Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPhil
The larger point is that black people are not monolithic and don't need "spokespersons" for the sake of the white dominated media. The black activists, intellectuals, leaders, and other key figures in our communities have never needed to be categorized as such until whites were searching for a black leader. "Who will lead black people and speak for them?" Annoying sentiment.
The blacks who want Jackson and Sharpton to be their spokespersons have a right to want that, although I am not one of them and question how many blacks actually feel this way. The blacks who don't, have plenty of more viable alternatives. Blacks are a large enough community that we can multitask--don't let whites tell us that we have to choose.
As a lighthearted aside about how people tend to choose "their leaders/key figures":
There is also a distinction between how researchers and intellectuals like West and Dyson, and others who are huge in academia but don't want to achieve mainstream notoriety, speak to fellow academicians versus how they approach nonacademicians and "laypersons." They have been pretty good at reaching outside of academia and speaking to the sensibilities of people who won't read journal articles or certain books. This requires a level of watering down, positivity, and nonconfrontation because it is appealing to educated persons outside the discipline but also to lesser educated and sometimes more sensitive people who can get offended and turn away, whether people want to admit it or not, which loses the larger message. The more cut-throat approaches are often reserved for fellow academicians because of a common understanding of the nature of the beast.  |
Great post. Playing devil's advocate here I will say that I have met a lot of black people who do feel that they are being "held down" by institutional racism- how would you argue that they have a legitimate complaint here now that the most powerful man in the world- elected by a majority white population- is black?