According to the narrative presented by Jacob U. Gordon in Black Leadership For Social Change, Gordon asserts how African American leadership roles in America, have always strive to seek out a mechanism to achieve social change. I do not deny that the African American community does not have their own type of leadership, due to the fact that it is vital to realize that we have had a complex historical narrative simply in the U.S. This narrative highlights the fact that we were once, a species that did not have the right to be deemed “humans.” Simply from taking this approach while studying African Americans in their entirety as a community, one is confronted with the same reality that can be seen in all minorities, this notion that we need to find a system that works for ourselves if we ever want to change society. Gordon asserts that leadership theories and practice excludes black leadership, which causes individuals to question what “leadership” does not possess to lead to the emergence of “black leadership.” Gordon’s definition of black leadership places emphasis on the group solely as he recognizes that the leader is dependent upon the group of people since they are the ones who are fighting for social change. Within Gordon’s definition of “black leadership,” he advocates for the fact that this “group response” is a product of the notion that they all have a shared struggle that stems from the color of their skin. The leaders throughout our own black historical narrative demonstrates that a lot of individuals possessed the characteristics of this New Negro identity. My thesis observes the stories of our own past leaders and how one would conceptualize their own leadership style by looking at Peter G. Northouse’s four styles of leadership. The question arises if this perception of black leadership still exists today and would we account for this “group” response.
The New Negro identity plays a huge role in the formation of “black leadership,” as the masses as well as the leaders are trying to raise up the community, and fight back against a long system of oppression. But on this journey to figure out how blacks today, define and respond to “black” leadership, I believe that we lost this so-called “New Negro” identity. This is due to the fact that we are not able to come together, because there is a lot of aspects that now have to be considered when try to look at our identities individually. For example, our skin color linked the whole black community in terms of being marginalized and oppressed. Yet in present-day there is a lot more that makes up an individual such as gender and sexuality, and if the movement does not include these factors, people are more likely to not participate. Since we cannot come to a common ground, we as a people cannot formulate a “group” response or goal, in which we are not able to take a stance against our own oppression. From this outlook, this form of black leadership vanishes in our current society. As Alain Locke states in The New Negro, “…it is the rank and file who are leading, and the leaders who are following,” (Locke 7). Keeping this quote in mind, it is hard for the group to lead if they cannot acknowledge their differences and move pass this and the leader can be moved by the group, in which he is following. When putting the New Negro identity in conversation with Gordon’s definition of “black leadership,” the overarching question becomes who is represented in this “group” response and if all walks of life are truly represented.