Washington vs. DuBois Group 2 by Course Materials

Booker T. Washington

coursematerialbackup — 2024-01-31 21:25:17 UTC

W.E.B. DuBois

coursematerialbackup — 2024-01-31 21:25:17 UTC

3) WHAT DO THEY AGREE AND DISAGREE ON?

coursematerialbackup — 2024-01-31 21:25:17 UTC

Even people with similar goals don't always see the same path to getting there. Post at least one point they agree on OR one point they disagree on and evidence to support it.

4) WHO IS RIGHT?

coursematerialbackup — 2024-01-31 21:25:17 UTC

For their time, which do you think makes a better argument about how to advanc black civil rights in this era in American history? Why? Be sure to tie your opinion to evidence.

1) PROGRESSIVE?

coursematerialbackup — 2024-01-31 21:25:17 UTC

Based on the definition of Progressivism explained in Lecture I and American Yawp, offer at least one piece of evidence from 21-5 "The Atlanta Exposition" that shows how Washington is or isn't part of the Progressive movement

2) PROGRESSIVE?

coursematerialbackup — 2024-01-31 21:25:17 UTC

Based on the definition of Progressivism explained in Lecture I and American Yawp, offer at least one piece of evidence from 21-6 "Booker T. Washington & Others"
that shows how DuBois is or isn't part of the Progressive movement

INSTRUCTIONS

coursematerialbackup — 2024-01-31 21:25:17 UTC

Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. DuBois were contemporary activists in the Progressive Era who were both interested in advancing the lives of black Americans.

After watching this Unit's lecture and reading Chapter 20 Sections I, II & VI, use documents 21-5 and 21-6 in Reading the American Past to add a post next to ALL FOUR items below.

Put your name in the header of each of your posts.

.

coursematerialbackup — 2024-01-31 21:25:17 UTC

.

coursematerialbackup — 2024-01-31 21:25:17 UTC

Harrison Dorman

2026-02-05 00:29:03 UTC

After looking at the article I think it is easy to see Washington is part of the progressive movement, now what side he is on is a little harder though. In the lecture it says progressivism is rooted in the belief man is responsible for improving everyone's life from top to bottom. In the article he talks of "Casting down your bucket" trying to persuade black americans to learn in the industries and take opportunities while trying to persuade white americans to offer them jobs. This could relate to improving everyone's life side of things which in turn might make Washington a part of the Progressive movement.

Harrison Dorman

2026-02-05 13:14:26 UTC

I think W.E.B. Du Bois is most definitely part of the Progressive movement. In his article he says a lot of things to criticize Washington's writings and say that Washington is moving too slowly. He demands things immediately like the right to vote, Civic Equality, and the education of youth according to ability. These are all things that can be directly correlated to Progressivism.

Harrison Dorman

2026-02-05 14:47:48 UTC

They disagree on many things as said in Du Bois's writings, but I think it is more important on what they agreed on. The greatest thing they both agreed on was that there needed to be a change. Their idea of change wasn't the same but the idea that they both wanted one was true. Du Bois's change was quick and immediate on big factors of our country like the right to vote, civic equality etc. Washington's change was slower and a different kind of thing like industrial education and things like that. But in the end they both agreed a change was needed.

Emily Reichert

2026-02-05 17:41:31 UTC

After watching the lecture and reading everything, I would say that Booker T. Washington was a part of the progressive movement. The definition of progressivism, as explained in the lecture, says that progressivism is rooted in the belief that man is responsible for improving every person's life. Washington was attempting to persuade white Americans to offer jobs to black Americans, and at the same time, Washington was also trying to persuade the black Americans to start taking jobs in the industries. In 21-5, it says, "Washington, perhaps the era's most celebrated black leader, spelled out a plan of racial accommodation as a path towards progress." Meaning Washington was trying to fight for black Americans to have improved lives and be equal to white Americans. Washington, doing this makes him a part of the progressive movement.

Emily Reichert

2026-02-05 17:55:19 UTC

As I said in my post about Washington, the lecture says progressivism is rooted in the belief that man is responsible for improving every person's life. With that definition, I would also say that W.E.B. DuBois is a part of the progressive movement. In the excerpt in 21-6 from DuBois, he heavily criticizes Washington for essentially only wanting to improve black Americans' lives. Dubois says, "Washington arose as essentially the leader not of one race but two,- a compromiser between the South, the North, and the Negro. Naturally, the Negros resented... surrendered their civil rights and political rights..." Black Americans were giving up rights because of the things Washington was saying, and DuBois knew this was wrong. All of the criticisms that he has in 21-6 show he cares to improve everyone's lives not just black Americans.

Emily Reichert

2026-02-05 18:12:43 UTC

Washington and DuBois disagreed on lots of things, and this is prevalent in 21-6 with all of the critiques that DuBois has on Washington. The one thing that Washington and DuBois both agree on is that they want change to happen. They are both just on different paths to make this happen. Washington wanted to take a slower approach, which got him criticized by DuBois. Washington wanted change to happen in small steps by starting with industrial education. Meanwhile, DuBois thought that the change should be something that is happening fast, and he did not think that it should start with industrial education; he believed that it should start with civil rights (voting rights, equality, etc). This is all very prevalent in the readings 21-5 and 21-6.

Emily Reichert

2026-02-05 18:16:18 UTC

I do not think that one of them was right and one of them was wrong. I think that they were both fighting for the same things to be changed; they were just going about it in different ways. Maybe if DuBois had taken a step back and tried to slow things down, that would have worked better, or maybe if Washington tried to speed things up, that would have worked better. These are things that we will never know, but neither of them is right or wrong. I think the best way they could have gone about all of this back then would have been to work together at a medium pace so they could work on changing more than one thing at a time.

Trevor Santrucek

santruct — 2026-02-05 19:12:29 UTC

Booker T. Washington was a progressivist due to his thinking of the the Atlanta compromise

Trevor Santrucek

santruct — 2026-02-05 19:19:40 UTC

W.E.B. DuBois was a progressive thinker just in a different way then Washington he was one of the founders of the NAACP.

Trevor Santrucek

santruct — 2026-02-05 19:33:21 UTC

W.E.B. DuBois and Booker T. Washington were both Progressive thinkers but both had different ideals. While W.E.B. DuBois wanted change and equal rights for blacks and whites. While Washington believed that they wanted to compromise and they would give up some of there rights for education and safety. while they both disagreed on what needs to be done for civil rights. they both agreed that they want education and safety but W.E.B. DuBois wanted to be equal but Washington wants to have a compromise.

Trevor Santrucek

santruct — 2026-02-05 19:37:58 UTC

Now how is right While both thought of ways to get what they want in terms of civil rights. even though that W.E.B. DuBois wanted equal rights he was not quite right on how he had a plan to get those rights.

Harrison Dorman

2026-02-05 20:21:38 UTC

I am not 100% on either of them but I do think if I had to choose one I would choose W.E.B. I just think that all american people should be equal and in Booker's writings he talks of sacrificing some of those rights or to not care about them as much to move forward. In W.E.B. 's writings he talks of demanding his rights and I think this is more the path I would lean to. Although, I do agree and see sense with some of the things Washington said. He talks of trying to open white southerners minds up and give Black Southerners jobs which I think is a good idea. But what he talked of sacrificing I think isn't right. In the end if both men sort of combine and create a happy medium I think that would be best but if I had to choose I would side with W.E.B.

Kara Yerrick

yerrickk — 2026-02-06 00:17:00 UTC

After reading the articles and watching the lecture, I do believe that Washington was part of the Progressive movement. The lecture described progressivism as man is not only capable but responsible for improving the life of everyone in society from the top to the bottom and Washington does just that. For example, in 21-5, Washington states "It is important and right that all privileges of the law be ours, but it is vastly more important that we be prepared for the exercising of the privileges" which illustrates how Washington fights for everyone to have the same privileges by using "we" but also for people to take advantage of the privileges.

Kara Yerrick

yerrickk — 2026-02-06 00:25:04 UTC

I believe W.E.B. DuBois was 100% part of the progressive movement. Basing the same definition of progressivism of my post about Washington, DuBois exhibits this trait as well. In 21-6, DuBois critiques Washington, but not on the topics Washington was discussing but rather the means on which Washington wanted to take action. DuBois was all for change, change that brought equal privileges to everyone which exemplifies the definition of progressivism.

Kara Yerrick

yerrickk — 2026-02-06 00:40:19 UTC

Washington and DuBois disagreed on many things but the big one that was pointed out in 21-6 was the means on how they each wanted the change to happen. In 21-6 DuBois criticized Washington and he main thing was that Washington was submitting to the white folks or people in power. While Washington was trying to make peace and compromise in a slow way, DuBois wanted a faster way, one that made people listen. In 21-6 it's stated that "Mr. Washington distinctly asks that black people give up, ..., three things, ... political power, ... insistence on civil rights, ... [and] higher education of Negro youth" which illustrates how Washington was going into this struggle, promoting submission. But they did agree that certain privileges needed to be granted to the black community.

Kara Yerrick

yerrickk — 2026-02-06 00:48:30 UTC

While both were fighting for about the same cause, they were both in the right but DuBois was more direct and ready to take a fighting stand. While Washington did have a good approach to getting on the good side of those in charge, I feel as though Washington's tactic would be slow but methodical. DuBois would be seen and heard because he wouldn't just give in to some laws that were unfair. In 21-6, DuBois states that Washington's doctrine was just pushing a black person's troubles to just be on the person rather than taking a progressive viewpoint and helping them because it would be your responsibility too. I can see where Washington's tactic can work but I feel as though DuBois's would be more effective.