In a 1918 editorial, W.E.B. Du Bois advised African Americans to stop

To keep things clear, here's the question again:


Choice (C) states that the contributions of African Americans to the U.S. war effort during WWI "did not end discrimination against African Americans in the military."

This is indeed suggested by the end of the passage:


It's undeniably clear from this text that discrimination against African Americans in the military took place during the U.S. war effort during WWI.

The author doesn't explicitly state that contributions of African Americans did not end this discrimination, but it's strongly implied by everything else we're told here:

• Du Bois believed that African Americans' contributions to past war efforts had brought them some legal and political advances.
• However, upon learning of ongoing systematic discrimination in the military during WWI, Du Bois called on African Americans to stop contributing to the U.S. war effort. This implies that their contributions hadn't ended that discrimination and would not achieve the same kind of results as in past war efforts.

(C) is supported by the text, while every other choice is not. I wasn't sure if you were having issues eliminating the other four choices, but I hope this clarifies why (C) is worth keeping around!

The passage indicates which of the following about Du Bois's attitude toward Washington ?

A. It underwent a shift during the First World War as Du Bois became more sympathetic with Trotter's views.

B. It underwent a shift in 1903 for reasons other than Du Bois's disagreement with Washington's accommodationist views.

C. It underwent a shift as Du Bois made a long-term commitment to the strategy of accommodation.

D. It remained consistently positive even though Du Bois disagreed with Washington's efforts to control the African American press.

E. It was shaped primarily by Du Bois's appreciation of Washington's pragmatic approach to the advancement of the interests of African Americans


Can someone explain why it's option B. Option B clearly says reasons other than disagreement with Washington's views.But the passage has not implied that du bois disagreed with Washington's views rather only with tactics.
GMATNinja please help

Posted from my mobile device

In 1895, Washington called on African Americans to concentrate on improving their communities instead of opposing discrimination and agitating for political rights.

• Du Bois apparently liked that, so he aligned himself WITH Washington in that case, even though he generally opposed Washington's accommodationist tactics.
• Does that mean that Du Bois had a change of heart and decided to support accommodationist tactics? No. Du Bois simply agreed with Washington in this case, so he praised Washington's speech.

Then, in 1903, Washington tried to silence those in the African American press who opposed him.

• Du Bois apparently didn't like that, so he aligned himself against Washington.
• His attitude towards Washington shifted, but not because of any fundamental change in the way he felt about Washington's accommodationist views.

In other words, Du Bois shifted his position for pragmatic (practical) reasons, not for idealogical reasons. That fits with choice (B).

I hope that helps!

Hi GMATNinja - my question is on 1, choice D

I thought this was right because the passage clearly shows Du Bois fluctuating from the Booker t camp to the William Trotter camp depending on the situation.

Given the fact that Du Bois keeps fluctuating between the two camps , isn't the passage thus "Contesting" the fact that Du Bois was significantly influenced by either ?

Given his shifting positions between the two camps(indicated per the passage), he is NOT influenced by either

Isn't that what D is saying ?

Dear Experts- Can someone please tell me why the answer to Q5 is E? On what basis can you clearly cross off the other options pleasE? Thanks in advance.

Question 1

I agree that the passage indicates that Du Bois shifted his position between the two camps, but does this mean that he was NOT influenced by either camp?

Not necessarily. In this case, the author provides direct evidence that Du Bois WAS influenced at times by one side or the other. The last sentence of the first paragraph shows that Trotter influenced Du Bois:

"In 1903, however, Du Bois aligned himself with Trotter, Washington’s militant opponent, less for ideological reasons than because Trotter had described to him Washington’s efforts to silence those in the African American press who opposed Washington’s positions."

So, just because Do Bois shifted positions doesn't mean that he wasn't influenced by either side. The author actually argues that he WAS influenced by both ends of the spectrum, but that his alignment might change depending on the particular situation.

Eliminate (D).

To choose (C), first break down the passage as a whole:

In the first paragraph:

1) The author introduces a position held by Du Bois (who advised African Americans to show solidarity with White Americans during WWI)
2) We then learn that this position was surprising to many people
3) The author explains why Du Bois' position should NOT be surprising (Du Bois "often shifted positions along the continuum between Washington and confrontationists such as William Trotter.)
4) Then the author lists examples of Du Bois shifting his position

In the second paragraph:

1) The author explains why Du Bois shifted toward the accommodationist position at the beginning of WWI
2) The author then explains why Du Bois shifted back toward the confrontationist position later in WWI

From this break down, we can see that the author's primary concern is to explain Du Bois' position on how African Americans should react to WWI.

This aligns nicely with (C):

(C) is the correct answer to Question 1.

Question 5

Take a look at this post for an explanation of (E) for Question 5, and let us know if that clears it up.

I hope that helps!

Hi GMATNinja,

Thanks for the detailed explanation of Q1 here. Although, I have a question as to why option C is correct.

Option C says - [The passage is primarily concerned with] accounting for a particular position adopted by Du Bois during the First World War.

My understanding of the meaning of this option is that the author accounts for(i.e gives record for) for a particular position adopted by Du Bois (i.e either adoptionism or confortationism).

But the according to me, in the passage, the author is not giving account of any particular position. He gives account for both the positions.

Also, even in your explanation, you concluded that the "we can see that the author's primary concern is to explain Du Bois' position on how African Americans should react to WWI.". What I understand from this statement is that author explains Du Bois' overall position (not one particular position). Then how can option C, which talks about one particular position, be correct?

I hope my I have been able to explain my reasoning/logic to you. Could you please explain what am I missing here? Where is my reasoning flawed?

Your thoughts will be v helpful. Thanks!

In this context, to account for something means to explain it. So, (C) says that the author explains a particular position taken by Du Bois.

The “particular position” that the author explains is Du Bois’ stance on how African Americans should react to WWI. You’re right that the author discusses Du Bois practicality and his willingness to take either the confrontationist or accommodationist position depending on the circumstance. But this is all in service of a broader aim to describe why Du Bois took the particular position, one more accommodationist than many expected, that he took during WWI.

So the particular position that the author explains is not that Du Bois was an accommodationist or confrontationist. Rather, the particular position is Du Bois’ seemingly uncharacteristically accommodationist stance on the African American response to WWI.

I hope that helps!

Please help to explain why it is E but not D

Based on explanation of above [u=https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-a-1918-editorial-w-e-b-du-bois-advised-african-americans-to-stop-53761.html#p1837289]post[/u] , I can know why it could be E but still I have doubts prevailing over D and E.

My prethinking:
DB’s target was to get long term goal to uplift AA status . But currently, he has social pressure and he don’t want to miss future opportunities. So it is better to be silent at this time rather than reacting over it.( Situation is similar as: Some employees don’t complain against their boss when they are under his supervision in order to avoid losing chances of growth in the organization)

With this thinking when I read optionE:

I rejected E:
In part: I could not convince myself why should I consider his strategy advocated“ in part”. In part means someone doesn’t not fully agree but also diest fully disagree. In this sceanrios what stategy he advocated that was the right step 100% as per situation.


Why I chose D:


Once he learnt that AA are facing discrimination, he advised them not to react but to accommodate because in long term, AAs would gain legal and political rights.

Here some may argue that once he learnt the discrimination, he advised AAs to come back. But as per passage it doesn’t mention that he didn’t know that there is discrimination against AAs soldiers. As he already knew there is some discrimination, so he advised them to adjust, otherwise why he need to even make such statements in editorial.

Finally when I saw answer, I was wrong.

Hi AndrewN sir GMATNinja GMATNinjaTwo : Please help to correct my thinking.

GMATNinja : Please give complete explanation, if possible, in your style ( why wrong is wrong not just why correct is correct) so that discussion on this can be closed one time for all for Q5

Hello, imSKR. I think you are confusing the timeline from the end of the passage. Take a look again at the last few lines:



The question is asking about Du Bois's strategy via the editorial, not about how the author felt later. Choice (D) aligns with the final line of the passage, choice (E) with the first in the above excerpt. Now, I will step aside, since GMATNinja has been called upon to provide a thorough analysis of the answer choices in his style, to lay doubts to rest once and for all.

- Andrew

Thanks sir for D clarification. For E, I still didn't get why "in part" is correct here?
I don't see any relation between what he advised in editorial vs what he knows about gains of past wars.
Please advise for E too . AndrewN sir

I think you are getting too caught up in the smallest of details, imSKR. If I tell you I bought a car because I had enough money, does that mean that having enough money was the sole reason I made the purchase? There may be other considerations beyond what you see on the screen, and it is these thoughts that allow in part or something similar (such as some) to operate within an answer choice. Just stick with the textual evidence and seek to disprove what is easy to pick off.

- Andrew

Hi GMATNinja, VeritasKarishma

Please help me to understand why B is incorrect.
Q4
B. explain why Du Bois was sympathetic with Washington's views in 1895

Flow of the passage:
1) A position held by Bois - Show solidarity with White Americans during WWI
2) Why author was surprised by Bois's advice - Bois is generally against accommodationism. So the position described is in favour of accommodationism. The 1st and 2nd statement in the passage already shows that Bois is changing position from opponent to supporter. (Is my understanding correct?)
3) "Infact" shows additional info supporting the 2nd statement. Also the 3rd statement clarifies and mentions clearly that Du Bois often shifted positions. Can we consider this statement as summary of 1st and 2nd?
4) Now Washington's views in 1895 shows that he was in favour of improving the African American community. This might be the reason why Bois supported Washington. Also this statement explains surprising behaviour of Bois.

If the author wanted to show Washington's views as just an example, he could have said that "In 1895, he was with Washington and In 1903, Bois was with Trotter". Why did he give a detailed explanation of views?

I was able to get an answer to this question "why Du Bois was sympathetic with Washington's views" -
Ans - "When Washington called on African Americans to concentrate on improving their communities instead of opposing discrimination and agitating for political rights, Du Bois praised Washington’s speech."
Washington's views in 1895 shows that he was in favour of improving the African American community. This might be the reason why Bois supported Washington.

Q2 - Why is C incorrect?
Bois's attitude toward Washington underwent a shift as Du Bois made a long-term commitment to the strategy of accommodation.
1) In 1903 Bois's attitude toward Washington shifted from positive to negative
2) In 1918 Bois's attitude toward Washington shifted from negative to positive. Why Bois's attitude shifted as described in editorial - As he was in favour of wartime position (strategy of accommodation) & from para 2, we know that may be reason for taking wartime position is to achieve long term goal (political advances). So Bois's attitude shifted as he made a strategy of accommodation to achieve long term goal.

4. The author of the passage refers to Washington's call to African Americans in 1895 primarily in order to

A. identify Du Bois's characteristic position on the continuum between accommodationism and confrontationism

B. explain why Du Bois was sympathetic with Washington's views in 1895

C. clarify how Trotter's views differed from those of Washington in 1895

D. support an assertion about Du Bois's tendency to shift his political positions

E. dismiss the claim that Du Bois's position in his 1918 editorial was consistent with his previous views


Look at the flow at the end of first paragraph:

Assertion:
Du Bois often shifted positions along the continuum between Washington and confrontationists such as William Trotter.
Supporting statement 1:
In 1895, when Washington called on African Americans to concentrate on improving their communities instead of opposing discrimination and agitating for political rights, Du Bois praised Washington’s speech.
Supporting statement 2:
In 1903, however, Du Bois aligned himself with Trotter, Washington’s militant opponent, less for ideological reasons than because Trotter had described to him Washington’s efforts to silence those in the African American press who opposed Washington’s positions.

So why does he refer to Washington in 1895? To show that Du Bois shifted positions from accommodationists to confrontationists.

He doesn't explain why Bois was sympathetic to Washington's views. He says that his sympathy shifted from Washington to Trotter.

Understand the crux of the passage:

- Du Bois kept switching position between accommodation and confrontation.
- In 1895, he supported Washington (accommodation)
- In 1903, he supported Trotter (confrontation) since Washington tried to silence his opposers.
- In 1918, he supported accommodation (Told African Americans to support White Americans in the war)
- At the end of war, he supported confrontation (after hearing abt discrimination during war)


2. The passage indicates which of the following about Du Bois's attitude toward Washington ?

A. It underwent a shift during the First World War as Du Bois became more sympathetic with Trotter's views.
Du Bois became more sympathetic to Washington's views in 1918, not Trotter's views. He became more sympathetic to Trotter's views at the end of the war.

B. It underwent a shift in 1903 for reasons other than Du Bois's disagreement with Washington's accommodationist views.
Correct. In 1895, he supported Washington but in 1903 upon hearing that Washington tried to silence his opposers, Du Bois' attitude shifted against Washington and he started supporting Trotter.

C. It underwent a shift as Du Bois made a long-term commitment to the strategy of accommodation.
Washington's strategy was accommodation. Du Bois kept shifting and did not make a long term commitment.

D. It remained consistently positive even though Du Bois disagreed with Washington's efforts to control the African American press.
It did not remain consistent.

E. It was shaped primarily by Du Bois's appreciation of Washington's pragmatic approach to the advancement of the interests of African Americans.
No such mention.

Answer (B)

Can someone please explain Q5.
As stated in Para 2.
Furthermore, Du Bois believed that African Americans’ contributions to past war efforts had brought them some legal and political advances. Du Bois’s accommodationism did not last, however. Upon learning of systematic discrimination experienced by African Americans in the military, he called on them to “return fighting” from the war.

The line in bold suggesting upon learning the discrimination he called back the african americans. It is conflicting with the line just above it.

Please explain how option E is the correct answer.

Hi empower,

Please refer the below replies by experts here:

https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-a-1918-editorial-w-e-b-du-bois-advised-african-americans-to-stop-53761.html#p1837289

https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-a-1918-editorial-w-e-b-du-bois-advised-african-americans-to-stop-53761-20.html#p2708850

https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-a-1918-editorial-w-e-b-du-bois-advised-african-americans-to-stop-53761-20.html#p2709536


Let us know if you still have doubts.

Thanks.