Moreover, even if it were in the self-interest to help blacks, whites were not always rational. In his speech, Washington did not account for the fact that southern white Democrats might work against their economic self-interest just to see blacks crumble. For example, during Reconstruction, southerners could not stand to see these former slaves voting, holding office, and lawfully being equal. Therefore, they made it their mission to strip blacks of any power and would not yield to anyone, even the northerners. Southerners cared more about derogating blacks and showing their superiority than working with the Northerners to receive investment, industrialize, and advance their society. As DuBois correctly pointed out, they were obsessed with dominating other races, no matter the cost. As long as they saw other races as inferior, they would never feel remorseful and their attitudes would never change. In fact, contrary to Washington’s belief, he was not recognized by the common white man. This was merely because he was a black; they did not regard his success as significant. People were shocked that the president invited him for a meeting. Therefore, his theory that whites will recognize economically successful blacks was false. This example instead established DuBois’s point that only once whites altered the foundation of their thinking and understood …show more content…
He assumed that they could tolerate being seen as inferior as long as they got economic freedom. But as DuBois claimed, this constant reminder of inferiority could “sap the manhood of any race,” especially when they themselves had to admit it and struggle so much. Basically, the benefit of gaining economic freedom could be outweighed by the cost of lost morale through acceptance of injustice. It has weaknesses like DuBois’s alternative which is to futilely educate whites about inequality but at least be able to preserve integrity by not admitting