“TWO WARRING IDEALS”:
DOUBLE CONSCIOUSNESS, DIALOGUE, &
AFRICAN AMERICAN PATRIOTISM POST-9/111
Todd C. Shaw
Department of Political Science
University of South Carolina, Columbia
350 Gambrell Hall
Columbia, SC 29205
shawtc@gwm.sc.edu
Todd C. Shaw is an assistant professor of Political Science and African American Studies at the
University of South Carolina, Columbia.
1
The author is greatly indebted to the assistance of the following undergraduate (or former undergraduate)
researchers: Bukola Bello, Clinton Jenkins, Darron Johnson, Jenell Kelly, Maya Pirtle, Lauren Ray, and
Keely Stewart.
Abstract
This paper explores how African American expressions of patriotism in post-9/11 America vary
according to whether they are stated in a conversational context that is All-Black, Biracial, or
Multiracial. With a sample of 87 students who attend a large, Midwestern, public university, a quasiexperimental focus group design was employed in April of 2002. The researcher discovers that AllBlack groups voiced a wide range of sentiments about patriotism and double consciousness, unlike
Biracial groups, which were often polarized. Yet, due to the many Americans who likely felt a certain
“two-ness” after 9/11, Multiracial group participants at least felt group members comprehended their
views even though they were less likely to reach consensus in comparison to the All-Black groups.
One key implication of this work is that, for the foreseeable future, race will not only fundamentally
shape one’s sentiments about patriotism, but those to who one expresses such sentiments.
2
“TWO WARRING IDEALS”:
DOUBLE CONSCIOUSNESS, DIALOGUE, & AFRICAN AMERICAN PATRIOTISM
POST-9/11
“One ever feels his two-ness, — An American, a Negro; two souls, two
thoughts…two warring ideals in one dark body…”
— W.E.B. Dubois, The Souls of Black Folks (1903)
As explained by DuBois in the above quote, a feeling of double consciousness has resulted
from African Americans attempting to situate themselves within American society. Even after
emancipation from slavery, Blacks2 were still denied meaningful citizenship rights by the “veil” of
race and racism though they contributed what DuBois calls the “gifts” of their souls. Thus, American
racism imposed an identity dilemma upon African Americans and affected their expressions of
patriotism. On the one hand, moments of crisis and racial opportunity have led leaders such as
Frederick Douglass during the Civil War, DuBois before World War I, and Al Sharpton after 9/11 to
embrace a faith that the Black gifts of labor, loyalty, and culture might one day be rewarded with full
racial equality (Levine 1997; Lewis 1993; Sharpton 2003.) This is called invested patriotism. On the
other hand, moments of racial retrenchment have led leaders such as Paul Robeson and DuBois during
the 1950s and Martin Luther King, Jr. during the Vietnam War to believe that Blacks must reject
traditional forms of patriotism and instead display devotion by fundamentally challenging American
racism (Marable 1990.) This is called iconoclastic patriotism. These two poles mirror the
“American” vs. “Black” duality of double consciousness, though both depart from the assumptions of
traditional symbolic patriotism.
Therefore, this paper explores how the Black expression of the above forms of patriotism
depends not only upon the larger racial climate of the times, but more specifically, upon whether the
2
The author uses the terms “African American” and “Black” interchangeably to mean persons of African
descent who are born in the United States and/or identify themselves as American citizens; although he is
mindful of the diasporic uses and connotation of the term “Black.”
conversational context for their expression is All-Black, Biracial, or Multiracial. As detailed later in
this paper, America after 9/11 represented a unique opportunity for American solidarity across racial
and cultural lines. The de jure barriers of racial segregation DuBois lamented at the turn of century no
longer existed and the terrorist attacks prompted Americans to symbolically unite. While African
Americans seemed as eager as other Americans to display traditional signs of loyalty and patriotic
attachment, this introduction will explain why considering the racial dynamics of dialogue are
necessary to any exploration of how African Americans express concepts as contested as patriotism.
Rally ‘Round the Flag?
Moments after the terrible realization that the second tower of the World Trade Center had
been deliberately struck by a hijacked airplane on the morning of September 11, 2001, millions of
Americans picked up a telephone, engaged in the very human process of conversation, and attempted
to locate meaning. Thus dialogue, especially talk about political crises, matters (Gamson 1992).
More often than not it is how one searches for useful interpretations from complex events (Harris
2004). Prior to September 11th, African Americans took a sanguine view toward expressions of
American patriotism and large numbers were quite critical of President George Bush’s leadership
(Dawson and Bobo 2001; National Election Study.) However, on the surface, September 11th
appeared to have changed everything. According to one fall 2002 poll, roughly 56% of African
Americans reported displaying the American flag daily, and 50% of them stated this was prompted by
the terrorist attacks. By other accounts, there has also been a dramatic turn around in Black
sentiments toward Bush. While some national polls stated that 70% of African Americans favorably
rated Bush, even the sober 2002 National Opinion poll of the Joint Center for Economic and Political
Studies found that a slim majority or 51% of African Americans rated Bush favorably (Bositis 2002.)
NAACP President Kewisi Mfume suggested that these attacks caused, “people to rally around
things we have together” and thus has “united all of our country.” One young African American — a
2
self-described hip hop journalist — explained why the attacks caused him to look beyond his normal
ambivalence toward America and instead see himself as a “full-fledged American”: “Being an African
American and dealing with racism from the age of nine, I never considered myself an authentic
American….But I realized that on the day of the bombing, had I been on the plane, my Blackness and
Islamicness were negated and I would have been just as dead as everyone else” (Hubbard 2001.) So
what has become of W.E.B. DuBois’s metaphor of double consciousness in which the “the veil” of
race and racism persistently divides Black America from White America? To put it in DuBoisian
terms, did these attacks induce such a level of political trauma that African Americans decided, at
least for a while, to fully identify as Americans and thus trump the salient group identity of Black?
Using debates about the contemporary relevance of W.E.B. DuBois’s double consciousness
claim as a point of departure, this paper examines two key forms of African American patriotism as
expressed after the terrorist attacks of September 11th. As aforementioned, they are invested
patriotism versus iconoclastic patriotism. To examine the above interaction in post-9/11 America,
this paper analyzes data from a study of Black and other students at a larger, Midwestern public
university. An April 2002 student survey had a focus group design with a total of 87 students 46 of
who were African American, thus it permits detailed conversational analysis. The lead researcher
concludes that African Americans may consider All-Black dialogue settings as the safest spaces to
express varied post-9/11 sentiments of Black double consciousness and patriotism, within limits.
Inversely, Biracial (or Black and White) settings are likely the most attitudinally polarized. However,
quite possibly due to shared feelings of “two-ness”, Multiracial settings may hold out prospects for
racial candor among Black and other Americans even if they arrive at little consensus about what it
means to be a patriot. Before the analysis section, this paper will first theorize the relevance of the
perennial double consciousness debate, the differing forms of patriotism emanating out of this debate,
and then the construction of contemporary Black conversational contexts, especially within this postsegregationist era.
3
Double Consciousness and Black Investments in America
In the Souls of Black Folks, DuBois made an eloquent plea for understanding the plight of a
newly emancipated but wholly racialized people. As a product of Western civilization and education,
DuBois believed African Americans were at the heart of the American liberal tradition (Lewis 1993.)
He argues that the American freedom envisioned and by the founders can only be realized if we
understand Black American contributions: “…there are to-day no truer exponents of the pure human
spirit of the Declaration of Independence than the American Negroes…” (DuBois 1997, p. 43.)
Germane to our discussions of double consciousness and contemporary American patriotism is that
DuBois implored an understanding of the Black investments in the American Republic, not the least
of which was centuries of enslaved labor. These investments have rooted Black people in the promise
of America and should root America in the promise of Black people. As he writes, “the ideal of
fostering and developing the traits and talents of the Negro, not in opposition to or contempt for other
races, but rather in large conformity to the greater ideals of the American Republic, in order that some
day on American soil two world-races may give to each other those characteristics both so sadly lack”
(Ibid.) Thus, he lamented that Blacks were not considered full Americans citizens as were Whites and
thus were segregated behind the “veil of race” away from the central life, polity, and economy of
America — a squandering of Black America’s vast potential (Ibid, p. 40.) Although DuBois clearly
concluded at this point in history that it was not only possible but desirable to be Black, American,
and patriotic, let us more fully consider how Black patriotism maps upon the duality of double
consciousness.
Invested vs. Iconoclastic Black Patriotism
Patriotism or the act of loving and defending one’s country is far from an absolute concept,
but like other political terms is subject to the motives and needs of the speaker (Bodnar 1996; Baker
4
and O’Neal 2001; Fugueiredo and Eklins n.d.; Sullivan, Fried, Dietz 1992.) No less has been true for
African American expressions of patriotism. In his book Jefferson’s Pillow, Roger Wilkins articulates
that even in the wake of post 9/11 patriotism that America’s racist legacy made him, “truly in awe of
the conundrum…the ‘twoness’ as W.E.B. DuBois called it. Because I am Black, I can’t avoid it, and
because I am American, I must confront it.” (2001, p. 5) Wilkin’s posture represents Black invested
patriotism or the African American faith that generations of toil, racial struggle, and societal
contributions might one day secure a full shareholder status in a clearly deferred American dream of
racial equality. Despite similarities, Black invested patriotism differs from traditional, “symbolic
patriotism” or “a strong, emotional view of country” and a “positive resonance toward traditional
patriotic symbols…” (Berns 2001; Sullivan, Friend, and Dietz 1992, p. 212.) Rather invested
patriotism is contingent upon group racial consciousness or Black linked fate and implies that Blacks
love America but America also still owes Blacks a debt because of their unrewarded sacrifices.
Because of the faith that one day Black contributions would be rewarded, ardent civil rights
leader Frederick Douglass exhorted African American men to fight for the Union during the Civil War
of the 1860s. A similar faith convinced W.E.B. DuBois to initially encourage African Americans to
vote for the Democratic presidential ticket of Woodrow Wilson as well as enlist in the United States
Army during World War I in segregated units. Likewise, African Americans bought record numbers
of war bonds during World War II along with again serving in segregated units (Levine 1997; Lewis
1979; Samuel 1996.) All of these outpourings of Black patriotism came at powerful and paradoxical
moments of instability and optimism that, like the aftershock of 9/11, compelled America to recruit
African Americans to defend the union in return for the tacit promise of equality. Therefore, invested
patriotism is rooted in the Black experience and leans toward the American pole of the double
consciousness dilemma. It shares some of the assumptions of Black liberalism or what Michael
Dawson calls radical egalitarianism in which America’s liberal creed is also embraced but challenged
to live up to its racial promise (Dawson 2001.)
5
Yet, when invariably the pendulum of American racial possibility has swung away from a
promised Black inequality toward the ends of racial retrenchment, frustrated African Americans have
at times reinterpreted the purpose of Black patriotism. What emerges is Black iconoclastic patriotism
or the assertion that Blacks display devotion to America by fundamentally challenging and
transforming its traditional interpretations, identities, and practices, otherwise America will remain
irredeemably flawed by racism. In general, this form of patriotism in the attitudinal literature
maintains that, “patriots who love their country must work toward economic and political change and
must be engaged in a broad range of civic and political activities” (Sullivan, Fried, and Dietz 1992, p.
212.) What distinguishes Black iconoclasm from a complete rejection of America or anti-patriotism
— though it may be in close proximity — is that it proponents strongly believe African Americans
should at least maintain limited ties with American society.
For example, it was during the most draconian period of American slavery in the 1840s and
1850s that Frederick Douglass implored audiences to tell him, “What country have I? …in such a
country as this, I can have no patriotism” (Foner and Taylor 1999, p. 77), which was similar to his
1852 Corinthian Hall address where he asked, “What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July?”
(Ibid, p. 196.) During the 1950s, W.E.B. DuBois, Paul Robeson, and other Black leftists promoted the
cherished American values of liberty and free speech despite the red-baiting of the McCarthy-led
House Un-American Activities Committee. During the late 1960s, Martin Luther King, Jr. aligned his
opposition to the Vietnam conflict by re-interpreting the American Creed to include economic
redistribution, anti-militarism and anti-racism (Marable 1990; Samuels 1996.) At the same time,
Hannah Nelson as persuaded by Black Nationalism berated racist America and its Star Spangled
Banner — a “warmed over drinking song” — while claiming to “love the ground I buried my mother
in” absent of Whites (Gwaltney 1993, p. 5.) So with regard to the double consciousness dilemma,
iconoclastic patriotism leans toward an explicit embrace of African American group interests or the
interests of politically marginalized Americans and is less concerned with its uniquely American
6
identity. What Dawson calls disillusioned liberalism — a more pessimistic and critical form of Black
liberalism — or community Black Nationalism — a belief in Black autonomy within the United States
— are schools of thought that seem to parallel this form of Black patriotism (Dawson 2001.)
Overall, the racial context and climate, as much as the specific ideological commitments of a
speaker, determine the strategic use of the two aforementioned forms of Black patriotism. However,
this paper’s conclusion will consider how these two forms of African American patriotism are not
likely the only forms. Toward the ends of specifying contextual particularities, let us now consider
how Black social and political status in this post-de facto-segregation era shapes Black double
consciousness and by extension group discussions of patriotism.
Black Double Consciousness and the Current Racial Context
Despite the enduring popularity of DuBois’ double consciousness metaphor, Adolph Reed
(1997) states that it is an anachronism rooted in DuBois’s Jim Crow segregationist period and thus is
not applicable to post-segregation Black America. Critical of the class presumptions underlying its
current use, Reed forcefully admonishes that: “…the imagery of double consciousness connects
particularly with the [Black] middle-class stratum” because it describes the precarious, racially
integrated work and career settings this class must negotiate (Reed 1997, p.165.) With this
examination of post 9/11 patriotism among Black Americans, especially Black college students, Reed
would caution that any expressed racial and political sentiments of these young middle class Blacks
are powerfully mediated by their class locations and ideologies.
To an extent, Reed is correct that class matters in dialogues about concepts as difficult as
Black group status and patriotism. Yet, the “veil of race” is still a meaningful social construction
(Omi and Winant 1994.) Not only does race still objectively suppress African American life chances,
but most African Americans still instrumentally use it to build ethnic communities of purpose,
meaning, solidarity, and group aims (Gregory 1998; Gwaltney 1993.) Beyond questions of class and
7
other intragroup differences, it is also important to consider how Black double consciousness is still
salient and being shaped by the context of race relations. While there has been indications that the
patriotic unity emanating out of 9/11 has improved aspects of race relations in the United States (ABC
News/Washington Post 2003), there is also the argument that the level of “racial profiling” the Bush
administration has practiced in its anti-terrorism campaign has helped swing the pendulum back to the
“normal” state of things; not to mention that on questions of the persistence of racial discrimination
there exists a Black and White attitudinal chasm (Heuman 2003; Saad 2003.)
Roughly sixty-two years after DuBois first wrote about double consciousness and “the veil”,
his demands of Black political, economic, and social equality were fulfilled by the 1964 Civil Rights
Act and 1965 Voting Rights Act. Now almost forty years after those reforms, we have witnessed a
fundamental change in the specific manifestations that race and racism have assumed since the days of
strict Jim Crow segregation. Bonilla-Silva (1999) argues that a “new racism” and accompanying
“racial structure” has emerged. To be sure, appreciable vestiges of the social and institutional racism
that confronted DuBois’s era still linger even post-9/11. In the Souls essay “Of the Sons of Master
and Man”, DuBois lamented how the color line drew a bar with regard to “physical proximity of
homes and dwelling places” (DuBois 1997, p. 134). One hundred years later, de jure residential
discrimination and housing discrimination have been abated in some communities. But predominantly
Black, economically depressed cities such as Detroit actually witnessed whopping increases in their
segregation indexes by the late 1990s (Farley et. al. 2000.) DuBois also was chiefly concerned with
the unequal “economic relations” between Blacks and Whites. Today’s post-segregation era
employment and educational reforms have ushered in a burgeoning Black middle and a larger fraction
of a Black upper class. Still when young African Americans in the inner city have the exact same
employment credentials as their White counterparts, “statistical discrimination” stigmatizes them as
employment risks ( Dawson 1994; Wilson 1996.)
8
Today we speak most accurately about the racial divisions between Black and White lives
when we refer to the segregation and stigmatization of specific Black communities. Black
suburbanization has more often produced predominantly Black suburbs such as Baldwin Hills, Los
Angeles or Prince Georges County, Maryland. Yet, there is at least a small minority of middle class
Black children attending mostly White academies or culturally diverse and well-funded public schools
(Graham 1999; Patillo 1999; Wiese 1993.) The post-1965 liberalization of immigration laws and the
increasing ethnic diversification of urban neighborhoods and schools in Los Angeles, Miami, New
York, and Chicago has brought African American communities — as racially segregated as most
remain — more in residential contact with Puerto Rican, Dominican, Chicano, Korean, Filipino and
other ethnic communities of color (Portes & Rumbaut 1996, pp. 28-56.) In fact the ‘boundaries of
Blackness’ have expanded to include persons from the African Diaspora (Waters 1999.) It follows
then that the DuBoisian veil of race is not simply a monochrome, omnipresent Black and White
curtain but a screen differentially separating various communities of color from White America. One
small testimony to the subtle vagaries of the “new racism” is that one national poll indicated how most
Americans were much more suspicious of Muslims and Arab Americans in the immediate wake of
9/11 than they were of African Americans (Traugott, Brader, Coral, et. al. 2002.) The next section
builds upon this understanding of the post-segregation area complexity and context to posit the
significance and variability of Black dialogic contexts.
The Significance and Racial Dynamics of Political Dialogue
One way we can understand how people politically interpret the world and those in it is to
listen as they talk about politics (Gamson 1992.) Sociologists, linguists, and other social scientists
have long suspected that given the ways in which each of us is shaped by communities of norms,
customs, and beliefs — not to mention language patterns and dialects — there are discernible routines
to and outcomes of conversation (Goffman 1983; Kellerman & Hee 2001.) Talking with others can
reinforce, challenge, or hold in abeyance preexisting expectations, interpretations, and memories. It
9
can help to create community were none existed or further alienate persons already occupying
divergent social locations. So how do the dynamics of a political dialogue about the War on Terrorism
and American patriotism change based upon whether a group is All-Black, Biracial, or Multiracial?
Research has already uncovered how All-Black dialogic spaces help to reinforce an
affirmative racial identity (Hecht, Jackson, and Ribeau 2003; Jackson 2004; May 2003.) However, the
work of Melissa Harris-Lacewell (2004) goes a step further. Beginning with a proposition she calls
“Black common sense” or the nebulous but important sentiment that being Black mutually matters to
speakers, Harris-Lacewell concludes dialogic interaction serves to hash out the particular ideological
conclusions participants will reach. With some awareness that class (and to a degree gender) create
varying opportunity structures for dialogue among different strata, her argument that the dialogic
process is fundamental to African American political interpretation is intriguing. To be sure, notions
of group collectivity have been defined in widely divergent ways. Discursive historical gatherings,
ranging from the 19th century Negro Conventions or Reconstruction Constitutional Conventions to
Black political assemblies in the late 20th century, provide evidence that collectivity or solidarity have
been valued if contested concepts for many who have claimed a “Black” racial self-identity (BarkleyBrown 1989; Allen & Bagozzi 2001; Smith 1996).
So, what can be said about Biracial or Black and White dialogues? Inspired by DuBois’s
proposition that the lack of Black-White social interactions most reinforced the racial dividing line,
Anne Rawls (2000) examined the greeting and introductory talk styles of Black and White students
and concludes that students self-identifying with each category had opposing expectations about
candor and consensus. Although her conclusions suffer from some cultural determinism, it is
interesting that the African American, dialogic norm of candor was considered problematic by Whites
in her study. Contrary to the survey literature on race-of-interviewer effect and social desirability
(Davis 1997a; Davis 1997b) it is possible that it at least in face-to-face peer settings — very different
from hierarchal, expert settings — it is not Black but rather White participants who will mask some of
10
their sentiments. If Bonilla-Silva’s (1999) assertions about the race-neutral and covert terminology
of “new racism” are valid, then White apprehension about not being considered as racist may strongly
inhibit their revealing candid sentiments during political discussions with Blacks. Such conversations
are then likely to be polarized or very subdued.
Lastly, what will occur within Multiracial peer settings? For all the attention various students
of DuBois’s Souls treatise have paid to the “double consciousness” passage about the distinct
separateness and “two-ness” of the American who is a Negro, it is interesting that his Hegelian
reference to the Negro as a “seventh son” initially situated the status of African Americans along a
multiracial continuum. Keep in mind that often invoked second passage in Souls where DuBois
likewise laments about the global and colonial expanse of the divisions by race: “The problem of the
twentieth century is the problem of the color-line, — the relation of the darker to the lighter races of
men in Asia and Africa, in America and the islands of the sea” (DuBois 1997, p. 45.) It is telling that
at the onset DuBois suggests the “veil” of race is a fluid curtain that engenders many forms of unequal
double-ness. Quite possibly this multiplicity means others present who also see themselves through
the lens of a “racial” or “ethnic” self as linked to broader communities will lessen the stresses upon
the Black-White polarity. Thus, candor without necessarily arriving at consensus is possible (Jandt
2004.)
Sample
This section turns to a discussion of expectations and findings. Based upon the literature, the
lead researcher expected All-Black focus groups to display the most varied and nuanced expressions
of double consciousness and invested versus iconoclastic patriotism.
Biracial focus groups, in
comparison to All-Black groups, were expected to display more one-sided expressions of either
iconoclastic or invested sentiments of patriotism among Black students. And Multiracial focus groups
were expected to display varied expressions of iconoclastic and invested patriotism as well double
11
consciousness among Black participants, although less group consensus than witnessed in All-Black
groups. Keep the above in mind as the sample and methods are described.
To examine the interaction between the above forms of patriotism in post-9/11 America, this
section analyzes data from a study of Black and other students at as major, public university in the
Midwest. This sample permits for limited generalization partly because of the diversity of the Black
experiences these students represented — e.g. affluent, working class, all born in the United States but
some of Afro-Caribbean and West African heritage, moderate to liberal — and that they attended
school in a bellwether state very representative of urban and rural America.
This study had a focus
group design with a total of 87 participants, 46 of whom are African American, thus it had a large
enough sample to permit an exploration of conversational dynamics.
The focus group method is employed to examine the conversational interactions of Black
students within differing peer environments. As advised by Fern (2001), the purpose of this research
design is to understand how in varying “experiential contexts” participants would freely react to a
common set of discussion points about a designated topic — i.e. the War on Terrorism. To be able to
control for some of the variance that arises for the inherent heterogeneity of social situations, the
research approximated the conditions of a quasi-experimental framework. Yet, the ultimate goal was
to build theory as opposed to test theory by considering how conversational settings construct shared
meanings (Gamson 1992; Morgan 1988). Specifically, an undergraduate research team and the lead
researcher conducted a series of thirteen focus groups in April of 2002. It was publicized as the “War
on Terrorism Student Dialogue Study.” College sophomores and juniors who self-identified as Black,
White, Arab, Asian, or Latino/a were recruited. Expected participation was for a one and one half
hour focus group session, and the total compensation was $20.00. Among other background
information, each prospective participant was asked her or his self-identified racial or ethnic identity
and then were contacted based upon the racial/ethnic and gender parity needed in the study. The goal
was to recruit 108 students, roughly even numbers of men and women including 63 Blacks, 27
12
Whites, 9 Arabs, and 9 Asians. The actual response rate was 87 participants or roughly 81% with 42
men and 45 women. The typical respondent was a junior, a political science major, who was about 20
years old. Because 70% of the Blacks participants reported attending high schools and growing up in
communities that were predominantly Black or predominantly minority, only a third went to mostly
White schools and only about 22% said they grew up in mostly White communities. Yet, even despite
these tepid signs of formal integration, the continuing social divisions of race are evident in that 61%
of Black participants and 64% of White participants said their four closest friends were of their same
race.
The format for each focus group was that the research team: (1) administered a pre-test
survey; (2) asked focus group members to read two articles about the War on Terrorism — one prowar article presumably written by a White male moderate “Jonathan, Scarsdale, New York,” the other
was an anti-war article presumably written by a Black female liberal, “Shelia, Washington, DC”
(though both were actually written by the lead researcher); (3) asked each group to have an
unfacilitated, open-ended group discussion for 30 minutes (‘suggested questions’ were provided) in
which only a student monitor was present to video record; and then (4) administered a post-test
survey. Before exploring the qualitative dynamics found in varying conversational settings, a
quantitative baseline of overall attitudes toward symbolic patriotism based upon racial identity and
double consciousness will be presented.
Symbolic Patriotism: A Quantitative Analysis
Table 1 displays the descriptive statistics for all of the variables included in the analysis.
Questions from the pre-test survey instrument measured symbolic patriotism as an additive scale of
dichotomous variables and were recoded to range between 0 and 1. The variables include: expressed
pride in America; hung an American flag/banner; wore a patriotic item of clothing, button, or pin; and
placed your hand over your heart or removed your hat when the “Star Spangled Banner” was played
13
(all were coded such that yes = 1, no = 0.) Overall this scale had a Cronbach’s alpha of .69. On
average the Black students in this study reported engaging in almost one or about .96 out of the 4
aforementioned patriotic behaviors, whereas the average they reported for their families and close
friends was a slightly higher 1.62. The respective rates for White students were 2.61 and 3.17 and for
Asians and Latinos they were 2.83 and 3.00. The independent variable of double consciousness was
measured by asking each respondent whether her racial and/or ethnic identity (or identities) was much
more important, somewhat more important, just as important, or not as important as being American
(recoded 0 to 1). Gender was a dummy variable coded 1 for female and 0 for non-female or male;
Black identity was similarly coded 1 for Black and 0 for non-Black. Race was measured as distinct
from a second open-ended question on ethnicity/nationality — e.g. Puerto Rican, Nigerian, Jamaican,
etc. For race, the researchers asked each respondent to check at least one of the following Census
categories: Black, White, Middle Eastern, Asian/Pacific Islander, American Indian, or none.
[Table 1 about here]
Table 2 reports results from the multivariate analyses. The model tests what effect a measure
of double consciousness, race, and gender identity have on exhibiting symbolic patriotism.
As it
reveals, there was a significant, strong, and negative relationship between racial identity and symbolic
patriotism. Respondents who considered their racial and ethnic identities as more important than their
American identities were less likely to report having engaged in symbolic acts of patriotism.3
Likewise, African American respondents were less likely to report engaging in symbolic patriotism.
Gender does not appear to have a significant effect. Arguably, political attitudes and behavior are not
formed in a vacuum but are in part shaped and expressed according to group dynamics such as
political dialogue. The next section examines this proposition.
[Table 2 about here]
3
The researcher included an interaction term between Blackness and Racial vs. American identity as an
independent variable; however, its coefficient was not significant.
14
Discussions of Patriotism across Racial Groups
Employing the conventions of conversational analysis (Psathas 1995), the author examines
whether and how African Americans differently express sentiments of double consciousness and
patriotism based upon the group setting. Each focus group participant is assigned a pseudonym and
her background is sufficiently masked to ensure confidentiality. But for the readers benefit, the
following designations are used to demarcate the race/ethnicity and gender of the participants: (BW)
for Black Woman; (BM) for Black Man; (WW) for White Woman; (WM) for White Man; (LW) for
Latina Woman; (LM) for Latino Man; (AW) Asian American Woman; and (AM) for Asian American
Man. The beauty of this type of qualitative data is that it is richly textured and permits the researcher
to observe nuances not possible with a blunt survey instrument.
Akintunde, Janette, and Harold are respectively business, political science, and economic
majors and their families either reside in suburban Chicago or upon the Westside; though originally
Akintunde’s parents are from West Africa. They are in an All-Black group of 8 participants whose
other participants also call themselves politically liberal and express a very strong sense of racial
linked fate with other African Americans. Janette, who wears African-inspired clothing, does not like
the labels of liberal and conservative but still has a strong critique of the Bush administration’s foreign
policy and the War on Terrorism.
Of greatest importance is that he and his group members agree upon iconoclastic
reinterpretations of what ought to constitute American patriotism and compassion for others. As the
dialogue begins, Akintunde is unconvinced by the pro-War on Terrorism argument and he considers
its logic incoherent. Before this discussion, the group merely inferred the identities of the two authors.
Harold, who up to this point has been fairly quiet, squarely states the racial standpoints and thus the
perceived credibility of the authors of the two articles — pro- versus anti-Bush War on Terrorism.
Underlying Harold’s comments is the importance of race and one’s status as an American. Note how
he qualifies his choice of words at the end of his statement.
15
Akintunde (BM): The first [author] was comparing it [September 11th] to World War II and
like the Japanese bias in this country. He was saying that it was not as bad as that — the
numbers don’t match up, as though discrimination against Muslims is okay because of the
numbers. I didn’t see what he was trying to do in this paragraph.
Janette (BF): I hate this slogan, “God Bless America.” Why can’t we bless everybody, all
nations? Why does it just have to be Americans or America? It’s such a cliché.
Akintunde (BM): You see flags everywhere. Cars, windows, my mom had one on there.
Janette (BF): They didn’t have one up there before that, you know?
Harold (BM): The first one [article] you can take from the standpoint of the majority of
White people, because he’s never been discriminated against. He doesn’t see the problem,
while the second you can take as the perspective of Black people. So she’s been
discriminated against; she knows how it feels. So she can relate…He has no reason to have
any hatred, I mean, bias toward the country, because it’s been good to him.
Now, contrast the dynamics of how the introductory comment concerning the Japanese
internment camps was a seamless, uncontested contribution in the All-Black dialogue with the
incremental struggle for even basic agreement experienced by the below Biracial focus group. Tonya
and Derrick are African American, while Rich, Cindy, and Ben are White. Most of the group
participants are political science majors although there is also a computer science and speech
communication major. While most in the group consider themselves moderate to liberal Democrats,
Rich calls himself a moderate Republican.
As with the previous group, Tonya and Derrick challenge the factuality of the first author and
his inability to see beyond the mainstream media interpretation, but in this context the author is not
racially labeled. The “veil” is referenced but its opposing occupants are not named, even though it
bisects the room. What is most intriguing about this exchange is how racial divisions subtly trump an
initial, liberal ideological agreement about the emptiness of symbolic or “blind” patriotism. At the
beginning, Ben describes himself as very liberal who leans more toward the second, anti-War on
Terrorism article as opposed to the first article. He ideologically reinforces the views expressed by
16
one of the African American participants that the contemporary United States is not devoid of the
vestiges of racism. Yet, by the end of this section of the conversation he has subtly questioned the
iconoclasm of both Black participants. In fact, he notes in his exit comments to the researchers that he
sees a “racial stance” or divide between the Black and White participants.
Tonya (BF): I lean toward the second one [article]…
Ben (WM): What didn’t you like about the first one [pro-war article]? I kind of thought it
was off. He said, you know, “a lot of Muslims and Arabs have been attacked but not that
many.” I don’t know. I thought it kind of downplayed that.
Derrick (BM): I think it sounded like blind patriotism.
Ben (WM): Yeah.
Derrick (BM): Like, he was sitting there saying, “everything that America has done is so
great!” It doesn’t even sound like he knows half the facts that he’s trying to present. Like
that part where he said very few have dared to hurt Muslims. I don’t necessarily think that is
true. I don’t know if he knows that’s true. It seems like he’d only know what’s put out in the
media and not everything that happens gets put out in the media. There could been hundreds
of thousands [attacked] but no one ever said anything about it.
Rich (WM): Well?…[raises eyebrows, then to Cindy], no, you go ahead.
Cindy (WF): Well I was just going to say that I did like the part how he [first author] said
that we don’t have internment camps anymore. We’ve come a long way in 60 years since that
happened. Back then mainstream society was okay with that. But now, nothing like that
could ever happen anymore. In such a short period of time, you know, 60 years is not long.
Ben (WM): But there’s still racial profiling.
Cindy (WF): Well, right.
Derrick (BM): They don’t have camps now because it’s not necessary now. That would be
a waste of time now. They’ve got better ways to do it.
Rich (WM): To do what though?
Derrick (BM): To me internment camps were more to make the Americans on the West
Coast feel safer because there was a general paranoia in that area about Japanese Americans.
The government felt it was necessary then. If they felt it was necessary now, they would have
done it. It just wasn’t necessary.
17
Tonya (BF): And you know, I don’t think there’s exactly what we would call today
internment camps in relation to what happened before because in the second article it pointed
out that a lot of Arab Americans have been kind of confiscated and put aside. They’ve been
arrested and held and detained with no charges against them and that may be the new
internment …
Ben (WM): [To Tonya] Well, those are the people “suspected” of something, right? You’re
talking people having to wear ID’s? Those may just be people who have dissent. I don’t
know…
Below are three separate dialogues from an All-Black, a Biracial, and a Multiracial focus
group conversation where the common topic of conversation is American patriotism. Note how the
All-Black dialogue is a seamless recitation of “historical realities”. It is an energetic weaving of a
shared, racial narrative around a concept termed “selective patriotism” where assertions of invested
patriotism, iconoclastic patriotism, and even anti-patriotism are fused. Each conversation excerpt
begins with the statements of a Black woman.
LaTesha (BF): As a Black woman in America, I’ve never been patriotic for the simple
reason that I have a very extensive knowledge of Black history and the history of the United
States, period. And as one who knows history of the United States, knows that J. Edgar
Hoover and…
Darryl (BM): COINTELPRO!
LaTesha (BF): COINTELPRO took out the whole Black Panther Party, and took out any
kind of nationalist organization that has ever been perceived as a threat; infiltrated drugs into
the Black community; destroyed the Black community; destroyed the Black family; and just
totally attacked what they considered evil acts, so I cannot say I am patriotic. As a Black
person who comes from the inner city where I’ve seen the evils of police brutality and how I
had to go school with holes in the walls and no heat, how can I be patriotic to a country that
treats me like a second class citizen? Like I don’t belong here? And so far as their notion of
patriotism, that is very iffy with me and I know a lot of other Black people. But like you said
[referring to Jamal] it’s a dangerous time right now to be unpatriotic in America…
Darryl (BM): I feel that as far as being patriotic, I’m patriotic. I’m patriotic to Black
Americans! I’m patriotic to minority Americans who work hard, not to everyone. I’m patriotic
18
to the people who benefit us as a people. So, I’m not going to say I’m not patriotic, I’m
selectively patriotic. That the best word for a Black American in my experience…
Jamal (BM): Don’t forget the inventions!
Darryl (BM): Exactly!…We’re the ones who made this country what it is…I mean there is
just so much. But we should be the most patriotic people because we built this country.
LaTesha (BF): Well, I’ll be patriotic when the people who built this country can take control
of it!
However, the below Biracial dialogue is not seamless at all. Even when participants begin
with a common theme it devolves into contestation over the most basic of premises — what
constitutes normality? Because most of the participants in the All-Black dialogue also knew each
other from campus life, they attempted to reinterpret, from slightly differing angles, what constitutes
“real” American patriotism. This Biracial dialogue’s participants fail to agree such a reinterpretation
is even necessary.
Tonya (BF): The whole thing with patriotism I think is some kind of propaganda gimmick.
Patriotism, I’m not even sure how to define it, but it comes off as something used to ensure
loyalty to the government; to ensure, “Hey, I am on your side.” But showing a flag doesn’t
really do that though. Showing a flag, having a bumper doesn’t say that. That can’t be the end
all absolute of loyalty. Even though there are billboards with “United We Stand” “We’re
together” that’s a very powerful propaganda mechanism, and that’s how I have to see it
because I know where it’s coming from. You know what I mean?
Barbara (WF): To me, I was personally involved. My brother’s plant was actually on the
[terrorist] hit list. He’s works for a nuclear company. I don’t have to show a flag, but I support
the US in as many ways as I can. To me it is a privilege everyday to be able to live in this
country. It got more personal to me. I knew people who had friends that were supposed to be
at the Trade Center that day. It was harder. The campus only recently got back to normal as
compared to six months ago…
Tonya (BF): Normal back to what?
Cindy (WF): It was really quiet. Like walking around the quad…
Derrick (BM): Yeah, but the campus was back to normal five months ago. I haven’t been
19
here that long, but after about a month I didn’t see anything that was that different.
Cindy (WF): Well, uh, just, the overall general feeling.
Tonya (BF): Do you mean edgy versus not edgy…?
Cindy (WF): Yeah, like everyone was walking on eggshells trying not to crack them and now
everyone’s back and saying it’s time to move on.
Tonya (BF): I see. But if we are getting back to normal is that normal before the attacks or a
new kind of normal?
Although not seamless, the below Multiracial dialogue more subtly grapples over basic
agreement. Throughout their conversation, the participants voice implicit and explicit feelings of
double consciousness — Black and American, South Asian and American, Jewish [or identifying with
Israel] and American. Overall, the group deliberated about symbolic, invested, and iconoclastic forms
of patriotism and reasons for the 9/11 attacks. Conceivably this is why participants reported on their
post-test surveys that they thoroughly enjoyed hearing the different perspectives of their group
members even though were clear ideological differences.
Sylvia (BF): [Commercializing September 11th] just cheapened the whole thing. These TV
executives were thinking, “We’ve got to get people to watch our channel.” In the midst of this
terrible experience, still people were thinking, “let’s make money.” Not simply asking for
donations to blood drives, but “we’re going to put some of our profits toward September 11th
victims.”
Nahkil (AM): Yeah, but wouldn’t you term that as part of the American spirit?
Sylvia (BF): Yeah, and unfortunately, the American spirit is not such a good thing,
sometimes.
Felicia (BF): I think that when you go down to the foundations of what America was based
on, I would agree with you [a previous South Asian woman speaker] that we didn’t deserve it
[the attack]. There’s a lot of stuff, crazy stuff that people do everyday. It’s not a matter of
deserving it, but it’s a matter of America being looked at as the bad guy. There is so much
good about America and so much bad at the same time.
Randy (WM): But it was an attack upon Americans in general. You guys were talking about
the American spirit; I think it was an attack on that as well.
20
Susan (WF): [The terrorists’] basic thing is that they are against Western civilization and
imperialism; and they don’t think we live the right way. The same kind of thing is happening
in Israel, you are scared to go down to certain places because you think you are going to be
attacked. I was in the bookstore the other day and saw a September 11th tribute. They had out
all kinds of books. It was nice but it was a little much. [To Sylvia] I think your point is very
valid. In my history class, we were talking about the Civil War and how there’s no testimony
of the contributions of Black soldiers as though it’s almost a government conspiracy. History
can be so biased sometimes. It depends on who writes it. You know when the September 11th
movie comes out…we’re not going to admit we sent the terrorists the bombs.
Sylvia (BF): I just think that if there’s anything that you think the government does that is
really good and looks great you need to really look behind it. It’s so important that you don’t
buy everything that they throw at you.
As related to double consciousness, below are excerpts from All-Black groups where the
speakers grapple with dual identities. These investigations revealed that the All-Black groups had the
most substantive discussions about African American ambivalence or “two-ness” relative to invested
and iconoclastic patriotism. Although Multiracial dialogues are not presented in the interests of space,
they also had fairly meaningful discussions about what it means to be, for example, Latino and White
or South Asian and American or Jewish and American. Not all of the Biracial groups were as
contentious as those presented, but it is interesting that participants tended to polarize more in Biracial
settings than in any other context. Note how some of the students have parents who are native
Africans and thus foreign-born. This speaks to the increasing diversity of Black American identity in
this post-segregationist era.
Janette (BW): If you…were deciding to place flags on your car, would you put up the
American flag; would it be first; would it be the only flag; would you put an African flag?
[Group chuckles and ponders]
Kristina (BW): For security purposes I would put up the American flag. [Chuckles] But I
don’t know; that’s a tough question.
Sandra (BW): To me, the flag, the American flag, holds so much destruction. Before
September 11th, when I looked at the American flag…I basically felt negative toward it. I
21
didn’t feel anything positive when I looked at it. After September 11th, maybe people were
putting it up because they were saying, “Oh, I feel for those people who were in the towers
and lost their lives” not just American [pride]. It was just a way of showing [solidarity with]
America. But I wouldn’t put a flag on my car — the American flag. I guess I wouldn’t put
up an African flag because I really wouldn’t know what flag to put up…
Akintunde (BW): I wouldn’t put an African flag. I’m Nigerian. My parents are Nigerian
and went to college in this country. I wouldn’t put up any flag. The American flag, I pretty
much don’t identity with that, and with the Nigerian flag, well, I was born and raised here.
So, I wouldn’t be the best person to ask. I know a lot about Nigerian history and culture and
what’s going on now in the country…but I’m a poor representative in asking historical
questions. I probably would just remain neutral and not have any flag.
In another All-Black group Kimberly shared a mixture of symbolic and invested patriotic sentiments:
“It’s like sometimes I feel grateful on the one hand that I live here as opposed to other places.”
Dennis and Malik definitely agreed, but Malik, whose parents are from West Africa, qualified his
invested patriotism when he shared that his parents, “…didn’t get snowballed into the whole thing
that, ‘America’s great! Look what we have here. It’s so much better!’ But at the same time, me
personally, I am happy that I’m here.”
In addition, the researcher found slight differences between Black students who were in AllBlack, Biracial, and Multiracial groups as they responded to questions about racial/ethnic identity
versus American identity, hanging the American flag, and expressing pride in America (possibly an
invested patriotism notion). With the racial vs. American identity, the greatest variance in opinion
was within the All-Black groups with 52% of the respondents stating race/ethnicity was important as
compared to the Biracial groups in which 64% of the respondents said it was more important.
Interestingly, however, by tiny differences, those Black respondents in Multiracial groups (20%) were
much more likely than those in All-Black (8%) or Biracial groups (0%) to report hanging an American
flag.
It is purely speculation, but outside of significant differences in the types of Black respondents
found in each of these groups — for example, the more patriotic behaving respondents were
22
unwittingly assigned to the Multiracial groups — another explanation may be the specific way in
which one’s racial/ethnic identity makes expressions of invested or symbolic patriotism more salient
in a context where no one is the majority.
[Table 3 about here]
Lastly, Table 3 reinforces expectations that African Americans within All-Black Groups were
the most likely of the Black sample to believe a consensus was derived at the end of their
conversations (row I, column I) and they were the most likely to feel they learned from a wide breath
of views (row I, column IV). In contrast, Blacks in Biracial groups appeared the most alienated of all
(row III, columns I and III) though over a quarter admitted that they gained from the differing views
that were voiced (row III, column IV). Note these sentiments are mirrored by Whites in Biracial
Groups (row IV, columns I, II, and III). Blacks in Multiracial groups were the least likely to believe a
consensus was reached (row II, column I). But they were less likely than Blacks in Biracial Groups to
feel misunderstood (rows II and III, column III) and they were more likely than those in Biracial
Groups to feel that there was basic group agreement (rows II and III, column II). Generally, these
findings support the researcher’s expectations about the conversational expression of Black patriotism.
In the conclusion, the author summarizes his findings and discusses future work and implications.
Conclusion: Patriotism, Dialogue, and Double Consciousness in Context
This study was a rigorous, qualitative investigation of how post-9/11, Black conversations in
differing conversational milieu produced varying or even starkly different sets of interactions. In
general, this conversational examination contributes to theory-building when we ask the question:
what is the context for the Black expression of various forms of patriotism? It has provided rich and
nuanced insights as to how racial and American identities constrain and enable dialogue as a process
for locating and creating political meaning. Without reifying race and assuming it leads to uniform
group values, Black expectations about collectivity mean that, at various moments, each All-Black
dialogue approached a candid consensus about group identity and patriotism. Black feelings of
23
contestation, guardedness, and being misunderstood were more the norms in the Biracial groups.
Occupying a space somewhere in between consensus and contestation, the Multiracial dialogue
participants who were Black found it useful to engage others around diverse differences even when a
consensus was not forthcoming.
Admittedly, this study is simply the beginning of a fruitful path of inquiry, and thus there are
many other questions the author seeks to explore. First of all, what are the other forms of Black
patriotism other than symbolic, invested, or iconoclastic patriotism and do all of these forms
ideologically correspond to particular Black schools of thought? For example, separatists Black
Nationalists who are on the opposite end of the ideological spectrum from Black liberals (Dawson
2001) may describe themselves as anti-patriotic, when strategically useful. In his career, Malcolm X
moved from the late 1950s separatism of the Nation of Islam to a mid-1960s “community
nationalism” and Pan-Africanism with his Organization of Afro-American Unity. He then declared,
“No, I not an American. I’m one of the 22 million Black people who are victims of Americanism”
(Malcolm X 1965, p. 151.) Despite this apparent expression of anti-patriotism, Malcolm appealed to
aspects of the liberal creed of freedom and constitutional rights as he pursued a new agenda of civil
rights radicalism to challenge (not retreat from) America’s racial politics.
A second question is how would the dynamics of the overall discussions of patriotism differ
now that the US military has invaded Iraqi? At the time of this study, the Bush Administration had
not yet invaded Iraq, deposed and captured President Saddam Hussein, and Democratic presidential
candidates had not leveled a full volley of election-year criticisms about the casualties and costs of the
American occupation. If as the literature on patriotism suggests that its expression is associated with
specific political events and crises, a post-Iraq study would provide a very useful update. Third, in
consideration of generalizability we must ask: what if this study was conducted using AfricanAmericans who represent generational and educational cross-sections? Young African Americans, in
some instances, hold opinions that are more volatile (subject to change) and militant than those of
24
their elders. What would we find if we had African Americans old enough to remember pre-Iraq
conflicts or to have served in the military? All of these theoretical or empirical questions speak to the
need for future research.
Nevertheless, this study lends support to the view that while race and racism are different in
this post-segregation era as compared to DuBois’s time, they still matter (West 1993). The students in
this study reported coming from community and ethnic backgrounds more diverse or integrated than
their parents; still they squarely confronted the divides of race. However, to argue this point requires
one to speak with specificity about those moments when racial collectivity is most salient and not
merely a camouflage for class or gender motives. For example, in one of the All-Black groups, the
students engaged in a vigorous debate about political strategies and class divisions in the Black
community. Rachel, who lived in suburban Chicago and was from an affluent family, confided that
although she was a liberal, her mother was a Republican. The inference was that people like her
mother would oppose radical strategies like armed self-defense against America. LaTesha, who
described herself as from “the hood” and who clearly had Black nationalist sentiments, as was further
evidenced by her invoking Malcolm X as she railed against traitorous “house niggers,” stated what she
saw as the ubiquity of racism, “eventually even those [Blacks] who live those sheltered lives and think
everything is gravy, if you Black, I don’t care if you 75 when it happens, you are going to get
discriminated against, and something is going to open your eyes!” In other instances, many of the
Black students who spoke in All-Black settings voiced sympathy and, in one case, solidarity with
Arab Americans and Muslims. While Larry echoed a form of double consciousness and drew a direct
parallel between the racial profiling Black people face and the profiling confronting Arabs and
Muslims after 9/11, “…I feel your pain my Arabian brother,’” another member of his group voiced a
not too subtle animus about “A-rabs” and their continuing to “look down on us.” Conflicts between
Arab merchants and African American consumers in cities like Detroit highlight the possible divisions
that prevent meaningful exchanges despite shared feelings of “two-ness” across communities.
25
From a normative standpoint, the purpose of this work is not to argue that All-Black settings
inherently produce transformative dialogues. In his book the Jesse Jackson Phenomenon (1985), Reed
lamented that the Black church was anti-democratic, anti-libratory, and more often ratified preexisting
conservative, moralist agendas than progressive ones. There are certainly scholars who would
disagree or at least want to significantly qualify Reed’s conclusion (Harris 1994; Harris-Lacewell
2004). Nonetheless, if the question is how to produce discourses of critical engagement within and
between various communities subordinated by race or ethnicity, especially in this post-9/11, this
investigation has suggested how race can both enable and constrain that process.
26
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics for Symbolic Patriotism Items, Race, Gender, and Racial vs. American Identity
(N= 87)
M
SD
Range
Expressed Pride in
America a
.53
.51
0-1
Hung an American
flag or banner a
.31
.47
0-1
Wore a patriotic
item of clothing a
.30
.46
0-1
Placed hand over
heart or removed
hat during national
anthem a
.54
.50
0-1
Black b
.55
.50
0-1
Gender c
.51
.50
0-1
Racial identity
more important
American
.47
.31
0-1
a
Cronbach’s alpha for 4 items = .69; b Black: 0=non-Black, 1=Black; c Gender: 0=male, 1=female.
27
Table 2
OLS Regressions of Symbolic Patriotism Scale by Race, Double Consciousness, Gender, and Interactions
(N=76)
β
SE
Race/ethnicity more important than being American
-.398***
.109
Black (Black=1)
-.297***
.068
Gender (Female=1)
.052
.059
Constant
.746***
.062
R2
.465
Model SE
.258
All tests are two-tailed. * indicates p<.05; ** indicates p <.01; *** indicates p < .001
28
Table 3
Participant Assessments of Focus Group Agreement/Understanding (N=87)
Focus Group Percentage who Agreed
Group within Racial
Group Type
I. Blacks in All-Black
Groups (19) a
I.
II.
III.
IV.
We reached a
consensus on
the War on
Terrorism.
Group agreed
more than we
disagreed.
Most of the
group did not
understand my
views.
The group helped me
see a different point
of view.
78.9
79.0
5.3
36.9
25.0
75.0
12.5
12.5
III. Blacks in Biracial
Groups (9) a
44.4
66.7
33.3
22.2
IV. Whites in Biracial
Groups (11) a
27.3
45.5
27.3
18.2
II. Blacks in
Multiracial Groups
(8) a
a
The number of participants of each racial/ethnic background is in the parentheses.
References
ABC News/Washington Post. (2003.) Despite A Chasm in Perceptions of Racism, Public Views of Race
Relations Improve. abcnews.go.com/images/pdf/909a3RaceRelations.pdf.
Allen R, Bagozzi R.P. (2001.) Consequences of the Black Sense of Self. Journal of Black Psychology 27(1):328
Barkley-Brown E. (1995.) Negotiating and Transforming the Public Sphere: African American Political Life
in the Transition from Slavery to Freedom. In Dawson, ed., The Black Public Sphere: A Culture
Book. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Baker W.D., J.R. O’Neal. (2001.) Patriotism or Opinion Leadership. Journal of Conflict Resolution, pp. 661687.
Berns W. (2001.) Making Patriots. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Bodnar J. (1996.) Bonds of Affection: Americans Define their Patriotism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Bonilla-Silva E. (1999.) The New Racism: Racial Structure in the United States, 1960s-1990s. In Race,
Ethnicity, and Nationality in the United States, ed. Wong P,55-101 pp. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
55-101 pp.
Bositis D.A. (2002.) National Opinion Poll: Politics. Joint Center for Political and Economic Affairs:
Washington, DC.
Davis D. (1997a.) The Direction of Race of Interviewer Effects Among African Americans: Donning the
Black Mask. American Journal of Political Science 41:309-22
30
Davis DW. (1997b.) Nonrandom Measurement Error and Race of Interviewer Effects among African
Americans. Public Opinion Quarterly 61(183-207)
Dawson M. (1994.) Behind the Mule: Race and Class in African American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
__________. (2001.) Black Visions: The Roots of Contemporary African-American Political Ideologies.
Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Dawson M and L. Bobo. (2001.) African Americans and the 2000 Presidential Election Study. Harvard
University.
DuBois, W.E.B. (1903.) The Souls of Black Folks, edited by Blight D and Gooding-Williams R. 1997. Boston
& New York, Bedford Books.
Farley R, Danziger S, Holzer HJ. (2000.) Detroit Divided New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Figueiredo R.J.P, Z. Elkins. N.d. Are Patriots Bigots? An Inquiry into the Vice of In-Group Pride.
Unpublished manuscript.
Fern E. (2001.) Advanced Focus Group Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Foner P.S., ed. and Y. Taylor. (1999.) Frederick Douglass: Selected Speeches and Writings. Lawrence Hill
Books.
Gamson, W. A. (1992.) Talking Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goffman, E. (1983.) Presidential Address: The Interaction Order. American Sociological Review 48:1-17
Graham, L.O. (1999.) Our Kind of People: Inside America’s Black Upper Class. New York: Harper Collins.
31
Gregory, S. (1998.) Black Corona: Race and the Politics of Place in an Urban Community. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University.
Gwaltney, J.L. (1993.) Drylongso: A Self-Portrait of Black America. New York: New York Press.
Harris, F.C. (1994.) Something Within: Religion as a Mobilizer of African-American Political Activism.
Journal of Politics 56:42-68
Harris-Lacewell, M. (2004.) Barbershops, Bibles, and BET: Everyday Talk and Black Political Thought.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hecht, M., Jackson, R., and Ribeau, S. (2003.) African American Communication: Exploring Identity and
Culture. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Heuman, M. (2003.) Good Cop, Bad Cop: Racial Profiling and Competing Views of Justice in America. New
York: P. Lang.
Hill Collins P. (1990.) Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of
Empowerment. New York: Routledge.
Hubbard L. (2002.) Old Glory’s New Appeal. Africana.com. accessed 11 September 2002.
wysiwyg://Content. 12/http://Africana.com/DailyArticles/index_20010926.htm
Jackson, R. (2004.) African American Communication and Identities: Essential Readings. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Jandt, F.R. (2004.) Intercultural Communication: A Global Reader. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kellerman K, Hee SP. (2001.) Situational Urgency and Conversational Retreat: When Politeness and
Efficiency Matter. Communication Research 28(1):3-47
32
Levine R.S. (1997.) Martin Delaney, Frederick Douglass, and the Politics of Representative Identity. Chapel
Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Lewis DL. (1993.) W.E.B. DuBois: Biography of a Race. New York: Henry Holt & Company.
_________. 1979. When Harlem was in Vogue. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Malcolm X. (1965.) Malcolm X Speaks, edited by George Brietman. New York: Pathfinder Press.
Marable M. (1990). Race, Reform, and Rebellion: The Second Reconstruction of Black America, 1945-1990.
Jackson, MS: University of Mississippi Press.
May RAB. (2000.) Race Talk and Local Collective Memory among African American Men in A
Neighborhood Tavern. Qualitative Sociology 23(2):201-14
Morgan D. (1988.) Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Newbury Park: SAGE.
Omi, M. and Howard W. (1994.) Racial Formation in the United States: From the 1960s to the 1990s. New
York: Routledge.
Patillo-McCoy M. (1999.) Black Picket Fences: Privilege and Peril Among the Black Middle Class. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Portes A., Rumbaut R. (1996.) Immigrant America: A Portrait. Second edition Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Psathas G. (1995.) Conversation Analysis: The Study of Talk-in-Interaction. Thousand Oaks: SAGE
Publciations.
Rawls A.W. (2000.) 'Race' as an Interaction Order Phenomenon: W.E.B. DuBois's 'Double Consciousness'
Thesis Revisited. Sociological Theory 18(2): 242-74.
33
Reed, A., Jr. (1985.) The Jesse Jackson Phenomenon. New Haven: Yale University Press.
_________ (1997.) W.E.B. DuBois and American Political Thought: Fabianism and the Color Line. New
York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
_________ (1999.) Stirrings in the Jug: Blacks Politics in the Post-Segregation Era. Minneapolis, MN:
University of Minnesota Press.
Saad, Lydia. (2003.) Black Dissatisfaction Simmers Beneath Good Race Relations: Slight Majority of Blacks
Think New Civil Rights Laws Are Needed. http://www.gallup.com.
Scheufele D, Shanahan J, Lee E. (2001.) Real Talk: Manipulating the Dependent Variable in Spiral of Silence
Research. Communication Research 28(3):304-24
Shaw T. C. Behind Closed Doors...In A Glass House: Race, the Public Transcript, and Black Political
Discourse. Unpublished manuscript. 1-33.
Sharpton A. (2003) Al on America. New York: Kensington Publishing.
Sidran B. (1971.) Black Talk. New York: DaCapo Press.
Smith R.C. (1996.) We Have No Leaders: African Americans in the Post-Civil Rights Era. Albany, NY: State
of New York University Press.
Sullivan J.L., A. Fried, M.G. Dietz. (2002.) Patriotism, Politics, and the Presidential Election of 1988.
American Journal of Political Science, vo. 36, issue 1, 200-234.
Traugott, M., Brader, T., Coral, D., et. al. (2002.) How Americans Responded: A Study of Public Reactions to
9/11/01. PS: Political Science & Politics, 35, 511-516.
Waters M. (1999.) Black Identities: West Indian Immigrant Dreams and American Realities. New York:
34
Russel Sage Foundation.
Wiese J.A. 1993. Struggle for the Suburban Dream: African American Suburbanization since 1916. Ph.D.
Thesis. Columbia University.
Wilkins R. (2002.) Jefferson’s Pillow: The Founding Fathers and the Dilemma of Black Patriotism. Boston:
Beacon Press.
Wilson WJ. 1996. When Work Disappears: The World of the New Urban Poor New York: Alfred A Knopf.
35