After Joan Crawford’s death, when actress Bette Davis was asked to say something kind about her longtime rival, Davis reportedly replied, "You should never say bad things about the dead, only good. Joan Crawford is dead. Good."
That story illustrates an old maxim: politicians and pundits with decorum often refrain from criticizing public figures immediately after they die. With the passage of time, however, history requires a more objective assessment of a person's legacy – their accomplishments, failures, and lasting impact, if any, on society.
The Reverend Jesse Jackson departed this life about six months ago, on February 17, 2026. To his admirers, he was an aggressive advocate for black Americans. To others, he represented something far different: someone who transformed his civil rights activism into a profit center built on grievance, intimidation, and opportunism. Unquestionably, he became a controversial figure.
As many people know, Jackson was present in Memphis on April 4, 1968, when Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated. That association propelled him into the national spotlight. In the years that followed, he attempted to cultivate the image of King's spiritual and political heir. That ploy didn’t work because it could not work: It was soon apparent that Jackson lacked the moral depth, intellectual rigor, and unifying vision that made King a transformational leader.
King appealed to America's conscience. Jackson employed tactics that his advocates claimed were necessary for the times, namely political pressure, public spectacle, and strategic confrontation.
Jackson was energetic in his younger days, media-savvy, and persuasive. His presidential campaigns in 1984 and 1988 energized Black voters and expanded minority participation within the Democrat Party. Rhetorically at least, his "Rainbow Coalition" promised racial and economic unity.
Over time, Jackson perfected a form of political extortion. His approach was to accuse a corporation of racial insensitivity or inadequate diversity, threaten boycotts and negative publicity, and then negotiate donations, hiring commitments, or financial contributions to Jackson-affiliated organizations.
In 1998, for self-serving reasons, Jackson opposed the merger of Citicorp and Travelers Group. After both organizations contributed vast sums to Jackson-affiliated groups, his opposition to the merger ended. A similar concern emerged surrounding Jackson’s opposition to the Southwestern Bell Corporation and Ameritech merger, with the same outcome.
At Freddie Mac, allegations of discriminatory lending practices resulted in heightened minority-lending commitments and financial support for initiatives linked to Jackson. These arrangements did not represent meaningful reform, serving instead as examples of blatant corporate payoffs.
Viacom and other brand-name companies found themselves under pressure from Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH Coalition before eventually ‘agreeing’ to financial contributions or diversity initiatives. Jackson defended all such efforts as economic activism designed to broaden opportunities for minorities.
Much of the business world eventually regarded Jackson — and later Al Sharpton — as a "shakedown artist."
Jackson's controversies extended beyond his extortion activities. Publicly portraying himself as a healer, Jackson privately resorted to divisive rhetoric. In 1984, he made an anti-semitic slur, referring to New York City as "Hymietown" during a conversation with a reporter. The remark sparked wide-ranging outrage and damaged his relationship with many American Jews. To make matters worse, Jackson initially denied making the statement before 'fessing up, once the recording became public.
His personal life also served to diminish his quest to be a moral authority. The Reverend Jackson fathered a child outside of his marriage, and to support the child's mother used funds that were traced back to his organizations. All the while, Jackson lectured his audiences about morality and personal responsibility.
Questions lingered about Jackson's role in key historical events. Some civil rights leaders accused him of exaggerating his closeness to Dr. King and of overstating his role in the aftermath of King's assassination.
Jackson was able to register voters and induce corporations to broaden employment opportunities, while critics argued that leaders like Jackson emphasized the wrong things. Instead of self-reliance, academic achievement, strong families, and economic independence, Jackson’s movement often centered on victimhood, racial polarization, grandstanding, and dependence on political institutions.
As with Al Sharpton, Jackson started appearing at nationally publicized, media-induced racial controversies. This was while remaining mum about problems devastating inner cities, such as violent crime, family breakdown, failing schools, gang activity, and generational poverty.
As Jackson's prominence waned, he was viewed as less a towering civil rights icon and more of a transitional figure. To many, his greatest faux pas was shifting away from Dr. King's message of reconciliation and renewal to the identity-based politics that now, unfortunately, thoroughly dominate today’s leftist discourse and political ploys.