Introduction
Booker T. Washington and W. E. B. Du Bois is the two influential Black thinkers of the late 19th century and the early 20th century. They were during the aftermath of the slavery abolishment, and that period presented new challenges to Black people. The thinkers suggested different, almost polar opposite ways to face those issues based on their experience. This essay will analyze Washington’s and Du Bois’ ideas, highlight their merits, and draw parallels with the current situation.
Main body
One’s views, especially political, are deeply rooted and come from life experience. Such is the case of Du Bois, who advocated for further enfranchisement of Black people and equal rights with the White population. His ideas were probably influenced by an unfortunate incident when his son died and his ever-present concept of the Veil. It would likely have been avoided if all races had possessed the same rights. On the other hand, Washington’s views seem to have stemmed from his education at a religion-based institute that taught the People of Color students “hard work, diligence, and Christian morality.” He echoes those values in the Atlanta Compromise Speech, emphasizing them as Black people’s virtues that will make cooperation between races possible. In general, the thinkers’ prior experience shaped their views and allowed different points of view on race relations to exist.
Washington and Du Bois were active in the dangerous times for Black people, and they used their voices to stop the violence. They responded to such phenomena as Jim Crow laws, lynching, and disfranchisement that threatened the lives of the Black people.
Du Bois was more straightforward about the issues he was addressing, mentioning the “Jim Crow car” several times in The Souls of Black Folk and the respective laws in his Negro Declaration of Independence. On the contrary, Washington was more general in his statements, not citing the exact issues, but underlining that there was racial tension. However, both tried to resolve the conflict in the ways they thought were correct.
For the time, Washington’s and Du Bois’ positions were sensible despite their differences. The former’s stance was peaceful and non-confrontational; he believed his race would eventually be free from ostracizing through hard work and effort. Although such sentiment delegates the decisive vote on the Black rights to the White population and leaves it at their mercy, it seemed reasonable, as they held more power. Although it might seem like pandering through the current lenses, it could also be a clever scheme to appeal to the Christian values of those in power. Du Bois opposed Washington’s views and pushed for the recognition of such rights for Black people, as the right to vote, civic equity, and the right to higher education or to learn whatsoever. His insistence on active but peaceful forms of activism also seems sensible, as the regulations were full of gaps regarding his race and under threat of new Jim Crow-like laws. Altogether, both positions had merits and focused on achieving a brighter future for Black people.
Now the times are different, and a similar confrontation of two great minds is unlikely, but the existence of the bipartisan system does not completely erase the conflict. Roughly speaking, the views of Washington and Du Bois could be likened to those of a Black person aligned with the Republican Party and a Black person aligned with the Democratic Party, respectively. The Great Old Party is frequently accused of racism, but it still has Black supporters, who could genuinely share conservative values and dispel the stereotypes associated with the party. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party has members or sympathizers pushing for more social justice and the abolishment of institutionalized racism. As it was almost a century ago, there is no right or wrong because people can choose which position suits them the most.
As for me, I gravitate towards Du Bois’ stance on active protest for rights. Although it can be dangerous for the participants, it can hasten the implementation of changes. Reflecting on the Civil Rights Protests of the 1960s, it could be that they served as a needed catalyst, or maybe, according to Washington, enough time passed, and White people saw the benefits of fully enfranchising the Black population. Perhaps, it was both, but I have to disagree with Washington’s way to bridge the races. I believe that in his speech, he presented what White people already knew, while Du Bois showed the perspective unknown to them and the burden of the Veil. Therefore, while respecting Washington’s opinion, I wholeheartedly support Du Bois’ struggles to make the plight of his people clear.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this paper evaluated the views of two prominent Black thinkers, Booker T. Washington and W. E. B. Du Bois. They advocated for different ways of resolving the racial issues, with Washington choosing to appeal to the White population and Du Bois promoting peaceful forms of social justice demand. Some might agree with one position or another, but as it tends to happen, both thoughts were eventually true, and the modern discourse on Black rights would be impossible without their contributions.
Bibliography
Aiello, Thomas. The Battle for the Souls of Black Folk: W.E.B. Du Bois, Booker T. Washington, and the Debate That Shaped the Course of Civil Rights. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2016.
Du Bois, William Edward Burghardt. The Souls of Black Folk. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Harlan, Louis R., ed. The Booker T. Washington Papers, Vol. 3. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1974.