A politics more defined by currying favor from those in proximity to present power can never be “revolutionary” even in metaphor. Calling a person in 2017 a capitalist who does not have a direct relationship with US markets and international labor is metaphoric. Calling someone in USA of 2017 is almost tongue in cheek humor at best. There is a desire to form leaderships based on anti-establishment sentiments while choosing these leaders from pools that can only exist because of established order and institutions. These are not leaderships born of intense interests and pure passions; these are leaderships born of an insatiable want of control and dominance.
US Black leadership in 2017 does not differ much from Whyte supremacist visions. In fact, it could be argued that this US Black leadership is a faction and support of those same said visions. For those that may be asking, OWL is not a revolutionary, OWL is one of those many millions of disenfranchised US inhabitants. My positions and my politics flow not from reading theory, but from being forced figure out means to express my humanity in a nation that defines my being based on my past. I am not anti-establishment because it sells, I am anti-establishment because this establishment is anti-me, in a direct sense.
This particular transparency on my part does not invoke any form essentialisms or pain Olympics. It is, however, to court my thinking on Black Media Trust further, but bringing into focus certain motivations and ambitions tied to these spaces of activism in a society of spectacle such as our USA in 2017. It is a transparency that evokes Black Media Trust and an obligation to fictive kinship so exploitative that in a fight to reduce murder by cops our highest achievement is an activist turned c-list celebrity being followed on Twitter by Beyonce.
This question of leadership with direct motivations not only inspired but controlled by corporate interests deserves vigilant scrutiny. There is something dangerous about people paid by US universities and cable news networks being allowed to borrow social and political cache from 1960s Civil Rights leaders slain in their pursuits. This coupled with a growing pernicious applauding of US Blacks securing proximity to Whytes(and their money) as “Black Excellence” demeans any true semblance of radical thought, let alone revolutionary thought, and it has only made cases for labor more difficult to make in light of present obscurity. “Black Excellence”, as well as “Black Leadership” in this “activists robbing cache from slain Civil Rights’s movement leaders” space, defines political success and value based on a person’s proximity to Whyteness, acceptance by Whyte corporate and institutional structures, and financial backing by those same Whyte corporate and institutional structures.
Currying favor from Whytes is not totally reactionary or out of scope for those like myself seeking outlets to power in this state. However, there is currying favor that actually gets you a favor done, and then there is currying favor that amounts to giving away your dignity for less than optimum advantages if anything at all.