Addressing the Unmet Promises: The Imperative for ADOS-Centered Policies
The legacy of slavery casts a long shadow over America. For descendants of enslaved Africans brought to these shores centuries ago, the brutal journey of their ancestors indelibly shaped the trajectory of their place in this nation. The acronym ADOS—African American Descendants of US Chattel Slavery—encapsulates the unique historical narrative and present-day challenges of this demographic, numbering over 40 million strong.
In recent years, ADOS advocates have brought renewed visibility to the need for targeted policies and resource allocation to address systemic inequities facing ADOS communities. Central to this perspective is an acknowledgment of the singular hardships borne by ADOS throughout history, hardships that profoundly impact livelihoods and opportunities today.
Understanding this context is key to comprehending the necessity of an ADOS-centered political agenda. As Antonio Moore, founder of ToneTalks, observes, “For hundreds of years, the ADOS population has endured enslavement, Black codes, Jim Crow laws, redlining, mass incarceration, and pervasive discrimination and disadvantage. This cannot simply be glazed over or subsumed into broader conversations about minority struggles. The lived reality of ADOS Americans is fundamentally shaped by this history in ways that statistically and economically verify the unique justice owed to them.”
Indeed, the data paints a stark picture of the chronic disparities facing ADOS. While comprising over 80% of the nation’s Black population, ADOS have a median household worth of just $4,000, compared to over $140,000 for white households. Mass incarceration disproportionately impacts ADOS men, with imprisonment rates nearly six times higher than the general population. The poverty rate for ADOS is over 20%, more than double the national average.
For ADOS advocates, these bleak numbers demand policies specifically tailored to uplift communities still reeling from the legacy of slavery and institutional racism. Blanket approaches or initiatives aimed at generic constructs like “people of color” fail to contend with realities unique to ADOS.
Unfortunately, such blanket approaches have become increasingly common, subsuming the ADOS struggle into a catch-all push for diversity and inclusion. This “rising tide lifts all boats” thinking overlooks how Black immigrants and non-ADOS minorities are situated very differently relative to native Black Americans, whose heritage lies in slavery and segregation.
The mainstream exaltation of “first black” achievements spotlights how this conflation can steer focus away from ADOS-specific policies. When Black immigrants or their children attain pioneering accomplishments, such feats are heralded as victories for African Americans.
For instance, when Kamala Harris became the first Black woman Vice President, many saw this as a triumph for the descendants of American slaves. In reality, Harris is of Jamaican and Indian descent and does not share the generational struggles of ADOS. Celebrating her success as a win for African Americans obscures this context.
As Yvette Carnell of Breaking Brown contends, “When non-ADOS individuals benefit from their non-ADOS status, their ethnicity is highlighted. But when it comes time to share resources meant to address the legacy of American injustice, they are suddenly ‘African American’. This is unacceptable. The unique plight of ADOS must remain centered.”
The contrast between native Black Americans and more recent arrivals is also apparent when examining socioeconomic indicators. Nigerian Americans have a median income nearly 1.5 times higher than ADOS households. Almost 60% of Ghanian immigrants and over 65% of Nigerians hold bachelor’s degrees, more than double the ADOS college education rate.
While the successes of immigrant groups are commendable, they cling to the myth of monolithic Blackness papers over real disparities. Using blanket “Black” or “African American” labels elides critical nuances that should inform policymaking.
This elision has enabled resources intended for ADOS to be scattered across varied groups under the pretense that they benefit all African Americans. Diversity initiatives in education, scholarships, government contracts, and corporations frequently group all Black people together regardless of origin, limiting access for their intended beneficiaries.
ADOS advocates maintain that meaningful change requires acknowledging Africa’s "two"diasporas"—descendants of slavery whose origins are lost and voluntary immigrants who arrived in recent decades. Conflating the two does neither justice. Targeted redress is impossible when fundamentally different histories are lumped as one.
What forms could ADOS-specific policy take? Priority in affirmative action, government contracts, and land/business grants is one avenue, as are reparations and targeted investment in areas like education, housing, and healthcare. Some advocates have proposed reserved Congressional seats to ensure ADOS interests are represented.
The possibilities are ample, but actualizing them first requires grasping the need for an ADOS-centered approach. American political discourse must recognize that the “Black community” label papers over real segmentation caused by divergent origins and experiences. Reflexively blurred lines serve to maintain an inequitable status quo.
Significant hurdles remain on the path to a focused ADOS policy. Some pushback comes from Black immigrants who chafe at disaggregation that differentiates them from native Black Americans. Many are reluctant to forfeit the “African American” label and its links to redressing historical injustice.
Additionally, vested interests are at stake. For the Black “leadership class”, invoking broad “unity” across ethnic and class lines helps sustain their own power and platforms. Pointing to the unique needs of one subgroup can threaten this lucrative arrangement.
Nevertheless, a political realignment centered on ADOS is steadily gaining momentum, buoyed by advocates tirelessly highlighting the numbers behind the rhetoric. Data continually reinforces that one-size-fits-all inclusion does ADOS communities a disservice.
As Antonio Moore emphasizes, “The median wealth figures speak for themselves. The depression-level unemployment rates speak for themselves. The incarceration rates speak for themselves. Blanket approaches have failed ADOS for too long. We need policies driven by data, not naive notions of ‘rising tides’. Anything less is an injustice.”
For America to truly grapple with the enduring legacy of its past, the onus lies with all of us to shift focus back to the descendants of those slaves upon whose backs this country was built. Only by confronting, with eyes wide open, the sacrifices of ADOS can we begin to conceive policies that live up to our highest ideals.
