1
Ambrose Olumuyiwa Faturoti
African American Religious History
Washington, Dubois, Garvey
Final Paper
Washington: The Complexities of the Man
At the turn and outset of the twentieth century, black people in American faced
some of the worst outright racism and discrimination the world has yet seen, turning to
the church and race leaders for hope and support. Out of this climate of bigotry and
intolerance, came Booker T. Washington, WEB Dubois and Marcus Garvey, essentially
leading the charge in black America’s attempts at conceptualizing the best way to build
the soon to be “black community”. Upon reading documents, such as his “Atlanta
Exposition” (1895), it is very easy to dislike Washington for the improbable and
unreasonable concessions he makes to white Southern segregations, many viewing his
stance as regression rather than progress. For reasons of this sort, when we conceptualize
the three aforementioned leaders, we often name Washington as the most conservative,
Garvey as the most radical, leaving Dubois somewhere in between the two. However,
after reading documents describing how paramount Washington was in bringing Garvey
to America and on his social work behind public view, we are forced to rethink our
stance on Washington’s role in history. One wonders if Washington’s voice was
necessary in order to raise up voices like Garvey and Dubois, with his tactics aimed
strategically this end.
A good starting point for this discussion is in exploring Washington, as he is
commonly known: the “Great Accommodator” and drastic compromiser. Born in
Franklin County, VA in 1856, Washington was born a slave, giving him an inside view
2
into the true workings of the South, and shaping his philosophy on the best way to lift the
race. Much of the grounds for his critiques come from the declaration of his philosophy
and work, best summed in his “Atlanta Exposition” Speech in 1895. In this well-known
speech, he argues that blacks should not try to look past the treasures right here for them
in America. He exhorted blacks to, “Cast down [their] buckets where [they] are,”1 in
efforts to empower black people to see just how rich their waters under the current
system, before looking to set up new systems or toward striking out into the realm of
education. These beliefs emerged from a millennialist theology, considering blacks the
most Christ-like people on Earth. For this reason, he thought it would be through a
patient and humble diligence, not forceful petitioning, that blacks would emerge from the
poverty, as leaders in America. He goes on to boldly declare: “The wisest among my race
understand that the agitation of questions of social equality is the extremest folly.” 2 In
this quotation, we see an abundant surplus of undue idealism from Washington that,
among many of his other statements, drew him much criticism.
In this vain, he goes on to say in his autobiography, Up From Slavery: “My own
belief is, although I have never before said so in so many words, that the time will come
when the Negro in the South will be accorded all the political rights which his ability,
character, and material possessions entitle him to.” 3 This statement goes on to echo the
blind idealism of the previous comment. However, Washington’s conservatism really
comes through in his belief “that the freedom to freely exercise such political rights will
Washington, Booker T, “Atlanta Exposition Address”, Gonna Sit at the Welcome Table, Second Edition.
Julian Bond and Andrew Lewis, Eds. New York: American Heritage, 1995. Reprinted 1997. Page 50.
2
Washington, Booker T, “Atlanta Exposition Address”, Gonna Sit at the Welcome Table, Second Edition.
Julian Bond and Andrew Lewis, Eds. New York: American Heritage, 1995. Reprinted 1997. Page 52.
3
Washington, Booker T, Up From Slavery, Cornerstones: An Anthology of African American Literature.
Melvin Donaldson, ed. St. Martin’s. New York. 1996. Page 647.
1
3
not come in any large degree through outside or artificial forcing, but will be accorded to
the Negro by Southern white people themselves, and that they will protect him in the
exercise of those rights.”4 In this passage, his mere idealism and conservatism border on
blatant ignorance of the state of race relations in the United States. However, reinforced
by white Southern backing, as well as a theology based upon waiting and appealing to
white sympathy through proving one’s “worthiness”, he continued his bold declarations,
seeking to mobilize blacks after this same manner.
Probably most unbelievable of all of his concessions to white America, is his
commentary on the rightness of segregation as a positive good for black and white
people. While the previous statements have seemed edgy, he went on to clear all doubt in
terms of showing the breadth of his stubborn hold onto the old ideas of segregation,
continuing in his Atlanta Exposition Address: “In all things purely social we can be as
separate as five fingers of the hand, yet as one hand in all things essential to mutual
progress.”5 Accommodationist statements such as this characterized Booker T.
Washington’s career and typifies the depiction of his voice and role in black America,
also winning this speech the nickname, “The Atlanta Compromise”.6
Many blacks felt betrayed at the thought that one of their own could ever conceive
of vocalizing such unthinkable concessions, after the battle blacks had been through in
America, for the previous three hundred years. Many rose up in vehement protest of his
social vision for blacks in America. Ralph Ellison offered this critique in his novel,
4
Washington, Booker T, Up From Slavery, Cornerstones: An Anthology of African American Literature.
Melvin Donaldson, ed. St. Martin’s. New York. 1996. Page 647.
5
Washington, Booker T, “Atlanta Exposition Address”, Gonna Sit at the Welcome Table, Second Edition.
Julian Bond and Andrew Lewis, Eds. New York: American Heritage, 1995. Reprinted 1997. Page 51.
6
Dubois, WEB, “On Mr. Booker T. Washington and Others” Gonna Sit at the Welcome Table, Second
Edition. Julian Bond and Andrew Lewis, Eds. New York: American Heritage, 1995. Reprinted 1997. Page
53-4.
4
Invisible Man, saying: Then in my mind’s eye I see the bronze statue of the college
Founder, the cold Father symbol, his hands outstretched in the breathtaking gesture of
lifting a veil that flutters in hard, metallic folds above the face of a kneeling slave; and I
am standing puzzled, unable to decide whether the veil is being lifted, or lowered more
firmly in place; whether I am witnessing a revelation or a more efficient blinding.”7 From
this perspective in 1947, we were asked then to re-evaluate the significance of leaders,
such as Washington, who advocate privileges only for those who had, by his standards,
“ability, character, and material possessions” enough to “entitle him” to rights, rather
than seeking enforcement of rights already made law, through Amendments. Critiques
such as this characterize our modern perception of Washington’s contribution to our
current society. However, out of his concessions, arose the protest and voice one of black
America’s most well respected intellectuals, in WEB Dubois.
WEB Dubois, born in Great Barrington, MA in 1868, rose to meet Washington’s
stance with a firm critic, saying: “Easily the most striking thing in the history of the
American Negro is the ascendancy of Mr. Booker T. Washington” in a time when “war
memories and ideals were rapidly passing” and “a day of astonishing commercial
development was dawning.”8 Being a man very much interested in the life of the mind,
the one among Washington’s ideas that most outrightly offended Dubois were his beliefs
in asking black people to remain on the same ground, her felt, represented everything
they were working to overcome.
7
Ellison, Ralph. Invisible Man. Second Vintage International Edition, March 1995
Original Copyright. New York. 1947. Page 36.
8
Dubois, WEB, “On Mr. Booker T. Washington and Others” Gonna Sit at the Welcome Table, Second
Edition. Julian Bond and Andrew Lewis, Eds. New York: American Heritage, 1995. Reprinted 1997. Page
53.
5
He harshly critiqued Washington’s social and economic agenda, calling it a
program of “industrial education, conciliation of the South, and submission and silence as
to civil and political rights.”9 Here, Dubois cites that Washington’s belief in an industrial
focus to black efforts would only prolong the loosing of the mental shackles binding
black Americans. Given the history out of which this commentary emerged, it is only
right that Dubois and others were quick to voice concern over Washington’s remarks.
Dubois cited that Washington’s views on a need for black people to take complete
responsibility for both their position in society as well as the means for emerging from
this place, as “dangerous half-truth,”10 irresponsibly overlooking the crippling effects of
both slavery and race-prejudice on the black psyche and station in America. Dubois was a
firm believer that, the only way for blacks to un-write the ingrained subservience of
blacks to whites, was to encourage the portion of brighter individuals to pursue higher
education, expecting their new knowledge to help uplift blacks in America.
Upon this “Talented Tenth,” as he called them in his novel Souls of Black Folk
(1901), he hinged all his faith and hope in the trace. He begins: “The Negro race, like all
races, is going to be saved by its exceptional men. The problem of education, then,
among Negroes must first of all deal with the Talented Tenth; it is the problem of
developing the Best of this race that they may guide the Mass away from the
contamination and death of the Worst, in their own and other races”.
Dubois, WEB, “On Mr. Booker T. Washington and Others” Gonna Sit at the Welcome Table, Second
Edition. Julian Bond and Andrew Lewis, Eds. New York: American Heritage, 1995. Reprinted 1997. Page
53.
10
Dubois, WEB, “On Mr. Booker T. Washington and Others” Gonna Sit at the Welcome Table, Second
Edition. Julian Bond and Andrew Lewis, Eds. New York: American Heritage, 1995. Reprinted 1997. Page
53.
9
6
A modern critique of Dubois’ “Talented Tenth” philosophy, Nikki Giovanni, asks
in her book, Racism 101, what happens to the “Normal Ninetieth” while the “Talented
Tenth” is getting its act together. She contends that, implied in notions of a need for a
talented portion to lift the common black out of oppression, is the idea that they are not
capable of empowering themselves, effectively stratifying a would be black community.
These ideas denote a very elitist view of society in which there are the lifters, as well as
those in need of lifting. More so, it intellectualizes a problem instead of actualizing a
workable solution for everyday people. These debates plunge ideas surrounding black
empowerment into the abyss of rhetoric and leaving the same people suffering, while
well off blacks continue to argue over what is to be done about the race problem at
suburb, dinner parties. This critique ends in being a more modern version of that offered
by the most radical of the early twentieth century black leaders, Marcus Garvey.
Marcus Garvey, founder of the Universal Negro Improvement Association
(UNIA), was born in St. Ann’s Bay, Jamaica in 1887.11 Garvey articulates well his main
critique of leaders such as Dubois in saying: “Here [in the United States] I found a
different problem. I immediately visited some of the so-called Negro leaders, only to
discover, after a close study of them, that they had no program,”12 in reference to this
same sole emphasis on the politics of the struggle for black equality, without placing
adequate emphasis on the socio-economic issues that other critics and followers of
Garvey held, as well. He goes on to call such leaders, “mere opportunists who were living
11
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4722/harlem1.html
Garvey, Marcus, “Garvey Tells His Own Story” African American Religious History. Second Edition.
Sernett, Milton, ed. Duke University Press. Durham and London. 1999. Page 458.
12
7
off of their so-called leadership while poor people were groping in the dark.”13 Here,
Garvey gives a stern indictment of the nature of Dubois’ leadership. Like Washington, he
puts into question the usefulness of a philosophy that advocates for the betterment of
blacks, but does nothing to help individuals help themselves, in their everyday lives.
Garvey’s vision and theology start with a complete disinterest in associating with
whites on really any level, believing, “it is a vicious and dangerous doctrine of social
equality to urge, as certain colored leaders do, that black and white should get together,
for that would destroy the racial purity of both.”14 Garvey believed that the ultimate
prosperity and happiness of black and white people absolutely depended upon their
separation. In this vain, he continues, saying: “We believe that black people should have
a country of their own, where they should be given the fullest opportunity to develop
politically, socially and industrially,” 15 all in hopes of bringing about “the restoration of
Ethiopia’s ancient glory.” 16 Here, we see the radical foundation for his social program in
helping to better people’s lives, rather than only arguing for the enforcement of rights,
that America’s social climate forbade blacks from using. Interestingly though, while his
emphasis on the social aspect of the struggle takes him away from the moderately radical
Dubois, these ideas are directly in line with the life and work of Washington. Marcus
Garvey credited everything he made of himself in America, to, in his own words, “the
dead hero”, who was responsible for Garvey’s migration to the United States, initially.
Garvey, Marcus, “Garvey Tells His Own Story” African American Religious History. Second Edition.
Sernett, Milton, ed. Duke University Press. Durham and London. 1999. Page 458.
14
Garvey, Marcus, “Garvey Tells His Own Story” African American Religious History. Second Edition.
Sernett, Milton, ed. Duke University Press. Durham and London. 1999. Page 461.
15
Garvey, Marcus, “Garvey Tells His Own Story” African American Religious History. Second Edition.
Sernett, Milton, ed. Duke University Press. Durham and London. 1999. Page 461-2.
13
Garvey, Marcus, “Garvey Tells His Own Story” African American Religious History. Second Edition.
Sernett, Milton, ed. Duke University Press. Durham and London. 1999. Page 461.
16
8
During his life, Garvey credited the success of his life and organization to the
vision of Washington, in desiring that his movement be one about the dignity of the
common black man, whether an individual was reading books or sweeping floors.
Lawrence Levine wrote: “He was able to take Washington’s philosophy and transform it
from a doctrine geared to help one up the ladder of American mobility into a mechanism
designed to increase the worldwide consciousness, unity, power, and autonomy of the
race.” 17 The group centered orientation of his movement, known as Garveyism (his
followers called, “Garveyites”), as well as, his emphatic speaking ability procured a
membership of 2,000,000 blacks for the UNIA, after only three years in the United
States. Levine goes on to say, “He took a philosophy suffused with overtones of
individualism and bent it to serve the purposes of the group.”18 Garvey’s ability to take
on Washington’s philosophy gave him a fairly effective means for economically
empowering blacks, and providing a workable starting point from which they could begin
to function with greater dignity.
Commenting on the destitute state of the race as well as, what he felt, were
outside efforts to destroy the edifice he and those who share his dream, had worked to
build, Garvey says: “Having had the wrong education as a start in his racial career, the
Negro has become his greatest enemy. Most of the troubles I have had in advancing the
cause of the race have come from Negroes.”19 He goes on to echo the same sentiment
articulated by Washington, in his Atlanta Exposition, saying: “Booker Washington aptly
Levine, Lawrence, “Marcus Garvey and the Politics of Revitalization” Gonna Sit at the Welcome Table,
Second Edition. Julian Bond and Andrew Lewis, Eds. New York: American Heritage, 1995. Reprinted
1997. Page 91.
18
Levine, Lawrence, “Marcus Garvey and the Politics of Revitalization” Gonna Sit at the Welcome Table,
Second Edition. Julian Bond and Andrew Lewis, Eds. New York: American Heritage, 1995. Reprinted
1997. Page 91.
19
Garvey, Marcus, “Garvey Tells His Own Story” African American Religious History. Second Edition.
Sernett, Milton, ed. Duke University Press. Durham and London. 1999. Page 462.
17
9
described the race in one of his lectures by stating that we are like crabs in a barrel, that
none would allow the other to climb over, but on any such attempt all would combine to
pull back into the barrel the one crab who would make the effort to climb out. Yet, those
of us with vision cannot desert the race, leaving it to suffer and die.” The way Garvey
ends here is probably the most perplexing of all, for many reasons. The primary reason
being, when we conceptualize Garvey and Washington, we picture them on opposite ends
of the radical spectrum, with Dubois off in the middle. However, in seeing that Garvey
refers to Washington and himself as having vision, and going as far as to cite examples
from his speeches, we are forced to re-work the way we place Washington, historically.
If an “accommodationist” man like Washington could back a radical advocate for
the overhaul of black communities like Garvey, two men with agendas seemingly
fathoms apart, what new ways must we think about Washington, in the fight for black
equality? One goes on to wonder what Washington’s motives were in bringing Garvey to
the United States. More importantly, one asks what motives were responsible for him
making the type of conservative statements that he did. We are forced to speculate as to
whether Washington’s advocacy of the concessions that white America had asked for
blacks to make, was necessary, in order to truly show how ridiculous these expectations
were. More so, his viewpoint made whites question what would make a black man
concede so much after decades of fighting to build community.
Finally, did America need a black man to actively advocate for the concessions
that much of white America asked of blacks, in the early part of the twentieth century? I
believe the answers to this question lay in Washington’s legacy and in the history,
immediately after his death. Out of Washington’s ridiculous claims, came space for
10
blacks to safely critique the current system, because it being passionately advocated for
by another black man. No longer was it black America crying out to an indifferent white
audience, but because Washington had allowed for this new critical space, voices like
Dubois’s were able to step in and pick up the lag that Washington left in seeking to
develop black youth, academically. More so, Washington left behind a workable plan for
economic empowerment that Garvey developed, restructuring it to suit his plans for
widespread black unity and dignity. In this light, we might view Washington’s life as a
necessary sacrifice that black America had to make, essentially enabling the existence of
a Dubois or a Garvey.
11
Works Cited
1) African American Religious History. Second Edition. Sernett, Milton, ed. Duke
University Press. Durham and London. 1999.
2) Gonna Sit at the Welcome Table, Second Edition. Julian Bond and Andrew
Lewis, Eds. New York: American Heritage, 1995. Reprinted 1997.
3) http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4722/harlem1.html
4) Cornerstones: An Anthology of African American Literature. Melvin Donaldson,
ed. St. Martin’s. New York. 1996.
5) Ellison, Ralph. Invisible Man. Second Vintage International Edition, March 1995
Original Copyright. New York. 1947. Page 36.
6) Giovanni, Nikki. Racism 101.