What Is Tokenism ?
Aesop, Fable 465 (Chambry)
A Wolf, peering from afar, saw some shepherds in a hut quietly eating a meal of lamb. He drew nearer and muttered to himself: “If I had done the same, what an uproar they would have raised!” So it is with tokenism.
When the powerful invite one of us to the table, carve a small portion, and call it justice, they applaud themselves as enlightened. Were the rest of us to demand the whole table, the very same voices would howl about ingratitude, disruption, and the collapse of civility.
Tokenism is not loud. It does not march with dogs or swing batons. It smiles. It says “diversity hire” with pride. It puts one Black face on a board of twelve and calls the photograph proof that the work is finished. It is the velvet glove over the iron fist of systemic exclusion, and it has been refined over centuries into an art form that white institutions wield with devastating precision.
Historical Roots:
Tokenism did not begin with corporate DEI brochures. Its lineage is older than the United States itself. In the antebellum South, certain enslaved or free Black people—often light-skinned, often literate—were elevated as “exceptions.” House slaves versus field slaves. The “good Negro” preacher allowed to read scripture (but never to lead a rebellion). Frederick Douglass was paraded by abolitionist societies in the North not only for his brilliance, but because his existence reassured white audiences that slavery could produce a man who sounded almost like them—proof, they thought, that the system wasn’t entirely cruel. Douglass himself grew furious at being reduced to a specimen on display.
After emancipation, the pattern repeated. Booker T. Washington was the acceptable Black leader for white philanthropists: accommodationist, grateful, non-threatening. W.E.B. Du Bois called him “the great compromiser,” and the white press adored Washington precisely because he made Black ambition palatable. One talented tenth, yes—but only if the other nine-tenths stayed in their lane.
The pattern calcified in the 20th century. In 1950s and 60s corporate America, the first Black vice presidents were almost always in “community relations” or “urban affairs”—positions that allowed companies to say
“See, we have one,”
while ensuring the person never touched profit-and-loss, never sat on the compensation committee, never influenced the real power centers.
In politics, the single Black appointee in a presidential cabinet became a rite of passage. Lyndon Johnson appointed Robert Weaver as the first Black cabinet secretary (HUD, 1966) amid riots in Watts, Harlem, and Detroit. The symbolism was undeniable; the power was negligible. HUD had no control over the Pentagon, the Fed, or the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. Weaver himself later reflected that he spent much of his tenure “explaining to angry Black people why things weren’t moving faster,” while white colleagues patted themselves on the back for his presence.
The 1990s gave us the “diversity hire” era in tech and finance. McKinsey reports began touting the business case for diversity, and suddenly every Fortune 500 company needed its visible proof point. The chosen few—often Ivy-educated, often from the same handful of families—were elevated into roles where they were over-mentored and under-sponsored, celebrated in press releases and isolated in boardrooms.
How Tokenism Actually Works?
Tokenism operates on three cruel principles: Scarcity as Evidence of Merit
“We found the one good one” is the unspoken subtext. The token’s success is framed as proof that the system is fair—after all, they let her in. This conveniently ignores the thousands equally or more qualified who were never given a phone screen.
Performative Exhaustion
The token is expected to represent the entire race, to educate white colleagues, to smile through microaggressions, to be the diversity voice in every meeting, and still outperform everyone else to justify their existence. Burnout is built into the job description.
The Loyalty Trap
Speak too forcefully about systemic issues and you become “difficult,” “angry,” or “not a team player.” The very system that elevated you can revoke its favor in an instant. Silence, then, becomes survival.
Buy a Villa Apartment in Ghana
The Pros (Yes, There Are a Few)To pretend tokenism has no benefits would be dishonest.
Let us name them plainly, without gratitude:
Access to Resources: A token who plays the game well can redirect real money—scholarships, grants, contracts—back into the community. Oprah Winfrey, for all the critiques of her respectability politics, built a pipeline that educated thousands of Black South African girls.
Intelligence Gathering: Being inside the room where it happens means you learn how decisions are actually made, who the real gatekeepers are, and what language moves money. That knowledge can be weaponized later.
The first crack in the wall matters. Shirley Chisholm, Thurgood Marshall, Barack Obama—each was, in their moment, a token. Their presence forced the system to stretch, even if only slightly.
Young people need to see someone who looks like them in the cockpit, the operating room, the C-suite. Representation is not liberation, but it is oxygen.
These benefits are real. They are also the reason tokenism is so seductive—and so dangerous.
The Cons: How Tokenism Sabotages the Struggle.
Tokenism does not merely fail to dismantle white supremacy; it actively fortifies it. It Replaces Structural Change with Symbolism
When a company hires one Black EVP and declares victory, the pressure for actual reform evaporates. Why fix the pipeline when the photo already looks diverse?
It Creates a Buffer Class
Tokens often develop a vested interest in defending the system that anointed them.
Clarence Thomas is the extreme example, but he is not alone. The higher you climb on the token ladder, the more you have to lose by burning the ladder down.
It Fractures Solidarity
“Why are you complaining? Look at Keisha—she made it!” becomes the rebuttal to every demand for systemic change. The token is weaponized against the masses.
It Distorts Meritocracy Narratives
The token’s success is used to blame everyone else for their failure. “If she could do it starting from the projects, why can’t you?” This ignores the lottery-ticket nature of token selection and the invisible tax paid daily.
It Exhausts the Token
Many tokens either burn out, sell out, or are pushed out. The turnover rate for Black executives in predominantly white firms remains shockingly high. The system chews them up and then says, “See, they can’t handle it.”
It Delays the Tipping Point
Real power shifts when critical mass is achieved—roughly 30% in most social science models. Tokenism keeps representation forever at 3–8%, the sweet spot where white comfort is preserved and the illusion of progress maintained.
After George Floyd’s murder, companies pledged $50 billion to racial justice. By 2023, only about 1% had been spent on anything that actually reached Black communities. Meanwhile, Black representation in the C-suite rose from 3% to… 4%. The boards looked better in the annual report. The wealth gap widened.
British Parliament
In 1987, four Black and Asian MPs were elected—the largest number ever. The press called it a “breakthrough.” Thirty-eight years later, in 2025, the House of Commons is 10% ethnic minority (roughly proportional to the population), yet only 3% of the most powerful ministerial positions are held by people of color. The early tokens became the justification for decades of complacency.
Hollywood
Halle Berry’s 2002 Oscar win was hailed as historic. In the 23 years since, exactly one other Black woman (none in acting categories recently) has won Best Actress.
The industry keeps producing “firsts” because it never commits to seconds, thirds, fiftieths.
Can Tokenism Ever Be Beneficial Without Being Harmful?
Only under strict conditions:The token must be explicitly temporary—a bridge, not a destination.
The token must have real power, not just visibility.
The token must use their position to open doors wider, not to close them behind themselves.
The community must refuse to treat the token’s success as collective success.
These conditions are almost never met. Which means, in practice, tokenism is nearly always harmful.
The only antidote to tokenism is abundance. Not one seat. Not ten. Thirty percent, forty, fifty—enough that no single person carries the race on their back. Enough that mediocrity is tolerated (as it always has been for white people). Enough that power is shared, not loaned.Until then, every “diversity hire” announcement should be greeted not with celebration but with the same question the Wolf asked the shepherds:
If the rest of us did the same, would you applaud—or would you howl?
We know the answer. The work is not to become better tokens. The work is to make the category of “token” obsolete.
“The small man builds cages for everyone he knows. While the sage, who has to duck his head when the moon is low, keeps dropping keys all night long for the beautiful, rowdy prisoners.”
— Hafiz
Author
Campbell Kitts
Subscribe to our newsletter
Comments
Post a Comment