Many of the discussions of the movement this time compared to the black movements of the post World War Two era are so convoluted that they are hard to follow. Much depends on ones working understanding of the past and the present. Since Oprah has spoken views have proliferated and historical interpretations are everywhere. Some people seem to think that the civil rights movement was so monolithic that the idea of a leaderless movement is new. Others know that there were groups in the 1960s that rejected the strong leader concept, but write as if there is little continuity between the past and the present. Some refuse to accept that there is a new movement and hold that there has been but one exceedingly long movement and thus leaderlessness is a tactic with a history that stretches to some indeterminate period in the past. I am just so glad that I have a phd and can keep up. What I do find interesting is that I find few debating whether a movement without a center or central leader can succeed or whether one with a defined leadership can. These positions do not have to be wholly ideological but they appear as such--at least for now.
Posted on: Sat, 03 Jan 2015 21:05:36 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015