Du Bois: 0, Washington: 0 -- A Great Rivalry in American Equality
Imagine a country, split on an opinion of a subject. Now, within one of those sides, there was another division. This occurred in the U.S. throughout the late 19th century and early 20th century.Human rights was a big topic of discussion, especially by people of color. In cities all over the country, African Americans were treated unfairly. They were beaten, harassed, and sometimes killed for something as silly as looking at a white person, drinking out of a restricted drinking fountain, or using a bathroom reserved for the other race. These were called the “Jim Crow Laws.” “In legal theory, blacks received ‘separate but equal’ treatment under the law — in actuality, public facilities …show more content…
Washington advocated for equality for African Americans by being more conservative, as opposed to aggressive during protests. He believed that violence would be ineffective for African Americans; it would only make matters worse for them. He expressed his thoughts on the issue during his 1895 speech called the “Atlanta Compromise.” In this speech, Washington stated that African Americans should accept social segregation and as long as whites allow them economic progress, educational opportunity and justice in the courts (Coffman, Anita and Rose, Vanessa). In response to Washington’s famous speech, author W.E.B Du Bois challenged Washington’s ideas in his book The Souls of Black Folk, saying “Mr. Washington’s programme practically accepts the alleged inferiority of the Negro races.” He believed that protests were necessary for a change in equality, instead of “blending in” with white people. In 1905, Du Bois and other black intellectuals founded a radical political group called “Niagara, ” which was dedicated to effecting change through non-violent protests. “The group dissolved in 1909, but its members helped establish the NAACP, which still functions today.” (Blatty, 2015). The NAACP’s goal is to push for equal rights for African Americans through protests and legal
Imagine a country, split on an opinion of a subject. Now, within one of those sides, there was another division. This occurred in the U.S. throughout the late 19th century and early 20th century.Human rights was a big topic of discussion, especially by people of color. In cities all over the country, African Americans were treated unfairly. They were beaten, harassed, and sometimes killed for something as silly as looking at a white person, drinking out of a restricted drinking fountain, or using a bathroom reserved for the other race. These were called the “Jim Crow Laws.” “In legal theory, blacks received ‘separate but equal’ treatment under the law — in actuality, public facilities …show more content…
Washington advocated for equality for African Americans by being more conservative, as opposed to aggressive during protests. He believed that violence would be ineffective for African Americans; it would only make matters worse for them. He expressed his thoughts on the issue during his 1895 speech called the “Atlanta Compromise.” In this speech, Washington stated that African Americans should accept social segregation and as long as whites allow them economic progress, educational opportunity and justice in the courts (Coffman, Anita and Rose, Vanessa). In response to Washington’s famous speech, author W.E.B Du Bois challenged Washington’s ideas in his book The Souls of Black Folk, saying “Mr. Washington’s programme practically accepts the alleged inferiority of the Negro races.” He believed that protests were necessary for a change in equality, instead of “blending in” with white people. In 1905, Du Bois and other black intellectuals founded a radical political group called “Niagara, ” which was dedicated to effecting change through non-violent protests. “The group dissolved in 1909, but its members helped establish the NAACP, which still functions today.” (Blatty, 2015). The NAACP’s goal is to push for equal rights for African Americans through protests and legal