In an attempt to justify why a white man should be appointed to Ethiopia, the article says that "Despite their name, the Ethiopians do not consider themselves racially homogeneous with aboriginal Africa." It goes on to assert that "Color varies In Ethiopia, from a pale olive among the northern inhabitants, through deep brown in the central part of the Kingdom to chocolate tints and true black in the farthest south. Ras Taffari, prince regent, is a black southerner but of the special superior blackness of the province of Shoa. Slim, short, wiry, Prince Ras Taffari considers himself super-Negroid." This is totally a racist statement that does not portray the Ethiopian psyche/mentality as we know it.
A further explanation given in the same article is that "Prince Ras Taffari is of a turn of mind no less inquiring than Rasselas. He would...desire as envoy from any other state, a representative of that state's dominant race. Ras Taffari would want to learn about China from a Chinaman, not a white man; about India from a Hindu, not an Anglo-Saxon; about the U. S. from a Caucasian, not a Negro." This, for me, is uncharacteristic of neither the Ethiopian polity nor the crown prince, rather something typical of the American psyche at the time. If the US found it right not to send a black diplomat to Ethiopia, it was precisely because the US was a racist state adhering to racism and racial classification not only in its domestic public life but also in its international affairs.Alemayehu Fentaw
To read the Time article follow this link: