(Via Instapundit).   Cathy Siepp of UPI has a great article about the "Barbershop" affair which pits Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and a host of other self-appointed members of the Black Leadership against Ice Cube, Cedric the Entertainer and a few others.   She begins provacatively:

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton just played the race card against Hollywood and lost.

...Sharpton said that he and other black leaders are considering a boycott against "Barbershop." ... Except that in this instance Jackson is really flailing. "Barbershop," which was the No. 1 film in the country for two weeks, was written, directed and produced by blacks.

What this incident also calls into question is the continuing legitimacy of "group leaders" in an environment of (generally) rising political enfranchisement.   While undoubtedly making great contributions in the early days of the "movement", there are now open and honest questions from within the community as to their leaders' mandate:

..."My question is, who named Jesse Jackson as my leader?" a customer in a real-life, South Central L.A. barbershop told Los Angeles Times columnist Steve Lopez the other week. "Because I didn't get no ballot."

The developmental economics crowd often studies the parallels between developing nations and poor inner cities and finds surprisingly strong connections & lessons to apply back and forth (a recent Samuel Huntington compendium book -- "Culture Matters" -- had a few anecdotes).   

In the somewhat parallel political world, we can similarly map this incident in South Central LA to key risks/limitations of the Transnational Progressive movement.   In the political arena, self-appointed "group leaders" at best provide a transitional utility towards group enfranchisement.  Once that political enfranchisement has arrived (or is close at hand), they can be an impediment towards the identity of the individuals in the groups they orginally represented (Cedric and Ice Cube certainly think so!).   

Tranzi's risk creating group-oriented, global political structures with tremendous inertia and staying power.   Imagine if the Rainbow Coalition, or the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, or the Black Panthers were directly allocated Congressional seats back in their respective heydays.   How would a highly politicized body effectively manage the (waning) influence of these groups to ensure proportionality with the groups they (claim to) represent?  The universe of NGO's + the UN is trending towards something potentially worse.

Over time, these structures reveal themselves to be primarily conduits for the group leadership rather than individuals within the group.