While Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas’ supporters want to portray him as a “self-made man,” his opponents point out that he was admitted to Yale Law School under an affirmative action program. Obviously this is thought to be an embarrassment for Thomas, who is a conservative critic of affirmative action.

Already there is a lesson here for young blacks: if you later want to make a career as a political conservative, taking advantage of affirmative action now will tend to drag you down, at least somewhat.

And why is Thomas supposed to be embarrassed? After all, there is no contradiction in taking advantage of a program that you think is unwise, nor is it necessarily wrong to do so. My hypothesis is that liberals are stung by Thomas’ ingratitude in opposing affirmative action after benefiting from it himself.

Their thought is that they—the liberal promoters of such programs—deserve much of the credit for Thomas’ later success, credit which he and his supporters refuse to grant.

This suggests another hidden drawback to accepting affirmative action benefits: you will be expected ever after to show proper deference to the liberal establishment, who will regard themselves as your benefactors.

Even if you never express any but the most orthodox liberal views, and so avoid the charge of ingratitude, the liberals will think of you as their creature and will take much of the credit for your accomplishments. Of course, if you align yourself with them they won’t say this to your face; but this is what they will be thinking.

In short, affirmative action benefits come with some hidden strings attached. While these will prove more annoying to blacks (and others) who are potential conservatives, my hypothesis (which I offer as plausible rather than certain) indicates that they are significant even for the most rigidly orthodox liberal.

James Hudson

Associate professor

Philosophy