Rev. Jackson, Al Sharpton, Malcolm X, Maya Angelou, I guess Oprah too.
If I was a black person, and had the mind I have , as a white person, these would be my 5 flavors to choose from politically and/or spiritually as "representatives" of my ethics and my race.
Here is my main issue:
This is designed to perpetuate the divisiveness between the races, as are things like MLK Day, and sort of reinforces the fact that even though King's legacy lives on (and has only been cheapened since it's inception, by association with a governing body which gloats in it's ability to declare their own pedestal status by giving such another hero his fair due [even after 15 years, how much time must pass in before we consider YOUR holiday?]) >that we only get a handful of (very ?able) 'leaders and/or 'agents of similar skin pigmentation' we have to choose from.
Why is this?
...Why it's our friendly underground railroaders, the intels and Tavistocks!
Do you ever wonder, how it is after 40ish years of so-called "desegregation" and "equality", there is incessant underlying tension between the races, even not taking into account the ghetto vs upscale issues.
Why our "representatives"
(Oprah etc.) keep making a point, whenever possible, to throw in the implications that
"This black man has acheived this"
"Even tho his competitor was white"
They instill, and maintain this divisiveness, which of course is why they've been allowed to become prominent figures, so much so that if you, as a black person don't subscribe to one of the above five flavors, you are a (white?) sheep...
None of this sits well with me.
If a man acheives something, let him be called merely a man, if a woman acheives something, let her be called merely a woman.
Leave race out of it, we'd have no need for anything like MLK Day.
Peace to his soul....
Happy to have been a part