Did Haynesworth Really Mean “Slave”?
America was recently shocked or better, outraged when Washington Redskins defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth uttered the following statement: “Just because somebody pays you money don’t mean they’ll make you do whatever they want…I’m not for sale. Yeah, I signed the contract and go paid a lot of money [$21 million this year], but that don’t mean I’m for sale or a slave or whatever.” A media feeding frenzy ensued as people declared outrage that a black man making so much money would compare his resistance to playing in a defensive scheme he despises. According to Haynesworth this issue was part of his contract negotiations with the Redskins. Of course he is not the first cotemporary athlete to utter the slave comparision. Former NBA great Larry Johnson once referred to some of his Knicks teammates as “rebel slave” which generated similar outrage. In fact, William Rhoden’s wonderful book “Forty Million Dollar Slaves” takes on the historic plantation mentality of American sport culture and contemporary athletes. My own work examines the mentality of contemporary post-civil rights, hip hop generation athletes (whom I call Ballers of the New School), bold enough to make such utterances.
To be fair to Haynesworth who is black, the history and legacy of the enslavement of African persons in the New World, and testifying against it or vestiges of it, will forever be part of the psyche of black Americans. Enslavement in America was harsh, bitter, and cruel as recounted in endless slave narratives. These narratives testified against captors and bore witness to the desire of every black person to be free. Haynesworth’s recent tirade or testimony underscore the feelings that most contemporary athletes are either unwilling to or incapable of articulating.
While Haynesworth certainly does not endure the same type of cruel bondage, his rebellion is against those in power of a plantation or system (dominated primarily by white men) that controls black men—even if when they pay them. It is a system capable of making them “do whatever they want” whenever they want. Haynesworth, like the slave narratives, which demonstrated the problematic value of plantation culture, is perhaps addressing the problematic white-black labor conditions in contemporary sports culture that is driven by a modicum of the past master-slave ideology. As Rhoden confirms in his book, “sports might be a plantation of sorts.” Indeed, Haynesworth seems to concur. And, no amount of money will hush black folk with knowledge of this legacy, because America’s foundation is buried in the fields of slave plantations.
Ironically, the foundation of contemporary high profile sports like football and basketball are the descendants of former slaves. Even the structure of contemporary sports teams traces the power dynamics of plantations; all the owners, most of the head coaches and commissioners, all the people who exercise power over players are white.
Quite frankly the outrage directed at Haynesworth for making his “slave” comment confirm the unspoken notion that descendants of former slaves, especially Haynesworth, should be grateful—more grateful than his white peers—for the money he makes.
But if Haynesworth is getting paid so much and the dynamics are so different why make the comparison? Haynesworth is bothered that despite his immense wealth he does not control the terms of his liberation—the problem slaves faced without the benefit of wealth. Further, in the contemporary sports world not only are white men (like his coach and team owner) in power but they have defined the terms of the liberation for black men. Haynesworth’s analogy is his way of perhaps saying that while his services may be for sale, his pride and self-respect are not; despite the money, prestige, and lifestyle he is not blind to the master-slave power dynamic in contemporary sport culture.
The oddest aspect of the Haynesworth saga is how it compares to Brett Favre of the Minnesota Vikings who is white. Haynesworth dislikes the Redskins 3-4 defensive scheme, preferring to play tackle instead of nose guard. He also skipped the Redskins voluntary off-season conditioning program. The media maligned him for this, suggesting he was lazy. Brett Favre routinely skips training camp until the last two weeks of camp. He also chose to play for the Vikings because they use an offense he likes. Yet the media response to his antics is the antithesis of the response to Haynesworth who is called ridiculous and a idiot for making his comments. Meanwhile Favre is worshipped for holding teams hostage (deciding if he will play or retire) each season until two weeks before the season—in fact he was given a raise this season (he now makes $16 million)!
Race is an undeniable variable in the different treatment of these men. The black one is told he should be grateful, shut up and do what he is told. The other is afforded the latitude to waffle about playing, and is offered a raise for doing so. One is the descendent of former slaves and should be happy for the opportunity. The other the descendant of former slave masters and entitled to do as he pleases. Haynesworth is aware the terms of his liberation and rejects them. Perhaps this is what Haynesworth meant when he said “I’m not for sale or a slave or whatever.”
Thabiti Lewis is the author of Ballers of the New School: Race and Sports in America. He teaches English and American Studies at Washington State University Vancouver.
Thabitilewis's Blog 