Third Party & Independents: Archives

March 07, 2007

Jesse Jackson Is NOT The Emperor Of All Black People

In tonight’s new episode of South Park the ‘N’ bomb was dropped, several times actually, but more importantly one line sticks out in the episode: That Jesse Jackson is not the emperor of all black people.

It seems that whenever any racial issue comes up everyone, especially the media, looks to Jesse Jackson. Like they think that Jesse Jackson speaks for all black people. That all black people are the same, and therefore Jesse Jackson can speak for them. While Jesse Jackson is one leader of the black community, he is not the emperor of all black people and does not speak for all black people. When issues of race come up we cannot just go and ask what Jesse Jackson thinks and than think that is that, that what he says is the be all and end all.

When the media consistently goes to Jesse Jackson for anything regarding race and asks his opinion, and than sound bites his opinion again and again people are led to believe that he speaks for all black people. More importantly because far too many people only get their news from the lowest possible source, the twenty four hour television news channels, they hear the 'pundits' replay these soundbites and comment on them as if Jesse Jackson actually is the emperor of all black people. This all leads to taking the individuality away from black people because people actually begin to believe that they know how all black people think by what they heard Jesse Jackson say. So next time you hear Jesse Jackson on the news or anywhere remember: Jesse Jackson is not the emperor of all black people.

Posted by Richard Rhodes at March 7, 2007 10:46 PM
Comment #211012

Richard, South Park Rocks, when the episode started I *knew* it was going to be a good one. There were several ‘lessons’ that I think they did a great job of bringing to the forefront, but you are correct that that one single line was very poignant indeed.

It would be nice if someday in the future the media didn’t run to Jessie Jackson (or whatever appointed black leaders is available for the camera that day) whenever anything having to do with race is brought up. Even better, maybe one day people will realize that race is an outdated concept now that we know the realities of human evolution…

Posted by: Rhinehold at March 8, 2007 12:11 AM
Comment #211017

Jessie fell out of favor several months ago. The new emperor seems to be Al Sharpton.

Posted by: tomd at March 8, 2007 02:22 AM
Comment #211036


As a latino who grew up in the 70’s and 80’s, our emperess and emperor were Charro and Ricardo Mantelban. How fair was that?

I would love the media to run to Carlos Mencia every time a latino issue was in the news. That would be entertaining indeed.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at March 8, 2007 10:07 AM
Comment #211037

Not only does the media go to Jackson or Sharpton, but any other famous person who makes a mistake reguarding race. When Biden made his unfortunate comments and when Richards make is disasterous comments (I loath to put these in the same sentence, as they are clearly not comparable), they when to appologize at the feet of the kings Jackson and Sharpton. It should be strike people as odd, not standard operating proceedure that this is what people are doing. Why is this percieved as the right course of action, why not volunteer at a black church, or do something that actually involves interacting with the people they clearly know so little about. Elites talking to elites rings hollow to me. Other communities do not have this. If you mispeak (or worse dont) and offend the hispanic community who do you go to? The Asian community? Native American community? And the difference is that Americans (anyone can mispeak about anyone else reguardless of race), can differentiate that within these immigrant communities there are vast differences within the community and that the community does not speak with one vioce. Hispanics, can be conservatives from Cuba, or Left wing from Mexico (and so on). the perception and it is reflected in voting patterns is that the democratic party represents Blacks in America, as 90% of blacks tend to vote democratic. Jackson and Sharpton have both run for president under the democratic ticket, and are thus the percieved leaders of the black community, even though they have been elected to no office by black people or anyone else(I may be mistaken about this). I wonder if the black vote were more hotly contested between the parties if there would be more vioces that would “represent” the black communities feelings.

Posted by: MikeD at March 8, 2007 10:24 AM
Comment #211064

Jesse Jackson IS the emperor of ALL Black people.
Don’t believe me? Just ask him.
The problem is I know several Black people that don’t agree. Some of them have gone so far as to call him a professional N…..
Between Jackson and Sharpton more has been done to set the Blacks back into the dark ages than anything any hundred Black folks could do in same amount of time these two have been running their mouths.
And neither care about the people they claim to be trying to help. They’re both making a very good living keeping Blacks dependant on them and the government.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 8, 2007 01:34 PM
Comment #211086

Al was over this way earlier this week. Turns out he’s a decendent of a slave once owned by Strom Thurmond’s family. Jesse’s from Greenville so maybe our state is to blame for all of the “ass kissing.”

That was a funny episode…..

Posted by: George in SC at March 8, 2007 05:03 PM
Comment #211113

Ron Brown is right! Jesse Jackson IS the Emperor of all black people…and HymieTown too!

Posted by: Jim T at March 8, 2007 07:54 PM
Comment #211172


You raise an interesting question pertaining to the fact the greater than 70% of registered “black” voters vote for democratic candidates.

I suppose as more “black” politicians become widely recognized (e.g. Barack Obama) I think the media might turn to them. Colin Powell and Condi Rice are both keeping low profile with respect to any kind of “black politics” because of their association with GWB (which is their own fault as far as I am concerned).

Jesse Jackson has a much longer history in the public eye. Remember he began his “public service” as the feet of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. When massive public, hence media, attention to race issue/civil rights was reaching it’s zenith. This activity was followed by the move from “protest to politics” including Jackson’s bids for the Democratic presidential nomination. In short, Jesse Jackson has had 30+ years of a headstart over many of the current “black” political figures, which by the way mostly have advanced degrees (JD, Ph.D., etc.) and likely spent far less time on the front line of civil rights activism as Jesse Jackson did. Al Sharpton came to prominence on the coat-tails of Jesse Jackson, of course, and that coupled with the media attention garnered from speaking out against racial profiling within the NYPD accounts for his notariety. He plays from the same playbook as Jackson with regard to seeking the Democratic presidential nomination.

I think Barack Obama’s presidential bid with cause a shift by the media away from Jackson and Sharpton.

I think the “go-to-guys” for “black” racial issues will soon be Obama and Ellison on the democratic side. If Powell ever resurfaces in the political arena and if Rice ever establishes the intellectual credibility she threw away at the feet of George W. Bush, they will like represent the “conservative” voice regarding race issues.

Those are my thoughts. What do others think who may not have commented on this post already?

Posted by: Kim-Sue at March 9, 2007 10:19 AM
Comment #211174


I agree another cutting edge episode with valuable lessons bringing attention to realities shich are normally taboo for anyone of stature to mention.

This makes me wonder who might be considered the so called modern day emperor of white people? Clinton maybe? He seems to be the go to guy a lot when a little unifying clarification is needed from time to time.

I do see Jackson as an opportunist. He always seems to show up at all major events. Sometimes he is there so fast that you know he had no real opportuninty to study the facts or even have time to hear the other side of the story. I have no problem with his agenda personally. It should be up to the blacks to decide if they wish to support him or not. There are new black icons rising thru the ranks (Obama etc) who I believe will eventually overtake his stature in the scheme of things. Most whites who hate him do so because they can not stand the thought of an influential black man being able to have his say. What should be more troubling is that in todays society minority groups even need a seperate mouthpiece. The fact that not all groups can get a fair shake without having to lobby for it I think says something as to just how little our society has advanced in racial matters.

Racism is an old and tired hatred that should not be. It only perpetuates more hatred on all sides creating a seemingly endless circle of senseless distrust and fear among all ethnic groups.

Posted by: ILdem at March 9, 2007 10:26 AM
Comment #211176

“Most whites who hate him do so because they can not stand the thought of an influential black man being able to have his say.”

Dems seem to always know what others think and why they think that way.

ILdem, you have absolutely no idea if I hate him or not and if I do, You have absolutely no idea why.

Posted by: tomd at March 9, 2007 10:37 AM
Comment #211188


I do not recall mentioning your name anywhere in my post. I am sorry if you misinterpreted such. You are right in that I do not know exactly what you or anyone for that matter is thinking or how they honestly see things. That is the problem with this type of media. It sometimes reveals too little as to the tone of the message.

However I do recognize and know the sounds of racism. I was not born yesterday and like most have lived my entire life in the wake of it. I did not accuse anyone here of being racist. But if the shoe fits…..

Posted by: ILdem at March 9, 2007 12:20 PM
Comment #211189
Like they think that Jesse Jackson speaks for all black people.

LOL! And you, Richard, as a black person(?) knows differently, right?

Seriously, why don’t you do some research and pull up some statistics on who black people see as role models? It seems pretty lazy to use an episode of South Park as your source for serious social commentary.

Posted by: American Pundit at March 9, 2007 12:22 PM
Comment #211221

I’ve always found it a little funny how conservatives usually are offended about indecent TV and blame it on the liberals, but if you asked most conservative parents what TV show they would most dread their kid watching, it’d would be South Park, and it’s a far right-wing show!

Posted by: mark at March 9, 2007 04:20 PM
Comment #211273

AP: A. No, I am not black.

B. I was not using South Park as a ‘source’, instead it made me think, and brought out rather obviously the fact that minority groups are represented through just one person in the media, instead of being seen as individuals. Thus the mentioning of Jesse Jackson as the mouthpiece for all black people, by the media, when anyone with any common sense should see through this and know that he does not speak for all black people. That quiet simply is my point: Is that Jesse Jackson does not speak for all black people, the same as Bill Clinton doesn’t speak for all white people, and that no one person can speak for an entire race. That it is irresponsible for the media to portray Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton, as speaking for all black people.

Posted by: Richard Rhodes at March 9, 2007 09:45 PM
Comment #216304

“What should be more troubling is that in today’s society minority groups even need a seperate mouthpiece.”
The whole idea of someone speaking for an entire group reminds me of the old black and white Tarzan movies. Remember when the big game hunter would turn to one of the natives carrying their gear and say “We’ll camp here for the night”. That native would turn and repeat his words to the others in some made up African language. Well that big game hunter is white America and the native who translates is a so-called “black leader”.
The notion that people of color require someone to speak for the entire group has always troubled me. It seems that some in America are unable to deal with others as individuals. They would rather treat all members of a particular group in a monolithic manner.
And please stop using the term “black leader” or “role model”. Implicit within those labels is the idea that all black people must be followers. You can’t have a leader without followers. So all people of color are just mindless sheep who need a spokesperson to speak for the group. It’s offensive. These people are activists not leaders.

Posted by: jevans at April 12, 2007 10:16 PM
Comment #216383

The perception in this country is that every group has somebody to speak for it. Jesse Jackson holds himself out as the voice of the “black community”, whatever that means.

By the same rule, William Donohue is the voice of American Catholics, Pat Robertson is the voice of evangelical Protestants, and so on.

There isn’t a voice of “white people” because white people in this country have found plenty of other ways to be divided. Nevertheless, as a white American, I see the “black community” hold itself out as a single entity more often than not. Consider: why is it OK to advocate “black pride” or “woman price” but not “white pride” or “male pride”?

That’s just my point of view, but it is what I see.

Posted by: the Rayman at April 13, 2007 10:41 AM
Post a comment