We Should Not Go Through A War

Is it possible to fix the relationship between two teams, friend, and races for just a few days? What about convincing a gathering of persons divided and with prejudice and racial discrimination over many years to live and work side by side? It some how seems unreasonable but maybe is it not. Nevertheless, ignoring the traditional notions concerning the taxing relationship between whites and blacks, Booker T. Washington, through The Atlanta Exposition Address from Up from Slavery Chapter 14, notices the importance of mutual progress regardless of the conflicts or challenges the races had before. Booker T. Washington was a prominent educator and the lone founder of Tuskegee National and Industrial Institute. In his speech, Washington makes use of rhetorical devices like repetition and metaphor, pathos and logos to support the collaboration between the white race and the black race to promote the development of the financial success within the South. In this particular speech, he opts to caution his fellow blacks against a feeling of claim to accompany their new attained freedom, while at the same time soothing his audience of whites that the eradication of oppression and servitude is nothing to be worried about, since the whites and blacks have similar mutual objectives in pursuing the renaissance of the South.

Washington is remembered chiefly for this “Atlanta Compromise” address. In this speech, he called on white America to provide jobs and industrial-agricultural education for Negroes. In exchange,

Washington was often looked at as an “Uncle Tom” because of the things he did, such as advising blacks to remain in the South and to avoid politics and protest in favor of economic self-help and industrial education. He eventually became a powerful political boss, friend of white businessmen like Andrew Carnegie, and advisor of some presidents. Washington publicly accepted without protest racial segregation and voting discrimination, but secretly financed and directed many court suits against such proscriptions of civil rights. To Washington his ideas was obvious and clear, by earning the respect of whites they would either help blacks or deal with their crime against humanity that will eventually bring them down.

On September 18, 1895, an African-American spokesman and leader Booker T. Washington spoke in the front of thousands of whites at the Cotton States and International Exposition in Atlanta. His famous “Atlanta Compromise” was one of the most influential speeches in American. regardless Washington soothed his listeners’ concerns about the what they said “uppity” blacks. Mr. Washington was a very well-known black educator. Even though he was born into slavery he strongly felt and believed that racism would in fact end once the blacks put effort into labor skills and proved themselves to society. He pressured industrial education for African-Americans so that they would gain respect from the whites. Washington often was good for ignoring discrimination because it didn’t phase him. But he was so nervous

One could believe Washington would speak the same to a black audience simply because the ideas he was arguing were things he truly believed in. Washington saw this as a way for African Americans to create a life of equality for themselves. 4. How do you think white southerners felt about his policy of “racial accommodation”? Based on the reading, what struggle do you think African Americans during the Progressive Era may have faced?

In this essay the author argued the strategy employed by Mr. Booker T. Washington during a period in history where race relations were hyper sensitive. Mr. Washington felt that the only chance for the survival and development of the Negro race was to submit to the white man by giving up three critical rights of American society; those were, the right to vote, civil rights, and access to higher education. In doing so, he calculated that if black people focused on industrial education, wealth accumulation, and conciliation of the South, they’d stand a better chance of advancing as a race. As Du Bois argued,” In other periods of intensified prejudice all the Negro's tendency to self-assertion has been called

The end of the Civil War was followed almost immediately by a new wave that would see the African Americans face great suffering and discrimination. As newly freed slaves, African Americans were presented with a dilemma to either curve a new niche in a society that once viewed and treated them as mere properties than humans. It was during these difficult times that two key figures in the African American History rose as paramount leaders of two sharply contrasting philosophical camps. The Massachusettian William Edward Burghardt and the Virginian Booker T. Washington, both held two completely contrasting proposals about the best approach for African American to overcome and thrive in the mist of their suffering and racial discrimination. Although their approaches greatly differed, both of these noble men shared a common goal in uplifting the black community in history. The aim of this paper is to argue in the contrasting philosophies of these two key figures in the history of African America.

In Chapter three of The Souls of Black Folk, W.E.B Du Bois discusses Booker T. Washington and some of his accomplishments for African Americans and also criticizes some of his lack of understanding in his propaganda that he could have done more in his position to progress African Americans status instead of trying to be accepted by the white community. Washington has been criticized by Du Bois because of his “submission” to the white view on African Americans and their rights Du Bois calling him “the most distinguished Southerner since Jefferson Davis” (Du Bois, 1903).

In contrast to Douglass, Washington’s famous speech known as the “1865 Atlantic Compromise” was not a protest or challenge of the political system, nor did he speak about the lack of social equality. Instead he focused his efforts on what blacks could accomplish, how they could compromise. He believed the militant rhetoric of Douglass and others distracted blacks from the path of liberty, equality, and economic success. Washington’s speech emphasized that it was the dual responsibility of blacks and whites to make the blacks a more

1) Both Eugene V Debs and Randolph Bourne, thought that the US should not enter WWI in their own opinions. In Document 22-2, Reading the American Past, Eugene V Debs believed that the US shouldn’t enter WWI because he believed that the government and the upper class were the ones who made the decision to enter the war. The lower class, or the majority of the people who fought the war, didn’t have a say whether or not they should enter the war. Another reason why the US shouldn’t go to war is because Eugene saw no problem with the Germans. He stated in the document, “They tell us that we live in a great free republic; that our institutions are democratic; that we are a free and self-governing people.” My understanding from this is that we shouldn’t get involved in a war with another nation who has no wrong towards us. It will just create more troubles we have to live with. In Document 125, Voices of Freedom, Randolph Bourne believed that instead of ignoring

Washington, who had faith in the future of his race in the country, believed that hard work, patience, and self pride would build their character and eventually earn them their civil rights. This is evident in Washington's The Future of the American Negro. He shows the "impatient extremists" within the Negroes of the North whose "ill-considered, incendiary utterances tend to add to the burdens of our people in the South rather than relieve them." ("Washington," Discovering Authors)

It may be initially remembered but eventually forgotten as the world moves on. However, through a powerful performance of voice, Douglass cements the speech into the minds of those who’ve witnessed it. Such a long piece of text becomes captivating to a group of people that yearn for freedom. The white audience also has a greater chance of reflection as in front of them is a figure who is personally attacking their grievous errors. For example, by asking the rhetorical question ‘what to the American slave, is your 4th of July?’

The autobiography of Booker T. Washing titled Up From Slavery is a rich narrative of the man's life from slavery to one of the founders of the Tuskegee Institute. The book takes us through one of the most dynamic periods in this country's history, especially African Americans. I am very interested in the period following the Civil War and especially in the transformation of African Americans from slaves to freemen. Up From Slavery provides a great deal of information on this time period and helped me to better understand the transition. Up From Slavery provided a narrative on Washington's life, as well as his views on education and integration of African Americans. All though this book was

Booker T. Washington was one of the most well-known African American educators of all time. Lessons from his life recordings and novelistic writings are still being talked and learned about today. His ideas of the accommodation of the Negro people and the instillation of a good work ethic into every student are opposed, though, by some well-known critics of both past and current times. They state their cases by claiming the Negro’s should not have stayed quiet and worked their way to wear they did, they should have demanded equal treatment from the southern whites and claimed what was previously promised to them. Also, they state that Washington did not really care about equality or respect, but about a status boost in his own life. Both

Critic Françoise Buisson observes that “Wash’s idealized vision of his master present[s] the reader with the baroque drama of Southern illusion” (Buisson 2), and Wash’s outlook embodies the general Southern attitude perpetuating inequality. He believes wholly in his master, and remarks “‘Well Kernel … they kilt us but they ain’t whupped us yit, air they?’” (Faulkner 132). Wash alters his own self-perception in a desperate attempt of self-elevation, convincing himself that the “world in which he sensed always about him mocking echoes of black laughter was but a dream and an illusion, and that the actual world was this one across which his own lonely apotheosis seemed to gallop on the black thoroughbred” (132). Wash’s Platonic conception of himself is merely a plebian emulation of the man he reveres most: Thomas Sutpen. He imagines himself in a position of power atop Sutpen’s black stallion, with all of the marks of representative power. When subjected to the verbal degradation that he experiences at the tongues of the slaves “calling him white trash” (Faulkner 130), Wash attempts to escape the reality of his dismal situation by fabricating a fictitious existence with limited verisimilitude. Wash’s puerile dismissal of his forlorn situation reflects many white Southerners’ general denial of the upshot of the Civil War—while in fact they are defeated, they refuse to accept this adverse reality.