I thought it was interesting- I noticed many of the details in the two website articles, and thought this may be an interesting observation to make in the men's comparison: I beleive that DuBois was too happy-go-lucky, and that Washington was a wuss when it came to standing up for the civil rights of African Americans. DuBois, despite his wide-spread Harvard education, was brought up living a life of wealth and priveledge. In his theory that African Americans should learn the liberal arts, he mentions nothing about how these people can come about the fortune to pay for the education, except for with "hard work and diligence". He doesn't provide the people with a true answer to thier economic problems. And, if any or all did pay for such an education, they all would have gone broke, and (most likely) back into share-cropping! As for Washington, I actually did think that his theory was partially correct- It was smart coming to terms with reality in telling African Americans to learn about industry- it was what they could do without a doubt to support themsleves. But, his accommodations DID go too far... So- In a way, I don't much like either Washington or DuBois- I don't think there is any justification between not standing up for the independance of your own race and misleading your own race.
I don't think Du Bois was as delusional as you make him out to be. Washington's message of economic self-reliance is good, but I disagree with his stance on racial accomodation with whites. He was too willing to accept the injustices of Jim Crow in my opinion.
I'm a native South Carolinian and I attained my undergraduate and graduate degrees from the University of South Carolina. I taught fourth grade for two years in the Mississippi Delta and two years at an alternative high school in Western North Carolina. I have been at Tigard High School since the fall of 2003, where I teach U.S. History and Psychology.
3 Comments:
I thought it was interesting- I noticed many of the details in the two website articles, and thought this may be an interesting observation to make in the men's comparison: I beleive that DuBois was too happy-go-lucky, and that Washington was a wuss when it came to standing up for the civil rights of African Americans. DuBois, despite his wide-spread Harvard education, was brought up living a life of wealth and priveledge. In his theory that African Americans should learn the liberal arts, he mentions nothing about how these people can come about the fortune to pay for the education, except for with "hard work and diligence". He doesn't provide the people with a true answer to thier economic problems.
And, if any or all did pay for such an education, they all would have gone broke, and (most likely) back into share-cropping! As for Washington, I actually did think that his theory was partially correct- It was smart coming to terms with reality in telling African Americans to learn about industry- it was what they could do without a doubt to support themsleves. But, his accommodations DID go too far...
So- In a way, I don't much like either Washington or DuBois- I don't think there is any justification between not standing up for the independance of your own race and misleading your own race.
7:08 PM
Emily,
I don't think Du Bois was as delusional as you make him out to be. Washington's message of economic self-reliance is good, but I disagree with his stance on racial accomodation with whites. He was too willing to accept the injustices of Jim Crow in my opinion.
7:21 PM
Thanks for these links carlisle they really helped me put the finishing touches on outline 3
9:54 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home