In the freedom struggle there are few who have exemplified the effort and tenacity that has been put forth by Ida B. Wells-Barnett. Throughout the latter part of the 19th century and the early 20th century Wells-Barnett worked tirelessly against the evils of postbellum American society. She battled against Jim Crow, the politics of anti-feminism, the horrors of lynching and the evils of racism. Moreover, she was very active in organizing the National Association of the Advancement of Color People (NAACP), as well as the Black Women’s Club Movement. In addition, she also astutely addressed issues of Black male chauvinism which seemed to run rampant through many of the movements and organizations of her time. She fought for freedom on all fronts, not just against white supremacy, but also against male chauvinism and sexism of her time. This essay will discuss the dynamic nature of Wells-Barnett’s leadership as well as he role in laying the foundation for protest and struggle for the 20th century.
Wells-Barnett was born into slavery in Hollins Springs, Mississippi to James Wells and Lizzie Warrenton. Her father, who was enslaved in Mississippi, was a talented carpenter whose skills were often hired out by his enslaver throughout the region. Lizzie’s life, on the other hand, was a bit more difficult under enslavement in Virginia. Her and her family were sold away to different enslavers throughout the South, making her part of the one of millions of displaced and broken Black families. Nevertheless, despite the problems created by the peculiar institution Wells-Barnett’s parents did well for themselves after emancipation. Lizzie became a famous and accomplished chef while James founded a successful carpentry business as well as he was named a trustee of Shaw College, what would be named Rust College one of the oldest Historical Black Colleges in the country. James was also a ‘race man’, fighting for the advancement of African Americans throughout the South.[1] Wells-Barnett was deeply influenced by the lives and efforts of her parents and by extension made it her mission to do as her parents did: to fight for the freedoms of her people.
Wells-Barnett was one of eight children born to Lizzie and James.[2] Unfortunately, her parents and one of her siblings were claimed by the yellow fever epidemic of the late 19th century. Wells-Barnett was able to avoid the affliction because she was away at Shaw College.[3] After her parents and sibling were buried, social services of the time threatened to separate her family because she did not have the capacity to take care of all of them by herself. However, she and her siblings moved to Holly Springs with their grandmother (Peggy Wells) in order to keep their family together and allow Wells-Barnett to continue with her studies. While earning her education she also taught elementary school to help make ends meet and to keep her family from be swallowed up by poverty. Wells-Barnett came from very strong and considerably affluent Southern roots, but she saw first-hand the devastation of poverty and racism reflected in her family and community and appropriately used that energy to become one of the most powerful and uncompromising voices in the African American freedom struggle.
Religiously, saying nothing about her personal beliefs, Wells-Barnett did not rely on the church or notions of God to solve the problems of the Black community. She believed the issues that plagued African Americans took more than simple prayer to remedy. To be clear, Wells-Barnett understood that the best way to deal with American racial oppression was head on, aggressively and without compromise. One of her most famous quotes - “a Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home.” - clearly tells of her resolve.[4] Wells-Barnett was not shy about her understanding that violence must be met with violence and he felt that Black people had the God-given right to defend themselves against tyranny and oppression, which was reflected clearly in her speeches and writings.[5]
For some, her ideas and philosophies were a bit radical. That is to say, Wells-Barnett had little interest appeasing those of the “talented-tenth”. She constantly quarreled with leaders and influencers who seemed to be more interested in pacifying whites for career advancements. Though she herself had little interest in kowtowing to Whites and stroking their cultural egos, but she was not above using them for her own gains. Scholar Thomas C. Holt argued that “Wells-Barnett saw ruling-class whites as the key to social change. But she was less concerned about gaining their favor than with manipulating their self-interest.”[6] To elaborate, Wells-Barnett often made it a point to hit the ruling class in their pockets, reminding them that their real interest was in money. She did this in a number of ways. For example, she argued that boycotts were useful in demonstrating that having segregated rail cars was bad for the bottom line of railroad corporations, which would also have an adverse effect for big money investors of the corporations.[7] Similar tactics were used during the Civil Rights Movement some fifty years later under the guidance of Martin Luther King Jr.
Wells-Barnett had a habit of rubbing her detractors and rivals the wrong way in large part because she was uncompromising in her approach while many of her contemporaries were willing to acquiesce for position and/or status. To elaborate, her perspective on lynchings in the South directly went for the jugular of the problem. That is, she believed and argued vehemently that white women were rarely the victim of raping by brutal Black men and were more often willing participants in white women’s desires for the forbidden fruit of the sexual prowess of Black men. Holt elaborates “while black men have betrayed weakness and stupidity in contracting such alliances, the women were very often willing participants.” Despite the astute and correct nature of her argument she was asked by many on her side of the isle to soften her attack on this hypocrisy. She refused.[8] And as a result she was shunned, ostracized and even booed public talks. It is not clear exactly why notable African Americans of her time asked her to not address this issue as aggressively, except for fear of angering their white supporter and financiers. Nonetheless, this issue was likely the reason why she was ostracized by Black scholars and elites of the time period.
Because of her unwillingness to acquiesce to white supremacy and its violent contradictions many turned their back on Wells-Barnett. Holt argues that “The most persistent themes in Wells-Barnett’s memoir are the loneliness of her struggle and the ingratitude of her people.”[9] To elaborate, Wells-Barnett’s aggressive and uncompromising approach against white supremacy made her more enemies in the freedom movement than friends. For example, Booker T. Washington seemed to almost forgive the atrocities of white supremacy by rarely addressing the problem of lynching at all.[10] While she was clear about her disdain for Washington and his methods, she felt she still had an ally in W.E.B. DuBois and the Niagara Movement which she helped to found. However, she was eventually and similarly ostracized by DuBois as well who distanced himself for her and her work the more he became involved in the NAACP. This is not to say that DuBois and the NAACP were not concerned about the lynching of Black people, because the historical record is clear that that was not the case. However, this is to say that her approach was perhaps a bit too aggressive for DuBois and his white allies who did their best to work within the established system to address the horrors faced by the Black community while simultaneously ensuring that white people were comfortable. It is very possible, even probable, that DuBois was asked to distance himself from her work because it made white supporters of the NAACP uncomfortable, but there is nothing substantive to that assertion, only speculation. Nonetheless, Wells-Barnett had no interest in making white people or their allies comfortable, especially when the lynching of Black people was such a huge problem in America.
Next to Harriet Tubman, Ida B. Wells-Barnett may have been the most impactful leader of the Black freedom struggle in America. Her understanding of the dynamics and inner workings of white supremacy provided a very sober understanding of the problems facing Black America. In addition, her fearless uncompromising attack of it made her a force to be reckoned with. Moreover, she was equally fearsome in her attack of patriarchy within the ranks of the Black freedom struggle, demonstrating early the interconnectedness of oppression. She saw the heart of oppression and stabbed at it with her wit and tireless work ethic, laying down and important legacy for us all to follow.
[1] Paula J. Giddings. Ida: A Sword Among Lions: Ida B. Wells and the Campaign Against Lynching (Reprint ed.). (Amistad, March 2009), 5-10.
[2] Patti Carr Black. “Ida B. Wells: A Courageous Voice for Civil Rights”. Mississippi History Now. Retrieved (February 2019).
[3] Ibid.
[4] John Hope Franklin and August Meier, eds. Black leaders of the twentieth century. Vol. 82. (University of Illinois Press, 1982), 45.
[5] Wells-Barnett, Ida B., and Henry Louis Jr Gates. Selected Works of Ida B. Wells-Barnett. Oxford University Press on Demand, 1991.
[6] John Hope Franklin and August Meier, eds. Black leaders of the twentieth century. Vol. 82. (University of Illinois Press, 1982), 45.
[7] Ibid., 46.
[8] Idid.,48.
[9] Ibid., 58.
[10] Ibid., 49-50.
Wells-Barnett was born into slavery in Hollins Springs, Mississippi to James Wells and Lizzie Warrenton. Her father, who was enslaved in Mississippi, was a talented carpenter whose skills were often hired out by his enslaver throughout the region. Lizzie’s life, on the other hand, was a bit more difficult under enslavement in Virginia. Her and her family were sold away to different enslavers throughout the South, making her part of the one of millions of displaced and broken Black families. Nevertheless, despite the problems created by the peculiar institution Wells-Barnett’s parents did well for themselves after emancipation. Lizzie became a famous and accomplished chef while James founded a successful carpentry business as well as he was named a trustee of Shaw College, what would be named Rust College one of the oldest Historical Black Colleges in the country. James was also a ‘race man’, fighting for the advancement of African Americans throughout the South.[1] Wells-Barnett was deeply influenced by the lives and efforts of her parents and by extension made it her mission to do as her parents did: to fight for the freedoms of her people.
Wells-Barnett was one of eight children born to Lizzie and James.[2] Unfortunately, her parents and one of her siblings were claimed by the yellow fever epidemic of the late 19th century. Wells-Barnett was able to avoid the affliction because she was away at Shaw College.[3] After her parents and sibling were buried, social services of the time threatened to separate her family because she did not have the capacity to take care of all of them by herself. However, she and her siblings moved to Holly Springs with their grandmother (Peggy Wells) in order to keep their family together and allow Wells-Barnett to continue with her studies. While earning her education she also taught elementary school to help make ends meet and to keep her family from be swallowed up by poverty. Wells-Barnett came from very strong and considerably affluent Southern roots, but she saw first-hand the devastation of poverty and racism reflected in her family and community and appropriately used that energy to become one of the most powerful and uncompromising voices in the African American freedom struggle.
Religiously, saying nothing about her personal beliefs, Wells-Barnett did not rely on the church or notions of God to solve the problems of the Black community. She believed the issues that plagued African Americans took more than simple prayer to remedy. To be clear, Wells-Barnett understood that the best way to deal with American racial oppression was head on, aggressively and without compromise. One of her most famous quotes - “a Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home.” - clearly tells of her resolve.[4] Wells-Barnett was not shy about her understanding that violence must be met with violence and he felt that Black people had the God-given right to defend themselves against tyranny and oppression, which was reflected clearly in her speeches and writings.[5]
For some, her ideas and philosophies were a bit radical. That is to say, Wells-Barnett had little interest appeasing those of the “talented-tenth”. She constantly quarreled with leaders and influencers who seemed to be more interested in pacifying whites for career advancements. Though she herself had little interest in kowtowing to Whites and stroking their cultural egos, but she was not above using them for her own gains. Scholar Thomas C. Holt argued that “Wells-Barnett saw ruling-class whites as the key to social change. But she was less concerned about gaining their favor than with manipulating their self-interest.”[6] To elaborate, Wells-Barnett often made it a point to hit the ruling class in their pockets, reminding them that their real interest was in money. She did this in a number of ways. For example, she argued that boycotts were useful in demonstrating that having segregated rail cars was bad for the bottom line of railroad corporations, which would also have an adverse effect for big money investors of the corporations.[7] Similar tactics were used during the Civil Rights Movement some fifty years later under the guidance of Martin Luther King Jr.
Wells-Barnett had a habit of rubbing her detractors and rivals the wrong way in large part because she was uncompromising in her approach while many of her contemporaries were willing to acquiesce for position and/or status. To elaborate, her perspective on lynchings in the South directly went for the jugular of the problem. That is, she believed and argued vehemently that white women were rarely the victim of raping by brutal Black men and were more often willing participants in white women’s desires for the forbidden fruit of the sexual prowess of Black men. Holt elaborates “while black men have betrayed weakness and stupidity in contracting such alliances, the women were very often willing participants.” Despite the astute and correct nature of her argument she was asked by many on her side of the isle to soften her attack on this hypocrisy. She refused.[8] And as a result she was shunned, ostracized and even booed public talks. It is not clear exactly why notable African Americans of her time asked her to not address this issue as aggressively, except for fear of angering their white supporter and financiers. Nonetheless, this issue was likely the reason why she was ostracized by Black scholars and elites of the time period.
Because of her unwillingness to acquiesce to white supremacy and its violent contradictions many turned their back on Wells-Barnett. Holt argues that “The most persistent themes in Wells-Barnett’s memoir are the loneliness of her struggle and the ingratitude of her people.”[9] To elaborate, Wells-Barnett’s aggressive and uncompromising approach against white supremacy made her more enemies in the freedom movement than friends. For example, Booker T. Washington seemed to almost forgive the atrocities of white supremacy by rarely addressing the problem of lynching at all.[10] While she was clear about her disdain for Washington and his methods, she felt she still had an ally in W.E.B. DuBois and the Niagara Movement which she helped to found. However, she was eventually and similarly ostracized by DuBois as well who distanced himself for her and her work the more he became involved in the NAACP. This is not to say that DuBois and the NAACP were not concerned about the lynching of Black people, because the historical record is clear that that was not the case. However, this is to say that her approach was perhaps a bit too aggressive for DuBois and his white allies who did their best to work within the established system to address the horrors faced by the Black community while simultaneously ensuring that white people were comfortable. It is very possible, even probable, that DuBois was asked to distance himself from her work because it made white supporters of the NAACP uncomfortable, but there is nothing substantive to that assertion, only speculation. Nonetheless, Wells-Barnett had no interest in making white people or their allies comfortable, especially when the lynching of Black people was such a huge problem in America.
Next to Harriet Tubman, Ida B. Wells-Barnett may have been the most impactful leader of the Black freedom struggle in America. Her understanding of the dynamics and inner workings of white supremacy provided a very sober understanding of the problems facing Black America. In addition, her fearless uncompromising attack of it made her a force to be reckoned with. Moreover, she was equally fearsome in her attack of patriarchy within the ranks of the Black freedom struggle, demonstrating early the interconnectedness of oppression. She saw the heart of oppression and stabbed at it with her wit and tireless work ethic, laying down and important legacy for us all to follow.
[1] Paula J. Giddings. Ida: A Sword Among Lions: Ida B. Wells and the Campaign Against Lynching (Reprint ed.). (Amistad, March 2009), 5-10.
[2] Patti Carr Black. “Ida B. Wells: A Courageous Voice for Civil Rights”. Mississippi History Now. Retrieved (February 2019).
[3] Ibid.
[4] John Hope Franklin and August Meier, eds. Black leaders of the twentieth century. Vol. 82. (University of Illinois Press, 1982), 45.
[5] Wells-Barnett, Ida B., and Henry Louis Jr Gates. Selected Works of Ida B. Wells-Barnett. Oxford University Press on Demand, 1991.
[6] John Hope Franklin and August Meier, eds. Black leaders of the twentieth century. Vol. 82. (University of Illinois Press, 1982), 45.
[7] Ibid., 46.
[8] Idid.,48.
[9] Ibid., 58.
[10] Ibid., 49-50.
No comments:
Post a Comment