Introduction
African Americans’ fight for equal rights has meant that their political interest has generally skewed toward domestic issues. However, their nuanced and opinionated responses to significant U.S. foreign policy initiatives throughout history and their growing presence in the foreign policy establishment is indicative of the community’s general interest in American statecraft.1 As the United States retools its foreign policy to face the challenges of the mid-twenty-first century, it will be essential to understand how African Americans view U.S. foreign policy.
In a spring 2023 survey of Black Americans, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace sought to develop this understanding. What issues matter to African Americans during national elections? How important is a presidential candidate’s foreign policy agenda to Black voters? How would they rate their familiarity with foreign policy issues? And how often do they discuss or consume media related to international affairs?
The survey results showed that while domestic issues, such as jobs and healthcare, were of paramount importance to African Americans, most respondents also believed that foreign policy mattered a great deal, including for voting decisions. This apparent contradiction may be best explained as indicating that African Americans, especially educated and higher-income individuals, understand the link between foreign policy and issues they care about and thus seek political candidates who reflect their priorities and demonstrate competence in both foreign and domestic policy. U.S. foreign policy leaders and lawmakers may want to be more explicit about how their initiatives—such as the billions of dollars in support sent to Ukraine—will address African Americans’ domestic concerns.
Survey Design
This article draws on an original online survey of 1,000 citizens of African descent residing in the United States. The survey includes individuals who identify as Black or African American, including those who are generationally African American (residence in the United States for multiple generations) and foreign-born people of African descent (for instance, continental Africans and Afro-Caribbean people). The survey was designed by scholars at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and conducted by polling firm YouGov between May 2 and 10, 2023.
YouGov recruited respondents from its proprietary panel of nearly 2 million U.S. residents. Only respondents aged eighteen and above who are Black and reside in the United States were eligible to participate in the survey.
YouGov employs a sophisticated sample-matching procedure to ensure that the respondent pool, to the greatest extent possible, is representative of the African American community. All the analyses in this survey employ sampling weights to ensure representativeness. The overall margin of error for the sample is +/- 3 percent. This margin of error is calculated at the 95 percent confidence interval.
Strength and Limitations
One of the significant benefits of working with an extensive survey panel, such as the one maintained by YouGov, is that it provides access to large sample sizes that allow researchers to make reliable estimates about relatively small populations of interest. YouGov’s survey panel provides access to various demographics within the Black American community.
Online surveys have some drawbacks. The way in which a question is phrased plays a critical role in how respondents interpret the question and can influence their response. Careful attention has been placed to ensure that questions are worded in a simple manner in the hope that all respondents interpret the question in the same or similar ways. Even then, one cannot prevent various interpretations among respondents.
Despite these limitations, this survey still serves as an important barometer in understanding African Americans’ views toward U.S. foreign policy in the twenty-first century.
Foreign Policy Is Not a Top Concern for Most Black Americans
Carnegie’s survey first sought to understand how important international affairs are to African American voters today. The economy and jobs, racism/racial discrimination, and healthcare ranked as the three most important issues that respondents reported considering when they vote. Twenty-nine percent reported the economy and jobs as their top issue, followed by 21 percent reporting racism/racial discrimination and 17 percent reporting healthcare as most important (see figure 1). With the economy still recovering from pandemic-era inflation—and the unemployment rate of Black Americans sitting at twice that of White Americans—it is unsurprising that the economy and jobs was the top issue for respondents. The high importance respondents placed on economic standing tracks with a March 2023 NPR poll that reported the economy was the foremost issue for a majority of all Americans.
Sorting African Americans’ views by partisan affiliation unearths interesting differences and similarities in these priorities (see figure 2). Twenty-seven percent of Democrats—who comprised 69 percent of respondents—reported the economy and jobs as their top concern, followed by 23 percent reporting racism/racial discrimination and 17 percent reporting health care. It was not surprising that racism and racial discrimination was among the top concerns for Democrats due to the fact that, since the presidency of Lyndon B. Johnson in the late 1960s, the Democratic Party has made race-specific domestic policies and identity politics central parts of its platform.
For Republicans, the economy and jobs ranked as the top priority—7 percentage points higher than it did for Democrats—followed by racism/racial discrimination and healthcare. Since the late 1960s, the Republican Party has not made Black uplift a central piece of its platform, so it was interesting that racism and racial discrimination ranked so high among Republicans. This finding somewhat speaks to how race and racial equality is a central lens through which most African Americans view the issues facing them and the country, regardless of political affiliation. Moreover, the data also speak to the reality that African Americans, like other Americans, are deeply concerned about pressing domestic issues, such as economic standing and healthcare.
Regardless of political affiliation, respondents had one commonality: they did not report foreign policy issues as high priorities when they make voting decisions. The survey contained three choices related to foreign policy: “national security”; “immigration,” which cuts across both domestic and international concerns; and a loosely defined choice of “U.S. foreign policy/role of the United States in the world.” Although these topics ranked lower for both parties, more Republicans ranked immigration and national security as their top concerns than Democrats did.
Twice the number of Republicans selected national security as their top concern (8 percent) than Democrats (4 percent). Likewise, 5 percent of Republicans selected immigration, compared to 2 percent of Democrats. Interestingly, only 2 percent of both Republicans and Democrats selected U.S. foreign policy/role of the United States in the world as their top concern. The relatively low importance placed upon foreign policy issues can perhaps be attributed to the fact that most people, regardless of racial background, place more importance on issues that appear to immediately impact their lives, such as employment, healthcare, and public safety.
The low prioritization of national security could be a function of how African Americans conceptualize national security and their relationship to the national security apparatus. For example, previous surveys have revealed that African Americans have shown and continue to show strikingly low support for sending troops abroad to engage in military engagements meant to secure U.S. national security interests, such as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. If respondents understood “national security” to mean costly overseas military campaigns, then this could explain why more tangible issues, such as racial equality, public safety, healthcare, and jobs, registered higher on their lists of priorities.
It is important to point out that economic and health issues are intimately intertwined with foreign policy, so the emphasis that respondents placed on these issues does not mean that foreign policy has no bearing on their lives. For instance, jobs and economic growth are impacted by free trade agreements, and the response to the COVID-19 pandemic (which disproportionally impacted communities of color) had a major international component. In other words, while the survey results should be understood as respondents primarily voting on domestic priorities, these issues are still linked to foreign policy, whether respondents are aware of it or not.
A Presidential Candidate’s Foreign Policy Agenda Does Still Matter
The survey then attempted to probe how important a presidential candidate’s foreign policy platform is to African Americans. Roughly four in ten (39 percent) respondents reported that a candidate’s foreign policy agenda is very important, and a plurality (44 percent) said it is somewhat important. On the other hand, 10 percent reported that a candidate’s foreign policy agenda is somewhat not important, and 7 percent said it is not important at all. In total, an overwhelming majority (83 percent) of respondents declared that a candidate’s foreign policy agenda is of some importance to them (see figure 3).
One potential explanation for these results is that the African Americans surveyed have an intuitive understanding that seemingly domestic issues, such as the economy and healthcare, are linked to foreign policy. Although they might not consider themselves to be experts, they want elected officials who have a common-sense approach to U.S. foreign policy and who understand the interconnectedness of the world.
Another potential explanation could lie in the fact that conversations about unemployment levels or racial discrimination are more tangible for African Americans than are international developments, such as updates from the battlefield in Ukraine. Yet, when foreign policy issues are discussed separately from domestic issues, international issues do hold some importance to the domestic well-being of the community.
Disaggregating the data along the lines of education and income also reveals interesting variations. Highly educated respondents and those reporting an annual household income of $100,000 or more were more likely to see a candidate’s foreign policy agenda as important. (Studies have shown that higher educational attainment is strongly correlated with higher earnings, partially explaining why these two demographics trend closely together.) In terms of education, six out of ten respondents (59 percent) with a postgraduate degree reported that a candidate’s foreign policy agenda is “very important.” For all education levels, most respondents felt that a candidate’s foreign policy is relatively important, but those with a high school diploma or less and those with some college education were more likely to say that a candidate’s foreign policy agenda is not important, at 18 percent and 21 percent, respectively (see figure 4).
Those in the highest income bracket (household income of $100,000 or more) were the most likely to report that a candidate’s foreign policy agenda is very important (45 percent) and least likely to report that a candidate’s foreign policy agenda is somewhat or not important (8 percent). Fewer respondents who reported a household income less than $50,000 or between $50,000 and $100,000 reported that it was very important (36 percent). For both income groups, roughly two in ten (18 percent) said that a foreign policy agenda was not that important to them.
Studies have shown that there is a correlation between education, political engagement, and self-perceived political knowledge. Increased levels of formal education can lead to more political awareness and knowledge and can perhaps furnish individuals with the skills to grapple with foreign policy. In the Carnegie survey, respondents with higher levels of educational attainment also reported the highest level of familiarity with foreign policy matters and reported consuming news or talking about matters related to international developments at a much higher rate than other demographic groups.
Familiarity With Foreign Policy Matters Is Strong
The survey proceeded to ask respondents about their familiarity with international affairs. A quarter of respondents reported being very familiar, and nearly half stated that they were somewhat familiar. Conversely, 18 percent said they were not very familiar, and 10 percent reported no familiarity. In sum, 28 percent of respondents reported relative unfamiliarity with matters related to U.S. foreign policy, while 72 percent reported relative familiarity (see figure 5).
It is interesting to note that the number of individuals who reported familiarity with foreign policy issues (72 percent) sits roughly 11 percentage points lower than the number of those who reported that foreign policy mattered to them when they vote for a presidential candidate (83 percent). This finding tracks with a 2019 poll by the Council on Foreign Relations, which revealed that Americans lack knowledge of world affairs yet consider such issues to be relevant to their lives. Again, this phenomenon could partially be explained by the fact that although Americans may not be well versed on such issues, they have a rudimentary understanding that these issues impact their lives and at least hope that the candidates they vest trust in will carry out a foreign policy agenda that benefits them.
There was a slight variation along partisan lines (see figure 6). Republicans were slightly more likely to report being familiar with foreign policy issues than Democrats. Eighty-five percent of Republicans reported being at least somewhat or very familiar with foreign policy compared to 73 percent of Democrats.
Here, education proved salient again. Forty-five percent of respondents with a postgraduate degree and 28 percent of those with a four-year college degree reported being very familiar with foreign policy issues. Conversely, those with less formal education, especially those with a high school education or less or some college education, were more likely to report less familiarity with foreign policy issues (see figure 7). The high rate of familiarity expressed by postgraduates could explain the reason why foreign policy matters to them when they vote; people care about what they are familiar with.
One would assume that since roughly seven in ten respondents reported relative familiarity with foreign policy issues, then issues explicitly related to foreign policy would have been more salient in the first question about top issues. Again, it is important to understand that two of the top issues selected by respondents intersect with foreign policy. While respondents may be concerned about the domestic manifestations of economic policy, such as employment and the price of goods, there is perhaps a latent understanding that these factors are influenced by trade policy and international security and stability.
Consumption and Discussion of Global News Is Relatively Common
The survey concluded with questions around how often respondents discussed or consumed news content related to global affairs. Roughly three in ten (29 percent) respondents either talked about or consumed global news every day, and a third (33 percent) of respondents reported doing either activity a couple of times a week (see figure 8).
While the exact nature of conversations about international affairs and the quality and sources of information may vary,2 it is clear that a significant portion of African Americans have their ear to the ground on international developments.
In terms of education, six in ten (58 percent) of those with a postgraduate degree reported discussing or consuming news related to international affairs every day. Roughly one in four respondents of every other educational attainment level reported the same. What is striking is the degree of difference between those with postgraduate degrees and all other levels of formal education (see figure 9). The statistical difference along the lines of educational attainment is salient throughout the survey.
Political affiliation and education were, once again, sites of statistical variation (see figure 10). Interestingly, 32 percent of Democrats reported engaging in behavior related to international affairs every day, compared to 18 percent of Republicans. However, 46 percent of Republicans reported engaging in such activity a couple of times a week, compared to 33 percent of Democrats. Republicans were the least likely demographic to report consuming or talking about international affairs less than once a month or not at all. Only 7 percent of Republicans reported doing so less than once a month or not at all, compared to 15 percent of Democrats.
Conclusion
History is replete with examples of African Americans’ interest in foreign affairs, despite the community’s many pressing domestic concerns. African Americans’ opinions on foreign policy have included, but are not limited to, issues related to decolonization and human rights. For example, African Americans were among the first citizens to protest president Harry S. Truman’s decision to utilize an atomic bomb out of concern that its use had racial undertones. Fast forward a few decades and African American activists and elected officials were some of the most vocal advocates pushing the U.S. government to take actions against South Africa’s apartheid system. Certainly, the tradition of African Americans thinking critically about the United States’ role in the world is not passé. Other surveys have shown that African Americans exhibit minimal support for military intervention yet strongly support the United States’ role in combating climate change and limiting nuclear weapons proliferation.
Although most respondents to the Carnegie survey did not rank international affairs as a top concern when voting in national elections, global issues do hold some level of importance for many African Americans. Most respondents placed importance on a presidential candidate’s foreign policy agenda, expressed some familiarity with world affairs, and discussed or consumed media related to global affairs at least once a week.
The apparent misalignment in interest in foreign policy and its importance to voting decisions could be understood as respondents voting with domestic issues at the forefront of their minds. However, they may understand the relative importance of foreign policy to their lives and therefore require that elected officials carry out foreign policy in their best interests, even if they are not extremely knowledgeable on the subject matter.
This misalignment could also be tied to another finding from the survey that respondents with the most formal education reported the highest level of interest and engagement with international affairs. In some ways, this finding reaffirms the conventional knowledge that foreign affairs is often a venture undertaken by elites. On the other hand, given how international developments impact virtually all Americans, it raises the question why other respondents do not share the same level of interest as the most educated respondents.
The answer could lie in how international affairs is taught in the U.S. education system. Are only those in the upper rungs of educational achievement being furnished with the ability to grasp and wrestle with the complexities of foreign policy issues? Is it clear to all Americans that foreign policy decisions can have big impacts on their lives? How can the foreign policy establishment critically engage with less-educated and lower-income African Americans?
Surveys have limits, and focus groups are necessary to fully understand why certain groups express a higher interest in foreign policy than others. Indeed, many questions remain. For example, on specific questions about various tools of U.S. foreign policy, where does the community diverge and where is there consensus? Moreover, given the great importance African Americans’ place on racism and racial discrimination, how do perceptions of race relations correlate with foreign policy opinions? These are just a few questions that I will explore in upcoming articles in this series.
However, the Carnegie survey does show that African Americans by and large are keeping a pulse on international affairs and U.S. foreign policy. This has implications for both the Democratic and Republican Parties. As the Democratic Party grapples with retaining the Black vote in 2024 and the Republican Party attempts to increase its appeal with Black voters, it will be important for both parties to think about intentionally communicating to African Americans how foreign policy initiatives will benefit domestic well-being. From casual observation, some people in the community have trouble reconciling how the United States has sent billions for the war in Ukraine, while initiatives to reduce the racial wealth divide (for instance, the cancellation of student loans or reparations) are stymied. Perhaps it will help if policymakers are more explicit in how various foreign policy initiatives will benefit kitchen table issues for African Americans.
Acknowledgments
The author is grateful to the many individuals who helped bring this research to its final form. Special thanks to Alexis Essa, Alexander Marsolais, and their colleagues at YouGov for their help with the design and execution of the survey. Christopher Chivvis, Jennifer Kavanagh, and Milan Vaishnav were instrumental in designing the survey questionnaire and offered invaluable feedback on the research approach. Stephen Wertheim, Matthew Duss, and Aurora Lopez gave vital feedback and played a critical role in data analysis. Lindsay Maizland, Jocelyn Soly, and Amy Mellon provided excellent editorial, graphic design, and publication assistance.
Notes
1 For a breakdown of African Americans’ responses to U.S. foreign policy initiatives, see Michael L. Clemons, ed. African Americans in Global Affairs: Contemporary Perspectives (Boston: Northeastern University Press, 2010).
2 A Pew Research report on news consumption published in 2020 revealed that not all media engagement is good engagement. Most Americans under thirty years old receive their political news from social media. Moreover, those who rely on social media for news are more likely to receive misinformation and unproven claims. Although most respondents in the Black American community were paying attention, this raises further questions about the sources and validity of their information.