The Souls of Black Folk: Chapter 3 Summary & Analysis

This chapter begins with a poem fragment by Lord Byron that includes the phrase: “Know ye not / who would be free themselves must strike the blow?”. Du Bois then opens by claiming that the rise of Booker T. Washington is “the most striking thing” in African-American history since 1876. Du Bois argues that Washington’s approach to social change—defined by industrial education, compromise with the South, and “silence” on the issue of civil rights—was similar to the approach of free black men from 1830 until the Civil War. However, Washington’s “enthusiasm,” hard work, and “perfect faith” were unprecedented.

Washington was greatly admired by whites in both the North and South; black people, meanwhile, were “silenced” in their criticism of him.His willingness to work with conservatives, and in particular his crafting of the Atlanta Compromise, ensured his fame and success even while it also seemed an abandonment of any hope of striving for political rights. In the North, meanwhile, Washington understood and assimilated to a culture fixated on material prosperity. Overall, Washington’s “singleness of vision and oneness with his age” made him highly successful, and Du Bois describes his widespread fame as akin to a “cult.”

Du Bois admits that it is tempting not to criticize Washington, both because he achieved so much having come from so little, and also so as to avoid being accused of jealousy. However, even while white people have praised Washington, black people have bitterly criticized him, and Du Bois says the silencing of this criticism is dangerous and undemocratic.

Du Bois examines the history of African-American leadership, beginning with those who led slave uprisings and revolts before 1750, “while the fire of African freedom still burned in the veins of the slaves.” As time went on and relations between black and white people (marginally) improved, leaders became less focused on “revolt and revenge”; during this period, African-American leaders began to gain intellectual achievements and make political demands. Meanwhile, the Haitian revolution inspired slave uprisings in the South, whereas in the North black people forced out of white churches founded “a peculiar socio-religious institution”: the African Church.

Some black people in the North came to focus less on the dissolution of slavery and more on securing rights for themselves as a different class of people from the enslaved. Others became active in the abolition movement. After the 1876 revolution and the “oppression of the Negro votes,” a new leader arose: Booker T. Washington. Washington continued previous policies of “adjustment and submission,” but was unique in doing so in a completely new political climate, in which the economy was booming and interactions between people of different races was at an all-time high.

Du Bois criticizes Washington for withdrawing pressure for African-American civil rights at exactly the point when this pressure was most necessary. As a result, black men were disenfranchised, black people were legally defined as second-class citizens, and money was withdrawn from black institutions of higher education. Although these things can’t be blamed directly on Washington, the movement he created was undoubtedly partially responsible. Du Bois identifies several paradoxes in Washington’s arguments, all of which relate to the fact that while Washington advocated dignity and self-reliance, the policies that he endorsed made dignity and self-reliance impossible.

Washington’s views are criticized by two distinct groups of black people: those who reject white society entirely and advocate emigration out of the US, and those active in politics who object to the disintegration of the political, civic, and educational rights of African Americans. This latter group may agree with some of Washington’s points, but hold that black people will never be able to fulfill their potential if they are forced to live as second-class citizens and do not receive opportunities such as higher education.

Du Bois criticizes this group of highly-educated black people for not vocalizing their oppositiontoWashington. He argues that “it is the duty of black men to judge the South discriminatingly,” which means making well-informed assessments that take into account the complexity and variability of white Southern attitudes toward black people. At the same time, this also means reckoning with the danger of seeing black people in the South be reduced to a state of “semi-slavery.” Du Bois praises Washington’s vocal criticism of lynching and other “sinister schemes,” but argues that Washington’s “propaganda” implies that overall the South’s unjust treatment of black people is reasonable.

Du Bois presents his own modifications of Washington’s arguments. He claims that “slavery and race-prejudice are potent if not sufficient causes of the Negro’s position” and that striving is important, but must be supplemented by policies and institutions that support people’s ability to strive. The South needs to be pushed to remedy its wrongs, and black people must resist Washington’s belittling and dismissal of Southern racism and injustice. Du Bois concludes with the words of the Founding Fathers, reminding the reader that America was founded on the principle that “all men were created equal.”