Vick-Tim: The Hypocrisy That Dogged Michael Vick

By Kenneth N. Robinson
Updated: September 5, 2007

BUFFALO — Now that Michael Vick has pled guilty to federal charges associated with dog fighting perhaps a more sobering perspective can emerge. What has been most shocking is the level of intoxicating contempt for Vick that has been bred by the media and the NFL through their hypocrisy. The same sports media that have vilified Vick has routinely referred to grueling football games as a “dogfight.”

Many sports reporters have suggested Vick was emulating hip-hop culture. A ridiculous supposition, not necessarily racist as black writers had offered the same erroneous perspective. Yet, dogfighting is not about hip-hop culture but is perhaps a reflection of the subculture of violence theory, which holds that violence exhibited by blacks is only partly different from the parent culture of violence.

Dogfighting is actually a vestige of plantation slavery when blacks as slaves would train animals to fight and kill, for the benefit of their owners that would gamble on such fights, and if the owner won enough cash, a slave could gain freedom.

In the epic TV mini-series Roots, “Chicken George” was known as such not because he liked fried chicken, but because he could train chickens to fight and kill. He eventually won his freedom and freed his family. Still dogfighting’s link to animal fighting during slavery does not absolve Vick and others of their actions. But it does lend greater perspective on why this heinous practice is still wildly popular in the South as sport.

On the other hand, the NFL’s response to dog cruelty in Vick’s case constitutes the height of hypocrisy. The League unnecessarily sent their investigators to help with the federal probe of Vick’s private home. It was not like the feds were interested in his locker at the Georgia Dome, a NFL stadium which still proudly displays the Confederate Flag atop, despite its inextricable link to Jim Crow racism, violence, death and dog attacks against blacks.

Moreover, the NFL’s hypocrisy grows as much as Pinocchio’s nose considering Commissioner Roger Goodell called Vick’s treatment of the dogs “cruel and reprehensible.” Yet the NFL still does big business with Communist China which murdered 50,000 dogs in 2006.

Furthermore, the NFL has been broadcasting its games in China for years, including the Super Bowl, which means it pays the Communist’s state run media and such revenues are no doubt commingled thus paying in part the military police that killed the dogs, deemed a “bourgeois affectation.” In other words China sees dogs as a reflection of Western culture and the economic system of capitalism in America. Dog owners in China were offered 63 cents to kill their own otherwise the state police as “killing teams” did it.

Rather than being mortified as they seemingly were about Vick, the NFL worked arduously to play an exhibition game in China in August of 2007 and only canceled it because the people did not buy in. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), which shamelessly used Vick for their cause — is another outstanding hypocrite as they went on record calling for a boycott of China’s products for the systemic killing of the 50,000 dogs, but would not call for a boycott of the NFL or Nike despite that each provides material and financial support to the Communist state. Nike dropped Vick’s endorsement deal for dog fighting but some of the same shoes he endorsed are made in China.

Perhaps the worst form of hypocrisy came from the Commissioner who scolded Washington Redskins running back Clinton Portis — who apologized — for daring to defend any of Vick’s actions. Yet the “Redskins” nickname is considered the most offensive to Indian nations as the genocide of Native Americans involved their torture, maiming and being skinned alive and having their red-skins sold at 80 cents each for adults and 20 cents for children.

But the league will never consider changing the name of the “Redskins”, the NFL’s first ever $1billion franchise. No better than Vick, hypocrites they all are.

NOTE: For more information in reference to the treatment of dogs in China, log on to