate to the same type of freedom, justice, and equality, Whites in America enjoy today.  It is not equally proportional (if so, let me have your half--LoL).

   Gary Bartz was onto something, when he said:  "There are a generation of Africans [which live in America a.k.a. Central Asians] which actually believe that you can negotiate, negotiate, negotiate and eventually get some kind of independence." These types of Blacks in America are barking up the wrong tree.  Many of us feel that we can plea to the White man in  America sense of sensibility, or play the game of semantics with their auxiliary of spin doctors.  That philosophy is dead; Whites are not there:  They want it all, and the best of it all   Most of them will only relent, when forced to.  Its tough being a Black quarterback (leader) amongst American owners of European descent.
  

How did things get here?

   When we were bought over here from the Central Asian part of the Asian continent, we were not pilgrims, like the Europeans (West Asians) were.  We were brought here by the English, to work on the land the colonists took, as their servants: First as indentured servants--then as a permanent work force for life (as their slaves); or free labor for the benefit of White slave owners.  Not all Europeans were slave owners but they all were colonizers.  Eventually the English were able to take over America from the rest of their European neighbors (European colonists).  America became an English colony which was free of English religious persecution (despite the fact that there were natives here before they colonized it).  In other words, the colonists stole this land from the original inhabitants.  This his*story, is something we learned in American schools--but in a much more palpable manner:  None of these European colonists had no intention of sharing their world with the natives who owned the land, or the Blacks who helped build it.  In Bermuda, the English colonists (rather than worry about giving each servant land to live on after tenure), simply worked "their slaves" to death, then replaced them with new ones (to then face the same fate).

  These European descendants had no intention of having to deal with Blacks as equals--nor did the ones in America:  Blacks were considered of an inferior, menial class, and definitely not equal to Whites--in their eyes.  The rules may appear different today, but who knows what goes on behind closed doors? Maybe the law enforcers feel the same way, but they know better than to speak about it.  Diplomacy is the best policy in American society.  Who knows what each of American "thinks" individually?  In America, there is a big thing about being politically correct; while hiding one's true intent under their cap.  Under this premise, who can make sure proper conduct is reinforced?  What invisible, clandestine forces are at work here?  Many people died in the Revolutionary war, but the lodge says none of them were Masons.  Did you know that during the Revolutionary War, both the noble and the working class Masons wore their regalia while in battle?  Did you know that they would only capture (not murder) a fellow Mason during war?  Maybe we should ask Mr. Albert Pike. . .

   It wasn't just that Blacks were made enslaved to work in America, but America made laws to regulate the slave trade, distribution, determine the rights and jurisdiction concerning Blacks.  It is a known fact  America allowed it, otherwise those who had slaves and participated in those deeds, would have been performing an illegal act.  Indeed, America institutionalized slavery, right down to her woven American fabric; indirectly indoctrinating White Americans with the notion of inferiority of the Black people and Superiority of Whites.  This is the under-current of American society of European descent.  Needless to say, although many Whites will not say it out of political incorrectness, it should come as no surprise that many Whites feel this way about Blacks--simply because it has been ingrained into their psyche over time; custom and tradition.  Anyone disagreeing with this perspective, only need to Google "America's legal position concerning slave rights," or read the conclusion of the judge concerning the Dred Scott case.      

   We Blacks in America did not win our freedom from rebellion: we won freedom en masse at the hands of Frederick Douglass' negotiations with President Abraham Lincoln.  Douglass promised that Black freemen and slaves would fight on the side of the Union (even though combat pay was tardy and unequal to that of Whites), to defeat the Confederate South and reunite the country in exchange for the freedom of Blacks.  As a result of the war effort  by Blacks, the Union won the Civil War.  And as promised, Lincoln freed Blacks from physical bondage by issuing the Emancipation Proclamation.  But Emancipation Proclamation did not repatriate Blacks, neither did America give monetary assistance to our people; America did not attempt to remove the psychological scars of slavery:  Lincoln merely set our people free, without cash or in lieu of.  This too, might of happened because Lincoln himself was engrained with the idea of Black inferiority and therefore would only go but so far. . .

   Since most Whites already controlled the land now, and the general view was that Blacks are an inferior menial class--the government acted as if these things were true, and did nothing to alter that opinion or view, until Black protest provided political pressure.  The government and its' succession of presidents after Lincoln, never attempted to remove any of these stereotypes until the Black Power/ Civil Rights Struggles of the 1960s--someone hundred years later.  Many Whites were quite content in that role for us--wanting us to "stay in our place."  As said earlier, this was not going to change unless Whites were forced to change it.  However, the Whites who were against it received great pressure from ones who were!  I might add that I heard by personal account (voice recordings of Malcolm's speeches), Malcolm X was never an advocate for Civil Rights.  Malcolm insisted that Black people should for petition the League of Nations for the human rights of Black people within America.  He saw autonomy and self development to be the best route for us as a people.  We were enslaved here for three hundred thirteen years (1865) without any money, then release without an ounce of education, financial assistance, while being segregated against; calling it "separate but equal" circumstance.

   Our ancestors and the abolitionist movement which put moral, ethical and political pressure on White America to play fair and include us in rights and proper citizenship.  Since the days of indentured servitude, it was never White America's intention to have Blacks join colonial White society.  In other words, these "negotiators" (abolitionists, Frederick Douglass, and company) attempted to appeal to America's sense of conscience concerning that  "peculiar institution" and received nothing but token gestures.  Yet the attempt had to made to show and prove to us that this route was futile. . .

Though not expressed openly in current days (due to it's political incorrectness), most White America holds a stereotypical view that Blacks are a low-menial class and in no way their equal--often disliked and treated with ill-conceived contempt.  Therefore being a quarterback in the NFL, is somewhat analogous (or equal) to being a captain of a ship or commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and many Whites inwardly feel, in no way a position that a Blackman should fulfill.  Those Whites who have this distorted view concerning Blacks in America, would find it particularly troubling to have a Black quarterback at the helm of "their ship"--constantly creating half-baked during water-cooler conversations of why they should get rid of the Black quarterback currently running their favorite team.  Mind you, the Black quarterback on most NFL teams are micro-managed by the coaches and the owners--not like the other quarterbacks in the NFL--but if you sign up for "their" teams, you play by their rules. . .

   In the movie, "Remember The Titans," when the Titan's Black quarterback was blind-sided by a defensive lineman, whose path was unabated--a fellow White team mate (and friend of the perpetrator) revealed that one of the Titan's lineman (who happened to be White) refused to block for the quarterback.  Even-though it is just a movie, we can't help but believe this sometimes occur in real life.  And unless the offensive line consists of all-conscious Blackman who are sensitive and compliant to the need, the Black quarterback will always be subject to camouflaged contempt by his fellow White offensive linemen--and sometimes jealous Blacks.

      Don't forget, all the credit, praise, and criticism for a football team get attributed to the helmsmanship of the quarterback.  There were not many Whites who want a Black leader for their multi-racial team.  They wanted a White man as the leader for a multi-racial team.  As a matter of fact, in the past, quite a few Black quarterbacks were asked to switch to wide receivers, tight ends, and running backs,etc., when they entered the NFL--particularly from the earliest times up unto the late 60's early 70's.  This was most likely done to "save face" in the NFL, concerning the public opinion of most of their White fans and fellow team mates.  I wouldn't be surprised, if some form of affirmative action is the basis behind the picking of the Black quarterback for the NFL--but unspoken White public opinion being the basis behind not starting him.

   After all, the most common statements Blacks hear from White fans concerning Black quarterbacks, is that "he can't throw accurately" or that "he can't read defensive themes."  I guess that's why these Black quarterbacks usually as the top ten in the draft--because they couldn't throw, ehh?  Besides that, for those who saw "Remember The Titans," in the opening game, there was a Black quarterback who was critically injured from an unabated tackle by a defensive player.  In order for this to happen, one or more of the offensive players had to allow it.  In this case (it was revealed in the film), it was a prejudiced White player on the same team, who allowed this to happen.  As I said, there are several factors as to why certain athletes don't perform well and some are beyond their control (and sometimes beyond their scrutiny as well). . .

   Of course, Philadelphia Blacks would be able to speak a lot about the Donovan McNabb/Michael Vick situation--since it happens to be so close to the vest.  Ever since he got here, Donovan has been made very socially conscious, where the team and our people are concern.  He got wide receiver, Terrell Owens here, by pleading with management (a management which is notorious for doing half of what it takes to win it all, but enough to fill up the seats and make revenue), and through the teams overachievement, the Eagles made it into NFL Super Bowl XXXIX.  Although Owens proved very problematic to McNabb, he never lost faith in helping talented Black people out.  He solicited for the Eagles to give Michael Vick and opportunity to get back into the league.  This would prove fatal to his career, because the Eagles secretly chose youth and talent over McNabb's track record (unbeknownst to him) and traded him, while keeping the younger Michael Vick (a younger talent which offers longer service for less money).  Despite all his Eagle-breaking records and team advancements, the owners unceremoniously dismissed Donovan McNabb in trade.  It seems like there was not too much consideration, on behalf of the organization, concerning McNabb as a person.

   Andy Reid gives a large White fan base what they want--he benches McNabb (who asks to be traded) for Kevin Kolb (White), then benches Kolb for Michael Vick with a rag-tagged offensive line.  So Mike plays a valiant game of "run for your life" and completes quite a few passes while he's at it.  The team saves money (which made Lurie and his "treasurer" happy) by not quickly replacing their offensive deficiencies, while Vick replaces with his career hanging behind him.  Kolb gets traded to the Cardinals, Vick gets a big contract for "run, Blackman, run." McNabb and coach Mike Shanahan of the Washington Redskins don't work out.  Now Mike is the starter, but the other parts are not in place, but he does make things look exciting as he evades the defense.  Owner, Jeffrey Lurie, makes a "do or die" statement towards coach Reid, with Nick Foles (the next White quarterback replacement) was waiting in the wings.  Mike stumbles out of the starting blocks; the porous line is letting the defense in like that seen in "Remember The Titans"--and the majority starts to call out for their 'hope," Nick Foles.  All of a sudden, the line looks like they can block and protect.  Guys aren't dropping the ball--but they hadn't won enough to evict Vick.  It is possible that those linemen found it hard to block for a mobile quarterback, but it is also possible that there are more clandestine forces at play here.The sentiments are obvious and his success is suddenly out of his control.  Ones which end in bigotry, inequality, and hatred.

   In the offseason, the press chimes in, saying that Vick won't negotiate his contract--he won't return next season, etc., etc.  Will Nick Foles start this year?  Coach Andy Reid, was fired as promised, and replaced by Chip Kelly (former coach of the college team, the Oregon Ducks).  The media now focused on Geno Smith (Black college quarterback) as the likely draft prospect to beat out Michael Vick as the starter, but Chip Kelly passed up on Geno Smith choosing Matt Barkley (a White quarterback) in the 4th round!  Now tell me, how is a Blackman supposed to feel about all these insults?  Looks like no one seems to be behind Michael Vick.  Rest assured, Mike's feelings are not being considered here, and if he was not raised to be prepared for this two-tier society, his self-esteem could be rattled.  These sort of things can shake anyone's confidence--but a new thing is evolving here. . .

   Most of us fans are looking for a time when a Black quarterback will win one super bowl--without realizing it already has been done: The NFL Super bowl was XXII (22), Washington Redskins versus The Denver Broncos, January 31, 1988, at Jack Murphy Stadium, San Diego, California  Doug Williams was the quarterback, becoming the starter midway through the Redskins season, posting a 11-4 record.  After trailing 10–0 at the end of the first quarter of Super Bowl XXII, the Redskins scored 42 unanswered points, including a record-breaking 35 points in the second quarter, and setting several other Super Bowl records. Williams, who was named the Super Bowl MVP, completing 18 of 29 passes for a Super Bowl record 340 yards and four touchdowns, with one interception.

  The fact that it is barely known in America, and is rarely mentioned during Black History Month, is a statement of how the mainstream society feels about letting the world know.  The fact that Williams did not return the next season; especially after being hurt in that super bowl and winning Super Bowl MVP--signals that something might have been done against the wishes of others in authority; but Gramling State University (historically Black university) coach Eddie Robinson was obviously happy. . . Coach Robinson groomed Doug Williams to do so, despite the obvious adversity.

   In essence, "You were getting a new generation that are beginning to think with their own minds, and see that you can't negotiate up on freedom nowadays.  If something is yours by right, then fight for it," --Gary Bartz.  Michael Jordan has his Bobcats and Jay-Z has his Brooklyn Nets, but it is still just pepper in a big salt shaker: They still belong to an Association which is dominated by American owners of European descent--and will therefore never be equal, because of people of European descent's opinion of other people on the planet; particularly Black people who live in America.  If they are not successful, it will hard to determine what all the causes for their failure would be--because many of their adversities will be hidden by people who do not wish them well.  Obviously Michael Jordan, Jay-Z, Oprah Winfrey, Bill Cosby and Magic Johnson are establishing things as blacks, but they are obviously still believers in the negotiations with Americans of European descent--with other American Whites as the judges.  They are still part of "their" game and will have to play by their rules--keeping at least most of the status-quo.  True change will only take place by choosing either other nationalistic, philosophical, economic, religious and/or cultural realignment.  We are an ethnic group transported to America by force and are in need of proper human rights and repatriation.  It is important that we be treated as a group in need of nationalistic development as a people first; then brought into the mainstream social arena within America, to renegotiate its' own American standings by evolved representatives from our own people.  Simply put, our current position is one in which was given to us, and it is unfair.

   I know it will be sometime before we could put out a product to be comparable to what mainstream society offers, but being under the scrutiny of another man, analyzing whether or not your actions fit into their plans is disgraceful.  While they are in control of the institution, they have the position to judge on things according to how they feel--and because you need what they have, you'll keep coming back.  It is beneath us as a people; but as long as we continue to perform for other people, that's the way it's going to be.  Sometimes the plans are socially, culturally and politically known, and sometimes the plans are unknown: as with  Sonny Liston and his manager and promoter.  An athlete spends most of his time preparing and conditioning his body for the task of performing his/her job to the best of their ability--but the Black athlete has to overcome stereotypes, distrust, and a general belief that there will be some type of adversity, obstinacy or upheaval, on the part of the person who will hire them.  It is like living in a luxurious apartment, as opposed to an ordinary fixer-upper.  While the apartment is glamorous and can attract many to you're seemingly opulence, you can spend money for the rest of your life and never own anything--nor secure a home.  Whereas, if you own your home, in time you shall be able to bring up the beauty--which you already own. 

It does gives you character facing adversity, but it is also depressing to be treated by others that way, unless you believe them to be your enemy.  Sometimes it comes as unspoken words, subtle attitudes, public opinion, prejudices, etc.; shaking a person's confidence every time he steps out on the field or every time it happens.  Is it them or is it me?  Running is just a defense mechanism for Black quarterbacks, for when all else fails. . .  And the frequency reflects a breakdown of his line, the execution of the play by others, the availability of players or his understanding on how to carry out the play.  It makes absolutely no sense to depend on something that's not dependable.  So I hang an up a picture on my front door threshold wall, of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., which has a caption which reads, "Now its up to us," to remind me when I'm entering or exiting. . .

   We, as Black people who live in America and all over the world,  forget that the White man we call colonists, came from Europe to America to start their own colony by deceiving the Native Americans  and stealing their land, then robbing this country of its' natural resources to enrich Europe.  They did this--not out of malice but--because they already depleted most of Europe's resources at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.  We forget  the White man took America from the Native Americans by force, with the idea to start his own realm and escape from religious and political persecution.  In other words, many of the colonists were dissidents from their homeland.  Once the European working class masons colonized the place,  they accused the royal or noble English Masons (who ran the exploration companies like the Raleigh Company of England) of collecting taxes from the colonies--without safeguarding them from the natives or representing their colonial interests in English Parliament.  Using this as a rallying point, Washington and other working class Masons fought for and won their independence from England.  They formed the New World, displace the other European colonies, and started a new White nation.  We have knowledge of all this in our conscious realms, but somehow relegated this to the back of our brains; in a place of  minor significance.  This information is something my person learned in public school--and--if your are like the majority of Americans within the United States, you learned the same story as well.  It's their game.  Their country.  Their rules (and if you don't like it, go home--they say).  I say, if you don't like it, make your own and work towards your own independence as a people--like they did.

Peace and Blessings,

C. Be'erla Hai-roi Myers