Is Affirmative Action to broadly implemented at the cost of those who suffered at the hands of the original sin of America?

by Teddy Fikre.  Posted:  Monday, July 26, 2010


This past week, Senator Jim Webb penned a very provocative article in which he questioned the wisdom of Affirmative Action in the 21st century.  While my overall reaction was that of disappointment that my Senator would think that Affirmative Action tilts the field against white people as opposed to leveling the playing field, I was also prodded to think about some of his other points.  The thing that struck out the most is his belief that Affirmative Action has evolved from a program designated for African-Americans to encompass all minorities including immigrant who never suffered the legacy of slavery and oppression.  In certain cases like awarding of government contracts, white women benefit from Affirmative Action more than African American men do.

As an Ethiopian who immigrated to the United States at the age of seven, I find myself conflicted as to who should and should not benefit from Affirmative Action.   Affirmative Action was instituted during the high of the Civil Rights Era to compensate minorities who were systematically repressed from reaching the American dream.  Grant it, Affirmative Action never explicitly stated that African-Americans shall be the sole beneficiaries.  However, the oppression of Jim Crowe and “Separate but Equal” and the generations of abuse and torment heaped upon African-Americans that came before the Civil Rights Era made it evident that no other group in America—along with Native Americans—deserved a means of leveling the rules by which a people can pursue freedom and happiness.

Affirmative Action, since its inception, has been broadened to include all kinds of groups including immigrants from almost every continent.  Without seeming paternalistic, it feels a bit unfair to me that folks who never experiences the legacy of engrained and generational racism shall benefit in the same fashion as those that can trace their linage back to the days of slavery.  As an Ethiopian, I have my own set of challenges of trying to fit into a new country and assimilating.  However, I can enumerate benefits which make it easier for me to succeed that many African-Americans growing up in the inner cities cannot point to.  Is it right for me to share in the “benefit” of Affirmative Action, in essence getting a leg up while getting the benefit of already having a leg up?  There is a part of me that believes that I don’t, however, there is another par t of me that says that I do based on the fact that the remnants of racism does not delineate between an Ethiopian and an African-American.  In the eyes of those who might hold bias towards hiring African-Americans or to an educational system that might be leery of accepting black people if it was not for Affirmative Action, I might be equally damaged by the biased perception of an inimical decision maker.

As last week’s episode with Shirley Sherrod reveals, America is by no means anywhere close to the point where a person can be judged solely by their character instead of the color of their skin.  The election of Barack Obama was a wonderful historical moment, but it was not a silver bullet that laid to rest the legacy of racism that traces its roots back to the Slave Trade.  The question then is not if Affirmative Action is needed, but to whom Affirmative Action be targeted.  Shall first generation immigrants be privy to a system that compensates for historical wrongs or shall the perspective be based not so much on past wrong but on the ability to compensate for current biases.  Is Affirmative Action to broadly implemented at the cost of those who suffered at the hands of the original sin of America?