QUOTE(La Herring Rouge @ Jul 22 2005, 10:59 AM)
He believes that, by steadfastly grasping for the american dream, black Americans will gain acceptance in this country. By polarizing issues and breeding discontent blacks will sit in social limbo. I happen to agree with him 100%.
If you pull up the proverbial bootstraps, put your head down and work hard you can go places in this country.
Yes, well it's hard to pull yourself up by the bootstraps when you don't have any straps or any shoes. Blacks did put their heads down and worked hard and the only ones that benefited from it were the White slavemasters.
QUOTE
Booker T. Washington was looking 100 years in thr future for his people. He was wise enough to know things would not change in 10-20 or even 30 years.
That sort of social upheaval has never happened in history. His was the right message. Martin Luther King had the same disagreement with Malcolm X (another brilliant speaker) 100 years later. Malcolm X sought to polarize and King sought an amalgamation of cultures akin to the Washington philosophy.
I could not disagree more. MLK was not an appeaser or an accomodationist such as Mr. Washington. Can you imagine Dr. King ever uttering a statement such as this?
...you can be sure in the future, as in the past, that you and your families will be surrounded by the most patient, faithful, law-abiding, and unresentful people that the world has seen. As we have proved our loyalty to you in the past, in nursing your children, watching by the sick-bed of your mothers and fathers, and often following them with tear-dimmed eyes to their graves, so in the future, in our humble way, we shall stand by you with a devotion that no foreigner can approach, ready to lay down our lives, if need be, in defense of yours, interlacing our industrial, commercial, civil, and religious life with yours in a way that shall make the interests of both races one. In all things that are purely social we can be as separate as the fingers, yet one as the hand in all things essential to mutual progress. That's the mindset of someone still thinking like a slave. "We shall stand by you with a devotion that no foreigner can approach, ready to lay down our lives, if need be, defense of yours." The mind boggles that a Black man would make such a offer to the White men whom had enslaved his own people. Such servile words and groveling and bowing and scraping were
never repeated by Dr. King. King did not favor armed struggle or call for violent revolution, but he was part of a revolution nevertheless. A quiet revolution where non-violent resistance and appeals to moral authority were the weapons of choice and not the gun, the knife or the bomb.
Washington was dependent upon the largesse of his White patrons to keep Tuskegee afloat and he would never say or do anything that might offend them. He knew Whites wanted to absolved of any responsibility for the destruction and harm slavery had wreaked upon Blacks. He cheerfully gave them that absolution with one eye on the bottom line of what would benefit Tuskegee University the most.
QUOTE
Either way, I think the speech is brilliantly done. It offers a great analogy (which is the crux of the debate about his meaning) and then goes on to appeal perfectly to the wealthy whites who were his audience. He said exactly what needed to be said to convince wealthy whites that blacks could be a boon to the nation.
Washington was a product of his times, and it's risky trying to evaluate him by 2005 standards and his methods benefited many Negroes. However, Washington's accomodationist rhetoric and policy of appeasing Whites further enforced segregation, subjugation and second-class citizenship for Black Americans.