Sirak Zena
September 22, 2025
After watching the recent YouTube interview accusing Professor Messay Kebede of being “anti-Amhara” and then reading his thoughtful rebuttal, I felt compelled to write this short piece. It is both a defense of truth and a plea for decency and intellectual integrity in our public discourse.
At first, I was tempted to leave a brief comment under Professor Messay’s rebuttal, registering my support and dismay at the unfair accusations he faced. However, as I reflected on the YouTube interview, read Messay’s thoughtful rebuttal, and considered the broader implications for our intellectual culture, I realized that a simple comment would not do justice to the seriousness of this situation. The weight of the attacks, the erosion of decency, and the disregard for honest debate compelled me to write something more substantial. I feel a genuine sense of disappointment about the state of our intellectual discourse, where reputations can be targeted so carelessly and good-faith engagement is all too rare. In this spirit, with a sense of support for Messay and the standards of fairness and intellectual honesty, I offer these reflections.
Frankly, I am disheartened by the state of political debate in our community, where honest ideas are often met with hostility and nuanced analysis is drowned out by suspicion and name-calling. What should be a rigorous, open exchange of ideas has instead become a space where good faith and decency are in short supply. I am not here to defend Messay more than he has already defended himself in his excellent, factual, and compelling rebuttal. I am writing this piece in support of Messay to defend the reputation of a thoughtful thinker and to emphasize the importance of upholding standards of fairness and reasoned discussion. These principles are crucial for our societal progress.
It is excruciating to witness someone of Professor Messay Kebede’s stature, an intellectual and philosopher of the highest order, devoted to Ethiopian unity, forced to defend himself against the baseless accusation of being anti-Amhara. The fact that he is compelled to repeatedly “justify” his positive perspective and Amhara credentials is not an indictment of him but rather a damning reflection of the intellectual insolvency and bad faith that are at play among his detractors.
Let us be absolutely clear: the recent YouTube attack, where the interviewee, a self-styled ” history buff,” absurdly claims that Messay suffers from an “inferiority complex” because of his Oromo and Gurage heritage, lays bare the sheer arrogance and insularity of those who, under the pretense of defending Amhara identity, insist that only Amhara can claim legitimacy or “dominance” in Ethiopia. Ironically, this is a repulsively ugly distortion: as far as I know, the Amhara as a people have never declared themselves dominant or others inferior. This poisonous narrative is being manufactured by self-appointed ethnic gatekeepers, not by the Amhara people themselves.
Yet what is even more astonishing, and frankly disturbing, is that when the interviewee made this bigoted statement, the sociologist interviewer, who should understand the nuances of social interaction and group behavior, remained silent, offering neither challenge nor correction. He not only tolerated but tacitly endorsed and agreed with the interviewee’s opinion. In a country celebrated for its dazzling mosaic of peoples, such an attitude is not merely absurd; it is toxic to the highest degree, actively corroding the very foundations of Ethiopian unity. This abdication of intellectual responsibility and ethical leadership, especially from someone trained in the social sciences, is nothing less than a betrayal of both academic integrity and the hope for a more inclusive and honest public discourse.
The interviewee’s denunciation of Messay and call to shun him is nothing more than childishness masquerading as activism, a textbook example of intellectual cowardice and ethical bankruptcy. Worse still is the interviewer’s duplicity: having initially agreed to let Messay respond, only to cancel the interview under flimsy pretenses and do so abruptly. This is not just a failure of journalistic standards; it is a betrayal of the most basic norms of decency and open debate. It reveals a willingness to stifle dissent and silence independent voices rather than engage with facts and ideas. Such conduct is an embarrassment to any tradition that values honest discourse.
Those attacking Messay reveal either a shocking inability or an outright refusal to read and understand what he actually writes and says. If they took the time to read his work with honesty, they would see he is careful to distinguish between criticisms of “ethnic elites” or “ruling class” and the people as a whole.
Even if one finds Professor Messay’s explanation on YouTube to be inadequate or less than fully satisfying, the proper response is to engage with his arguments using evidence, logic, and respectful debate, rather than through personal attacks or simplistic labeling. Intellectual disagreements should be opportunities for clarification and learning, not occasions for vilification.
Unfortunately, it seems that the entire YouTube program was designed to discredit and attack Messay, focusing on accusations and inflammatory claims rather than genuinely addressing his ideas or allowing him to defend himself.
As Messay himself points out, rather than demanding evidence or moderating the discussion, the interviewer doubled down on the unfounded accusations and later canceled Messay’s chance to respond, leaving no room for fair rebuttal. When rebuttals rely on character assassination rather than substantive critique, they undermine the pursuit of truth and cast a shadow over the culture of intellectual discourse. This, above all, is what makes me feel dispirited about the current state of our conversations.
The claim that Messay is anti-Amhara is not only false but also perverse and wicked. Here is a man who has written movingly about the “invaluable and crucial contributions of the Amhara people in the inception and implementation of the idea of Ethiopia.” To call him “anti-Amhara” is rhetoric that defies logic and exposes a willful distortion of reality.
The real issue, as Messay himself incisively observes, is that certain individuals cannot abide even the slightest criticism of the Amhara elite, no matter how measured, academic, or grounded in evidence it may be. This is the very definition of anti-intellectualism: a willful refusal to engage with fact or argument, substituting hurt pride for honest debate. Worse still, to conflate legitimate critique of ruling elites with hatred for an entire people is not only dishonest; it is a deliberate attempt to poison the well of public discourse. It is precisely this tactic, collapsing the distinction between people and rulers, that has driven the ethnicization of Ethiopian politics, a corrosive trend Messay has consistently warned against for decades.
Such intellectual laziness and moral cowardice are the tools of those who wish to silence dissent, not defend the dignity of any group. The refusal to accept criticism is not a defense of the Amhara people; it is a defense of unaccountable power, and it betrays the very idea of Ethiopia as an inclusive national project.
None of Ethiopia’s ethnic political elites are, or should be, above criticism, though the degree and substance of that criticism will naturally vary according to history and context. Is there a single ethnic political elite in the country that can honestly claim to be pristine, utterly free from mistakes or wrongdoing? The very idea is absurd. Every ruling group, whatever its origins, has been implicated in the country’s complex and often troubled history. To pretend otherwise is to indulge in myth-making, not analysis, and to deny the reality that no group’s leadership is exempt from scrutiny or accountability. If we are ever to move forward, we must abandon the fiction of blameless elites and instead engage in honest, evidence-based critique across all communities.
Let us remember that labeling those with whom we disagree and manufacturing enemies out of honest critics and opinions only serves to deepen divisions and widen the dangerous chasm of polarization that threatens our society. When disagreements are met with accusations and character assassination rather than thoughtful engagement, we not only damage individual reputations but also corrode the very foundations of our intellectual life and national unity.
Decency and integrity must be our guiding principles, especially in the realm of ideas, if we hope to build a healthier, more inclusive, and forward-looking Ethiopia. Let us reject the easy path of scapegoating and embrace the more complex, nobler work of open, respectful, and evidence-based dialogue. Only then can we hope to rise above the toxic politics of exclusion and realize the full promise of our diverse, shared national project.
Please let us wise up and recognize that dialogue, not labeling or manufacturing enemies, is the only tool worthy of our differences. Ethnic and national issues in Ethiopia are deeply emotional, but we must learn to govern our emotions and approach these questions with rational thinking and mutual respect. Blaming and labeling people without truly knowing them and their true intentions only multiplies enemies and deepens wounds that our nation can ill afford. As Messay Kebede’s experience shows, collapsing the distinction between honest critique and hatred, or between elites and the people, is a recipe for endless division and suspicion. Now more than ever, Ethiopia needs civil discourse, rooted in decency and integrity, to preserve our unity and honor the dignity of every ethnic group. Let us reject the toxic politics of scapegoating and exclusion and instead build a future where open, honest, and respectful dialogue is the foundation of our shared national life.
We should recognize Professor Messay Kebede for what he is: a scholar of courage and vision, a champion of Ethiopian unity, and a thinker whose ideas offer hope for a country ensnared by ethnic politics. Attempts to silence and smear him are nothing but an admission of intellectual defeat.
Messay needs no license from self-appointed ethnic gatekeepers to express his views. Ethiopia needs independent voices like his now more than ever.