Hello fellow classmates,
I found the conversation in class today on the differences between Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. DuBois very interesting, so I decided to do a little more research on the two. Enjoy.
W.E.B. DuBois was an American civil rights activist born in Massachusetts. Throughout his life, DuBois was a devout scholar, graduating from high school and continuing his studies at Fisk University, where he got his bachelor of arts. DuBois then studied at Harvard University, where he spoke at the commencement ceremony, then studied at the University of Berlin, and finally taught Greek and Latin at Wilberforce University. As a civil rights activist, Dubois helped found the Niagara movement (a civil rights protest group of black scholars and professionals), and the NAACP (the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People). Throughout his life, DuBois fought for the advancement of black peoples' rights, and wanted to fight against the current system that was in place.
This very radical style of protest was much different from the style of another black activist, Booker T. Washington, who wanted blacks to slowly work their way up in political society by working hard in economics. Washington understood that blacks could not simply work their way up society without white protest, so his public approach was to partially accept white supremacy and work their way towards equality slowly (however, privately he advocated strongly for black equality). Washington decided on this form of protest since he grew up as a slave in the South and understood how difficult moving up in society would be for blacks. W.E.B. DuBois, however, grew up in the North as a free black man, and therefore had a different view than Washington had.
Dubois was very critical of Washington's style, since he believed that Booker T. Washington was accepting white supremacy, and in part he was correct. Washington received a lot of support from white leaders due to his form of protest that accepted black peoples' role in politics, and was part of the reason that he was so successful as an advocate. While both men had very different ideas of how to fight for black rights, they were both pioneers in the black rights movement.
So now I pose a question: Would you follow Booker T. Washington's form of protest of W.E.B. DuBois?
Sources:
http://www.naacp.org/pages/naacp-history-w.e.b.-dubois
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/stories_people_booker.html
video that explains all this in like 5 minutes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xmnBAKnnww
-the Kraken
Solid info Patrick
ReplyDeleteI think what Washington did was very interesting because it showed his true intelligence. He knows as a southern that you do not go against the ideas of society such as racial society roles. This is why he believed that it wasn't important for blacks to improve their status as a race of people but also to improve as people themselves. Basically what I am saying is that Washington was a realist and that is what is important. As people we cannot do everything but its important to the best we can and I feel Washington envisioned this idea.
While W.E.B. DuBois may have been idealistic, and even naive, about the racially divided system, his "radical" ideas for reform, (compared to Washington's) represent a very powerful voice speaking out against the injustice of the inequality for blacks, a voice that would accomplish more in the long run; theoretically, if most of the black population decided to adopt the radical ideas of DuBois, at first many would be attacked and mistreated, but if the cause remained steady, equality may have been achieved much earlier than the 1960s. While DuBois may have not understood the magnitude of the violence against blacks who challenged the system, his radical beliefs are characteristics of a leader of reform, and to "overchallenge" the system would (hypothetically) result in more compromises at a faster rate, than to slowly challenge the system. There would be a cost, however, because in the initial stages of protesting inequality, many would die at the hands of lynchers. Washington's stance on reform is understandable due to his background, and theoretically would work slowly to bring equality to American society, however in the end (1960s Civil Right's Movement) it is a willful demand for change that catalyzes the end of segregation. (Great post Patrick!!)
ReplyDelete