McNabb’s Plight Illuminates NAACP Ignorance
You could say sports are the most oft-used allegory in the lay-philosopher’s explanation of life’s meaning.
We hear the sporting analogies too often.
“Timmy, doing homework now is hard, but stay in the game, tough it out, and someday you’ll be a winner.” This is inevitably followed by, “Now if you need more help with your paper, ask your mother. I need to watch the strongman competition.”
And yet, the game, and all that surrounds it, still affords us the opportunity to illuminate issues of far greater importance, ones that affect more than fantasy-starved legions of cubicle-ites who are tired because they stayed up too late watching the 1 AM Sportscenter.
Like, real issues.
This week saw one of them.
When J. Whyatt Mondesire - publisher of a newspaper for blacks and the president of the Philadelphia branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People - ripped into Donovan McNabb in a way that would make even the unkindest of sports analysts blush, the critique was surely the second most important issue.
As is often the case, the social discussion here is far more fascinating.
It is fascinating because more perplexing than the fact that a prominent member of the NAACP would call out McNabb for what he lacks - he added further belittlement by calling him “Donny” in his critique - is that there exists an organization in 2005 that claims it can promote advancements for a single race, period.
Liken this to sports.
Paul Tagliabue is the commissioner of the NFL. His job is to act in the league’s best interests, drive profits, enforce penalties, and generally serve the league in a way that promotes vision, growth, and stability.
This isn’t groundbreaking information.
He is similar to the men who hold positions in other leagues. Gary Bettman in the NHL, Bud Selig in MLB, David Stern in the NBA, Myles Brand in the NCAA…
You get the picture.
The world of sports is a diverse one. Each league or body shares some similar principles, and many leagues share similar rules and general ideals, but inconceivable is the notion that one commissioner, or one central office, could possibly understand the depths of each sport, and could represent the best interests of each similarly.
There can only be discord when such governance happens. And if people want to make comparisons to actual national government, that doesn’t stand up. At that level, democratic governments are in place to protect rights, not advance the cause of a particular group - not to say that doesn’t happen.
But in this case, we speak of idealizations. And “idealized” (or delusional) is all you can call any organization that claims it exists to advance the cause of something as diverse as an entire race.
Even in something as comparatively simplistic as the world of sports we can see that an NAACP-type representation is laughable.
So why do we have the NAACP at all, much less one that would have a member openly attempt to tarnish the reputation of a fabulously talented, well-spoken, almost sure-fire Hall of Fame quarterback who has managed to thrive and become a leader of unquestioned instincts in one of the league’s most difficult markets?
Seriously. Why?
Why in 2005 is there an organization that claims it can speak on behalf of advancing the causes of (writing this word makes me whince) “colored” people everywhere?
Mondesire’s perplexing idiocy shouldn’t even add to this. But it can illuminate the issue.
The NAACP has not endorsed nationally what we might call a conservative agenda. Yet, some of the most powerful African-American’s in the world embrace conservatism. Condeleeza Rice, Colin Powell and Clarence Thomas do not appear concerned that they don’t represent the idealized interests of the NAACP.
This does not say that one must support these people, or not recognize that they are where they are because of their associations with an elected official. It only asks that we recognize the fact that under its heading, they would in fact be ideally supported by the NAACP.
They are black, or as the NAACP would label them, “colored,” and yet they garner little respect.
Why does a prominent member openly support one African-American, and throw Donovan McNabb under the bus based on vague, foolhardy interpretations of football.
The fact is, the NAACP does not choose to support many of the people its title claims it should. It only chooses to support those who maintain allegiances the organization ludicrously deems are in the best interest of an entire race.
It matters little that the national leader of the NAACP has condemned this written attack on McNabb. So he attended one day of public relations 101.
Read what Mondesire wrote:
“In essence Donny, you are mediocre at best. And trying to disguise that fact behind some concocted reasoning that African-American quarterbacks who can scramble and who can run the ball are somehow lesser field generals … is more insulting off the field than on.”
It was Mondesire’s contention that McNabb is essentially ditching his black-quarterback essence by playing the role of the white quarterback, a man apparently resigned to sitting in the pocket, making reads, and distributing the ball to his receivers because he lacks the footspeed to run the ball down the field on his own, play after play.
You might say that Mondesire shouldn’t be taken seriously. His general football savvy is vacuous at best, his ignorance - at least to even the casual football fan - assured.
I think you’re wrong.
He should be taken seriously, as an ignorant part of the leadership of an ignorantly titled organization.
In that sense, despite the condemnations of some of his peers, Mondesire represents the NAACP perfectly.
He claims to represent all people of color.
He really only represents the ones he approves of.
Tags: Donovan McNabb, football, NAACP, NFL
Share This Article
No Comments
No comments yet.
Comment On This Article
From The Gallery
Image Gallery Is Empty!
Website Poll
