This is an old revision of the document!
In this reading, there is a consistent theme of black men feeling torn between to choice of fighting for the nation that did not protect them with the possibility of gaining recognition and perhaps a better standing in society as a result, or refusing to join as a show of protest. Points were brought up by black newspapers like the “Freeman” by showing the hypocrisy of white Americans supporting “Cuba Libre” while black people were losing their voting rights. However, other black publications like the “Colored American” took a different approach by trying to show that black men were willing to fight in the same that white men were, hoping it would curie favor. (Henry Prior)
Another theme in this reading is how black news publications chose to back and smear candidates depending on how willing they were to speak out and defend the venerable black population in the south. When William McKinley did not address voter intimidation aimed at black voters and defend them even as a loyal voting base, the “Colored American.” a black publication, shamed the president for not speaking out or even offering words of sorrow. This was contrast from how earlier publicans like this one had directed full praise towards the president as the war against Spain began. (Henry Prior)
In this article, Piero Gleijeses examines the complicated socio-economic context of the African American response to the Spanish–American War of 1898 and the subsequent American conquest of the Philippines. On the one hand, some African American newspapers expressed concern about participation in the war given the racial violence of the Jim Crow South, including lynching, mob violence, and disenfranchisement laws. On the other hand, members of the African American community realized that acceptance at home could possibly be acquired through patriotism and the performance of civic duties, such as involvement in the war. Unfortunately, this dilemma was exacerbated by the incessant violence against the African American community and the almost total indifference of the broader white public discourse, ranging from newspapers to the administration of William McKinley. However, P. Gleijeses demonstrates that these conditions did not turn African American communities into merely passive agents, as they actively sought to alter their discursive position through newspapers, participation in or evasion of the war, and various political acts. - Nikolai Kotkov
On page 332, Gleijeses describes the disenfranchisement of African Americans in North Carolina (the last Southern state to disenfranchise African Americans) as an “emasculation”. This is well in line with our discussions of American masculinity throughout the course, which inherently connects being a man to one's ability to participate in politics. White masculinity was historically contrasted with Black masculinity due to the freedom of Whites and the subjugation of Black men by their enslavers. However, the passing of the Fifteenth Amendment briefly allowed Black men to participate politically and therefore attain that masculine trait. The eventual disenfranchisement of Black men can therefore be easily thought of as an “emasculation”, as masculinity through political power was achieved and then forcibly stripped away. (Nick Thodal)
Unfortunately, after the Civil War the relationship between groups that became less hostile was not between White and Black Americans but rather between North and South White Americans. Therefore, Black Americans actually lost some Northern support and now instead of having to fight for rights focusing only on the South, they had to appeal themselves to all White Americans. Thus, the public opinion of Black Americans as shown through African American newspapers such as the Colored American and the Washington Bee, had to be strategic but with such a complex situation, their opinions often changed. For example when it comes to Philippine expansion morally, they are against America exerting its control over another minority population, but on the other hand, they can use this as an opportunity to prove their patriotism and loyalty which could increase positive public opinion of them as a whole. (Katherine Hamilton)
During the Spanish American war, African American's faced a serious dilema over what side they would take and what it meant for their patriotism and masculinity. For many African American's, this war was a way to prove their patriotism, though it was proving their patriotis, to a country that has shown them nothing but disrespect, violence, and hostility. However, in many of their minds, this war was a way have an equal claim to manhood through military service. They would often experience exclusion and oppression within the military, which stopped the, from being able to achieve their political goals. After the war moved into the Phillipeans, black troops began realizing the white supremacy in these transnational politics. Their support for the war started disolving as desertion rated for black soldiers started climbing. This highlihted the irony of the US claiming to be fighting for the freedom of Cube, while simultaneously perpetuating a society where oppression is still rampant. -Caroline Cochran
Piero Gleijeses brought the discussion of how African American's dealt with the reaction of the Spanish-American War and how they dealt with being both the oppressed and the oppressor when it came to the impacts of the War in the Philippines and other “liberated” Spanish territories. This allows for the cycle of oppression to continue, where the African Americans were on the higher point of the cycle to help and aide the Anglo-American ideals of their racial superiority to be forced onto other non-white communities. (sage Milton)