A Little on the Top, or A Lot on the Bottom
May 10, 2006
We have talked about the pros and cons of Black faces in high places on this site before. This is a concept worth revisiting in light of a survey by the Washington Post that says the G. W. Bush has brought on less females and minorities in his administration than Bill Clinton.
Conservative reaction to this story is not surprising (an example is here), but it does raise an interesting question. To quote conservative columnist Michelle Malkin:
“In other words, Bush is an enemy of progress and civil rights because he has appointed too many minorities and women to top Cabinet positions–and not enough to lower, less important jobs!”
This is a matter of quantity versus quality. I think you can have both here, but maybe you can’t. Which would you rather see: a few Black folks in prominent leadership positions or lots of Black people working in lower positions?
Comments
One Response to “A Little on the Top, or A Lot on the Bottom”
Got something to say?
I am more about both/and not either/or but to answer your question, I would prefer a larger quantity of Black folks in lower positions than a few in prominent positions. I say that because when you have a few (like Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice) it becomes too easy for their mistakes to turn into generalizations. Moreover, when you have Black folks in lower positions, (I am including middle management for lower positions) I think it is more likely that your Black colleagues can keep you grounded when you can’t see or understand the whole picture.