US Blacks tend towards abstract representations as opposed to concrete representations. Individuals produced more through distance and media polish than those that exist in common everyday spaces. As we have moved from local physical proximity to distant mediated space, so have many of those considered “leader”. Possibly, there is a danger not only in this act of avoiding seeking leaders from our local neighborhoods but in seeking leaders in general. But, that last sentence feels like an unrealistic digression.
These United States of America promotes “success” as gross overabundance and acquiescence to a hegemony predominantly based on vanity and dominance. We play at this sort of patronizing assistance of our fellow human, but this is ploy. Our altruism is more for show than for effect. We employ sympathetic gestures to emphasize our socio-economic position above others. This ubiquitous US character trait informs our US Black cultural expressions. We define beauty through a lens filtered by corporate interests. We define leadership through this same colored glass. In that same manner that beauty standards begin to define our choices, so do our standards of leadership.
I want to extend this disclaimer. I do hold that there are very rigid limits to any form of group essentialisms when we discuss behaviors. All US Blacks cannot dance. All US Blacks are not proficient with basketballs and hoops. All US Blacks are not charismatic or cool communicators. Painful as it might be, we are simply a hodge-podge of individuals thrown together under one label. Outside of our common oppressed ancestry and present day shared oppressions, our similarities tend to fade. Greatly in many instances.