The City University of New York’s bid last fall to enact an African-American Male Initiative to boost recruitment and retention of this under-represented population in higher ed has been met with a lawsuit charging the system with discrimination. It was reported on in The New York Times and here in Diverse. CUNY’s attempt is another example of the damning paradox that undermines these initiatives. The language of the AAMI is always clear, purporting to identify, address, rectify and solve the academic problems of Black men. These efforts are universally based on principles of justice and equity. Ironically, the attacks against them universally cite those same principles. The Sisyphean rock is repeatedly being pushed up the hill and rolled down again. The key to disentangling the paradox and breaking this cycle of futility is to identify the fundamental set of tools that all Americans ought to have.

In his book, Inequality Reexamined, Dr. Amartya Sen argues that there must be agreement on the core set of items to be equally distributed among people before any discussion of inequality can take place. This is mandatory because equality in this core set is used to justify inequality in peripheral areas. The logic is clear — if all are given equal opportunities and some opt not to seize them, then any individual shortcomings thereafter are justifiable. Herein lies the central dilemma facing Black male initiatives. Are Black males given equal educational opportunities and squandering them? Or are they shortchanged from the outset and operating with a built-in handicap? There are legions of scholars dedicated to solving this mystery, and it is a national shame that their talents are tied up in this manner in 2006 — 141 years after the abolition of American slavery and 51 years after Brown v. Board of Education.

There is an increasingly popular stance of attacking the cultural practices of Black males. John McWhorter, Orlando Patterson, the Thernstroms, Bill Cosby, Juan Williams and others have effectively argued that Black males opt not to take advantage of the opportunities awarded them. These critics are part of what I suggest is the “Invictus Group.” They subscribe to the tenets of William Henley’s poem, “Invictus,” where he declares that, “I am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul.” The Invictus Group argues that the persona voluntarily adopted by Black males is not conducive to academic success. They argue that Black males are choosing to cede the mastery of their fates and the captaincy of their souls to degenerative cultural practices. The logical conclusion of their position in the Sen framework is that academic exclusion of Black males in university systems like CUNY is justified. AAMIs are therefore unjust and discriminatory against others who opt to seize the opportunities awarded them.