Am I naive in wondering why they can't just have an unimpeachable, inoffensive MLK-style march? Even Fox News couldn't get hot and bothered about that.
The problem is, many whites will view the march as being another Sharpton stunt. Even MLK was controversial in his lifetime among many whites, even those who weren't racists from the south. I don't condone rioting, but it is not my place to decide what the black communities response should be.
The Million Man March may have gotten more traction had it been organized by someone other than Louis Farrakhan. Something along these lines may be necessary. Some kind of national "Day of
Rage Justice" with a DC march headlined by Obama and a mix of establishment and activist figures, with local rallies nationwide. Maybe propose a new Civil Rights Act, even if it won't get anywhere (I worry that LGB concerns would latch on- even if justifiably- and bog it down further). Voter registration drive, hopefully make enough gains in Congress to get it to pass after 2016. A push for police-community dialogue at the state level. Jesus. Sounds like something out of a UN peacekeeping plan.
I've long felt that social integration of blacks has been a double edged sword of sorts. On one end, we are now a country that is for the most part able to elect black leaders to high office, which is fantastic. But the downside of this is that the blacks with the most potential now aim to become national rather than "black leaders", leaving a leadership gap, in a community that
does need a degree of leadership, that is often filled by second-rate figures or race-baiting charlatans. So I think, in many ways, people like Obama, Booker, Foxx, and hopefully even Republicans like Scott, Carson, etc. should occasionally assume the role of "black leader" when that becomes necessary- as it now is.
There also needs to be more engagement with the middle class blacks- the "African-Americans living in Prince George's County" as DFB mentioned- and the inner city poor. Coming from my immigrant background I did not have many opportunities to interact with these sorts of circles, but more recently I've interacted with upper-middle class African-American groups in the form of organizations like Jack and Jill, 100 Black Men, the Boulé (I have relatives who are members of the last two), and so forth. Now, I've come to appreciate that, skin color aside, there is a common "African-American" cultural heritage, and that it is as such something worth preserving and passing down. But many of these groups seem to engage in activities- ski trips, college tours, debutante balls- that I consider fantastic, don't get me wrong, but don't tem from that cultural heritage (but they may be, who knows), but rather their elite status, and as such I wonder if they'd be better off doing those sorts of things on a non-racial basis.
It seems as if this Talented Tenth of sorts, to put it otherwise, is overly concerned with perpetuating and advancing the cause of the African-American elite. I'm fine with the perpetuation of elites, and I'm all in favor of the advancing the cause of African-Americans , but I cannot help but feel that they are too...
insular. Thus groups like these should step up to fill the leadership gap and work to essentially do what Booker T. Washington called for- improve the standard of education and promote African-American entrepreneurship on a wide (rather than an elite-based) scale. I won't claim to know how people in these communities would react to this- it obviously might seem like African-American paternalism- but in political terms it is these groups that I imagine would be best positioned to successfully lobby for change. Fundamentally, however, I see it as a socio-cultural issue that cannot be meaningfully resolved through
political means alone.
