No, Booker T. Washington’s philosophy and actually his actions did not betray the African Americans in the context illustrated. This is because he alienated both the students and faculty at Tuskegee Institute by effectively establishing a strict coordination that failed to offer a sufficient scholastic core curriculum to put in order the students for the industrialized place of work. This shows that Washington was restricted by what he was capable to do in the racial climate of the surrounding arena and consequently the effective accomplishments that were at his circle of reach.
The African-American educator and consequently an author of the various pieces of art, was a great orator and actually an advisor to the side of the republican, presidents. In his position he played a key and crucial role in the context of uniting the larger population ,of the black people who consequently lived in the south of the united states of America. In my own view he was a hero who served as a uniting bond between the people in the overview that saw them solid and united in the category that every individual was seen as very important in issues pertaining the democratic progress of the nation (Larry 1990).
Booker consequently spoke of the political and definite civil rights on behalf of the isolated black class. He also described mob violence as a form, of the democratic rights violations to both the individual and the state in the context that seek to accomplish the general equity in both the social as well s the educational platform in which the both the citizens shared in that order.
He further decried mob hostility, and actually defended black education which aimed to achieve as a means of promoting a more affirmative representation for African Americans in an era subjugated by the set of guidelines of white domination.
The period associated with the progressive era in the US saw the transformation of the various setbacks in the economy in the context that elevated the social activism and generally increased in the performance around the political platform of the nation. The era tried to eliminate the various evils in the economy such as corruption as well as substantive purification of the government in the lame light that seek to elevate all the people (carry 1996).
On the contrary the authors of the clashing sides such as Marcus Garvey was totally addressing the opposite on the context that he brought the concept of advocacy on the side that showed complete racial purity and separatism. In his philosophical writings he addressed the return of the black Americans to Africa and on that context he addressed the issue of figurative speech to illustrate over the same.
On this aspect I choose to consider Booker as a hero who seeks to address the concept of equity over all the races on the planet. He further choose to address and air their voices in the platform that those blacks in the south were in a good position to regain their right to vote after the loss through disfranchisement.
On the contrary activist such as Marcus addressed that since white people have seen their own God through white spectacles; we have now started to see our God through our own spectacles" (White 92). In addition he clarified that black people should also on the other category visualize a black God and a black Christ.
In conclusion Washington Booker share the same ideologies with Dr. Martin Luther king junior and W. E. B. Du Bois who wanted the black ,people to be accepted in the American community and wanted the intellectual elite of the black community to be led in the direction of achievements and prosperity.
References
Larry Madaras, Taking Sides" 20th Century American History
Wintz, Cary D (1996), African American Political Thought, 1890–1930: Washington, Du Bois, Garvey, and Randolph
