How Did Booker T Washington Treat Black People As Equals?

The Jim Crow laws were state and local laws that mandated de jure racial segregation in all public facilities and institutions south of the Mason-Dixon line. These laws were enacted in the late 19th century after the Reconstruction period, and were enforced in the southern United States until 1965. “Separate but equal” was the premise of this body of law, but there was nothing equal about this practice. The African American community received no representation in the government, and were largely marginalized by white America. How would African Americans respond to a white society that had not intentions of treating black people as equals? Analyzing the civil rights stance of Booker T. Washington, W.E.B DuBois, and Marcus Garvey will reveal

Washington was a leading black educator in the United States in the late 19th century. Having been born into slavery, such an experience had shaped Washington’s views on racial separation and the Jim Crow laws. His attitude pertaining to segregation is clearly illustrated in his speech the Atlantic Compromise in which he promotes gradualism and separatism. While Washington accepted the reality of racial segregation, he also insisted that African Americans be included in the economic progress of the south. He supported the idea that African Americans would gain full participation in American society through “constant struggle rather than of artificial forcing” (Washington 114). Washington wanted African Americans to show they were responsible, productive American citizens, as opposed to the incompetent people that the deeply-prejudiced, white Americans believed them to be. His assertion was that vocational education was far more valuable to African Americans than social advantages, higher education, or political office. Washington encouraged African Americans to temporarily accept segregation and concentrate on economic improvement. He stated that both races could “be as separate as the fingers, yet one as the hand in all things essential to mutual progress” (Washington 113). This was an agreement in which African Americans would remain peaceable and racially separated, and in return white Americans would take responsibilities to improve the social and economic

DuBois was an American, civil rights activist and co-founder of the NAACP. He argued voraciously for the removal of racial segregation laws and practices that inhibited black enfranchisement. DuBois represented everything Washington argued against. Whereas Washington believed in vocational education, DuBois emphasized on higher education. DuBois wanted to introduce the curriculum of liberation to African Americans and expand the number of black people with college degrees. His approach was confrontational and called for ceaseless aggravation, protests and legal actions to end the Jim Crow laws. He wanted African Americans to demand full political, civil and social rights. DuBois agreed with Washington that self-improvement was a good idea, but in no way, did DuBois believe that it was more important than African Americans achieving immediate full citizenship rights. DuBois attacked Washington’s acceptance of racial segregation in his Atlanta Compromise and argued that Washington was too accommodating to the interest of white America. He also spoke against Garvey’s approach, claiming that “Marcus Garvey is, without doubt, the most dangerous enemy of the negro race in America and in the world. He is either a lunatic or a traitor.” DuBois noted how Garvey’s approach coincided with the ideals of racists thinkers and politician. DuBois considered Garvey a threat to the gains made by his own