Compare And Contrast Young And W. E. B. Dubois

W.E.B. Du Bois and Iris Marion Young were prominent political theorists at the forefront of their respective political eras. Central to Dubois’ definition of freedom was the belief that freedom was the elimination of societal suppressors, including white elites and institutional racism. Young, on the other hand, lists five faces of oppression that threaten one’s ability to realize true freedom. Both present persuasive views on freedom, but Du Bois’ argument is stronger, because of its solution driven approach, focused logic, and emotional appeal.
Du Bois’ argument begins with the notion that American society created a seemingly unbridgeable divide between persons of color and whites. Du Bois stories how the majority of white folk desire to

ask black Americans how it feels to be a problem. He employs an anecdote to emphasize this point, in which a white girl refused to accept his Valentine’s card in grade school. Consequently, Du Bois concludes, “Then it dawned upon me with a certain suddenness that I was different from the others” (Du Bois 38). To explicate this difference, Du Bois’ utilizes a metaphorical veil. In a literal sense, the veil serves as a visual manifestation of the color barrier dividing black and white Americans. In a metaphorical sense; however, the veil takes on a more pronounced meaning. The veil ensures that black Americans experience a vastly different world view than white Americans. Because of the veil, the black American is forced to stare at himself through the eyes of others. Du Bois refers to this as double consciousness - a concept he illustrates as the intersection of being black and American, rather than just American. As a result, black Americans are denied opportunities in the political, economic, and social realms of society. On the subject, he writes, “He simply wishes to make it possible for a man to be both a Negro and an American, without being cursed and spit upon by his fellows, without having the doors of Opportunity closed roughly in his face” (Du Bois 39). This commentary epitomizes how the African American worldview is one defined by limits, bounds, and unfreedoms.
Du Bois continues with his depressing perspective on freedom by expounding upon the short life of his son. First, he articulates how black American infants are immediately subjected to the veil at birth. He continues by noting that the main pursuit in life for these children is to “dwell above the veil.” Because his son’s life ended so abruptly, he never was able to understand the depths of racism, segregation, and prejudice that plague black Americans. For this reason, Du Bois concludes that his son’s innocence and youth allowed him to dwell above the veil, because he did not live long enough to understand the veil’s consequences. It is generally accepted that this conclusion is regrettable; society should feel remorseful that Du Bois’ son died so young, not thankful he did not experience double consciousness and the veil.
Du Bois sees education and political liberty as the only mechanism able to achieve true freedom within American society.

In lieu of a more conservative approach focused on vocational training that other civil rights activists including Booker T. Washington had recommended, Du Bois argues for higher education at universities. Du Bois understood that blacks who did not attend universities were failing to reach their full potential and that constant failure is what keeps propelling the cycle of generational racism. Du Bois believes that the Negro’s fundamental desire is to understand himself, and college fosters that opportunity. According to Du Bois, with equal education and political freedoms (including suffrage, voting rights, civil rights, etc.) black Americans may find it possible to dwell above the

veil.
For a different portrayal of freedom, one can turn toward Iris Marion Young.

Young begins her theory by defining injustice by two parameters: oppression and domination. She details how each functions to promote injustice, thus restricting one’s ability to pursue true freedom. She then continues by explicating differences between two similar concepts: oppression and discrimination. The two differ in their targets and methods; oppression focuses on groups while discrimination targets the individual. Additionally, oppression tends to be socially present, while discrimination is intentional. Both oppression and discrimination together undermine efforts at achieving liberty for their respective victims. Of paramount importance in Young’s conception of freedom are her five faces of oppression: exploitation, marginalization, powerlessness, cultural imperialism, and violence. While potentially dangerous in limiting oppression to strictly five “faces,” these “faces” serve their purpose in forwarding how oppressive behavior impacts its victims. Respectively, the five faces maintain hierarchical structure in society, establish uselessness and lack of self-respect, force victims to abandon their autonomy, establish a sense of double consciousness, and set a standard for violence. Young’s five faces of oppression serve as a good model for freedom because they are broad in scope and create lines for comparison. Rather than reducing oppression to describe specific groups such as Jews or

homosexuals, she creates comparisons and contrasts between targeted groups and categorizes them based on which specific face of oppression is applicable.
Young and Du Bois have one distinct parallel in their conceptions of freedom. Both employ intersubjectivity into their ideas of oppression, meaning that how one defines himself is how others see him. For Young, this is illustrated by consequences of the five faces of oppression. She argues that the judgments and oppressive behaviors bestowed upon victims transcend their own personal opinions of themselves. Similarly, for Du Bois, intersubjectivity is described through his idea of double consciousness. He agrees that black Americans have been uniquely shaped by how their white counterparts view them.
Unlike Du Bois’ conception of freedom, Young’s does not detail plans to resolve the existing unfreedom. Du Bois’ writing elaborates on solutions and mechanisms for fighting injustice while Young merely highlights that it exists. While it should be conceded that Du Bois addresses a narrower audience in his writings (black Americans) than Young, Du Bois’ argument is more compelling as it touches on the roots of where and why divides were created and how society can work to bridge them.
All points considered, Du Bois’ view of freedom is most persuasive because it transcends traumatic personal experience; it is a well-conceived and logical theory concerning the plight of institutional racism and its impact on black America. Here, the veil and double consciousness underscore the experiences suffered by black Americans, while education and political liberty highlight important and necessary steps to achieve true freedom. Conversely, while Young’s argument is based in truth, her appeal to emotion is lacking. There exists a detached feeling when reading Young that is not an issue in Du Bois’ writing. In conclusion, Du Bois’ passionate account from the perspective from which he and other black Americans see the world is vastly different than how whites see the world. Du Bois’ theory succeeds in profoundly illuminating societal unfreedoms and proposing reasonable and logical solutions to correct them.