Why I Won't Vote
— W.E.B. DuBois, The Nation, October 20, 1956 —
Since I was twenty-one in 1889, I have in theory followed the voting plan
strongly advocated by Sidney Lens in The Nation of August 4, i.e., voting for a third party
even when its chances were hopeless, if the main parties were unsatisfactory; or, in absence of
a third choice, voting for the lesser of two evils. My action, however, had to be limited by the
candidates' attitude toward Negroes. Of my adult life, I have spent twenty-three years living
and teaching in the South, where my voting choice was not asked. I was disfranchised by law
or administration.
In the North I lived in all thirty-two years, covering eight Presidential elections. In 1912 I
wanted to support Theodore Roosevelt, but his Bull Moose convention dodged the Negro
problem and I tried to help elect Wilson as a liberal Southerner. Under Wilson came the worst
attempt at Jim Crow legislation and discrimination in civil service that we had experienced
since the Civil War. In 1916 I took Hughes as the lesser of two evils. He promised Negroes
nothing and kept his word. In 1920, I supported Harding because of his promise to liberate
Haiti. In 1924, I voted for La Follette, although I knew he could not be elected. In 1928,
Negroes faced absolute dilemma. Neither Hoover nor Smith wanted the Negro vote and both
publicly insulted us. I voted for Norman Thomas and the Socialists, although the Socialists
had attempted to Jim Crow Negro members in the South. In 1932 I voted for Franklin
Roosevelt, since Hoover was unthinkable and Roosevelt's attitude toward workers most
realistic. I was again in the South from 1934 until 1944. Technically I could vote, but the
election in which I could vote was a farce. The real election was the White Primary.
Retired "for age" in 1944, I returned to the North and found a party to my liking. In
1948, I voted the Progressive ticket for Henry Wallace and in 1952 for Vincent Hallinan.
In 1956, I shall not go to the polls. I have not registered. I believe that democracy has so
far disappeared in the United States that no "two evils" exist. There is but one evil party with
two names, and it will be elected despite all I can do or say. There is no third party. On the
Presidential ballot in a few states (seventeen in 1952), a "Socialist" Party will appear. Few
will hear its appeal because it will have almost no opportunity to take part in the campaign
and explain its platform. If a voter organizes or advocates a real third-party movement, he
may be accused of seeking to overthrow this government by "force and violence." Anything
he advocates by way of significant reform will be called "Communist" and will of necessity
be Communist in the sense that it must advocate such things as government ownership of the
means of production; government in business; the limitation of private profit; social medicine,
government housing and federal aid to education; the total abolition of race bias; and the
welfare state. These things are on every Communist program; these things are the aim of
socialism. Any American who advocates them today, no matter how sincerely, stands in
danger of losing his job, surrendering his social status and perhaps landing in jail. The
witnesses against him may be liars or insane or criminals. These witnesses need give no proof
for their charges and may not even be known or appear in person. They may be in the pay of
the United States Government. A.D.A.'s and "Liberals" are not third parties; they seek to act
as tails to kites. But since the kites are self-propelled and radar-controlled, tails are quite
superfluous and rather silly.
The present Administration is carrying on the greatest preparation for war in the history of
mankind. Stevenson promises to maintain or increase this effort. The weight of our taxation is
unbearable and rests mainly and deliberately on the poor. This Administration is dominated
and directed by wealth and for the accumulation of wealth. It runs smoothly like a
well-organized industry and should do so because industry runs it for the benefit of industry.
Corporate wealth profits as never before in history. We turn over the national resources to
private profit and have few funds left for education, health or housing. Our crime, especially
juvenile crime, is increasing. Its increase is perfectly logical; for a generation we have been
teaching our youth to kill, destroy, steal and rape in war; what can we expect in peace? We
let men take wealth which is not theirs; if the seizure is "legal" we call it high profits and the
profiteers help decide what is legal. If the theft is "illegal" the thief can fight it out in court,
with excellent chances to win if he receives the accolade of the right newspapers. Gambling in
home, church and on the stock market is increasing and all prices are rising. It costs three
times his salary to elect a Senator and many millions to elect a President. This money comes
from the very corporations which today are the government. This in a real democracy would
be enough to turn the party responsible out of power. Yet this we cannot do.
The "other" party has surrendered all party differences in foreign affairs, and foreign
affairs are our most important affairs today and take most of our taxes. Even in domestic
affairs how does Stevenson differ from Eisenhower? He uses better English than Dulles, thank
God! He has a sly humor, where Eisenhower has none. Beyond this Stevenson stands on the
race question in the South not far from where his godfather Adlai stood sixty-three years ago,
which reconciles him to the South. He has no clear policy on war or preparation for war; on
water and flood control; on reduction of taxation; on the welfare state. He wavers on civil
rights and his party blocked civil rights in the Senate until Douglas of Illinois admitted that
the Democratic Senate would and could stop even the right of Senators to vote. Douglas had a
right to complain. Three million voters sent him to the Senate to speak for them. His voice
was drowned and his vote nullified by Eastland, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, who was elected by 151,000 voters. This is the democracy in the United States
which we peddle abroad.
Negroes hope to muster 400,000 votes in 1956. Where will they cast them? What have the
Republicans done to enforce the education decision of the Supreme Court? What they
advertised as fair employment was exactly nothing, and Nixon was just the man to explain it.
What has the Administration done to rescue Negro workers, the most impoverished group in
the nation, half of whom receive less than half the median wage of the nation, while the
nation sends billions abroad to protect oil investments and help employ slave labor in the
Union of South Africa and the Rhodesias? Very well, and will the party of Talmadge,
Eastland and Ellender do better than the Republicans if the Negroes return them to
office?
I have no advice for others in this election. Are you voting Democratic? Well and good;
all I ask is why? Are you voting for Eisenhower and his smooth team of bright ghost writers?
Again, why? Will your helpless vote either way support or restore democracy to
America?
Is the refusal to vote in this phony election a counsel of despair? No, it is dogged hope. It
is hope that if twenty-five million voters refrain from voting in 1956 because of their own
accord and not because of a sly wink from Khrushchev, this might make the American people
ask how much longer this dumb farce can proceed without even a whimper of protest. Yet if
we protest, off the nation goes to Russia and China. Fifty-five American ministers and
philanthropists are asking the Soviet Union "to face manfully the doubts and promptings of
their conscience." Can not these do-gooders face their own consciences? Can they not see that
American culture is rotting away: our honesty, our human sympathy; our literature, save what
we import from abroad? Our only "review" of literature has wisely dropped "literature" from
its name. Our manners are gone and the one thing we want is to be rich--to show off. Success
is measured by income. University education is for income, not culture, and is partially
supported by private industry. We are not training poets or musicians, but atomic engineers.
Business is built on successful lying called advertising. We want money in vast amount, no
matter how we get it. So we have it, and what then?
Is the answer the election of 1956? We can make a sick man President and set him to a
job which would strain a man in robust health. So he dies, and what do we get to lead us?
With Stevenson and Nixon, with Eisenhower and Eastland, we remain in the same mess. I
will be no party to it and that will make little difference. You will take large part and bravely
march to the polls, and that also will make no difference. Stop running Russia and giving
Chinese advice when we cannot rule ourselves decently. Stop yelling about a democracy we
do not have. Democracy is dead in the United States. Yet there is still nothing to replace real
democracy. Drop the chains, then, that bind our brains. Drive the money-changers from the
seats of the Cabinet and the halls of Congress. Call back some faint spirit of Jefferson and
Lincoln,and when again we can hold a fair election on real issues, let's vote, and not till then.
Is this impossible? Then democracy in America is impossible.
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|