[History 202-V]
[Submission Date]
The concept of white supremacy governed racial relations in the United States during the antebellum period and as a result, black persons remained subject to an inferior status on which the whites grounded the slave system. Expectedly, even after emancipation, whites retained their position as the superior race while those of African descent remained a disfranchised lot since color segregation took roots in the United States. Still, unlike in the years of slavery, African Americans could finally fight and claim the same privileges enjoyed by their white counterparts. The problem was while some blacks entertained the idea of equality, others were content with their status and at the same time, those that agreed to fight for said rights endorsed different methods. Thus said, while the abolition of slavery dictated individual liberties for blacks, the white man's efforts to uphold the color line caused divisions among African-Americans: some blacks voiced their contentment with the inferior position of their race and others opted for a solution albeit with separate methods of achieving the same. However, the approach of nonviolence proved more effective to demand equal rights for the African Americans.
Foremost, the idea of racial equality on American soil was both unfathomable and impossible to obtain just because history proclaimed one race as the dominant one in all levels of society. In other words, from the local to the national levels, Caucasians prevailed at the expense of other racial groups, with particular emphasis on the blacks. Accordingly, biracial Booker T. Washington spoke from experience when he urged blacks to draw a line between “the superficial and the substantial” desires they harbored as black persons in the United States (30). Evidently, Washington’s connection with both the white and black races gave him firsthand knowledge of how relations between the two groups worked. According to him, the blacks were not inferiors. However, he felt that it was necessary for them to start modifying their ways and work hard to achieve their desired outcomes. Their inferiority was the result of their fate as they had been slaves for years and did not have adequate opportunities for education and self-improvement. Washington was certain that education and hard work could allow blacks to enjoy equal rights in the American society. Hence, in the Atlanta Compromise (1895), Washington suggested a peaceful coexistence revolving around the “ignorant” black people allowing the “helping” whites to guide them in the paths of social and economic freedom (30-31). Otherwise, the African Americans whose skills relied on hard labor were fighting a lost cause with their misguided notions of being equal to the whites.
For the same reasons, Washington founded the Tuskegee Normal and Industrial Institute (Tuskegee University) where he stressed on the acquirement of the virtues of fortitude, enterprise, and prudence. He made African Americans realize that the attainment of economic success is not a milestone that could be achieved overnight. The students were taught that subordination and subjugation to white people was an unavoidable yet essential evil till the time when blacks could prove their worth for getting all rights enjoyed by whites. Washington assumed that the white community would revere and acknowledge African Americans if they work harder and obtain economic independence as well as worked hard and obtained financial independence and cultural innovation.
As mentioned earlier, Washington did not disapprove equality. He thought differently and felt that gaining equality must be a progressive and time-taking process. In his opinion, the civil rights could not be attained with protests and remonstrations. His belief was to fight for civil rights through hard work. He knew that blacks possessed many other abilities other than working hard. However, he just felt that hard labor was as respectable and valuable as any other type of job. In the Harvard graduate’s views, Washington and anybody who concurred with his ideas justified the actions of the Southern whites, and that “propaganda” was responsible for the “disfranchisement” of African Americans (Du Bois 33). Accordingly, rather than applauding the apparent flaws in the American Justice system, Du Bois advocated “honest criticism” of the government as a tactic that African Americans could employ to change their situation(34). Since he was a university graduate, Du Bois’ arguments were well founded and appeared to echo those of other African Americans at the time.
Moreover, I, Too was composed by Langston Hughes that also portrayed the African Americans’ desire for respect and elevation in the social status (71). He was a renowned leader in the Harlem Renaissance – the name given to the cultural advancement of black poets, artists, musicians, and other intellectuals that happened in Harlem during 1920s and 1930s. The world also witnessed Black Nationalism in the endeavors of the Universal Negro Improvement Association whereby its founder, Marcus Garvey, encouraged African Americans to return to their motherlands.
With the given facts in mind, African Americans were expectedly a discontented lot, and they voiced their demands for changes in the United States. Now, while African Americans supported the idea of Civil Rights for all people regardless of their skin color, there was a problem in determining what methods would move the government into making the necessary Amendments to the American Constitution and federal law. On one hand, Martin Luther King Jr. promoted civil disobedience and peaceful protests to draw the States’ attention to the predicament of the disfranchised black persons residing in the United States. In the 1963 delivery of his speech I Have a Dream, the pastor turned Civil Rights activist encouraged “discipline and dignity” during the protests as that was the only way through which blacks would be innocent of “any wrongful deeds” when they achieved their goals (King 121). On the other hand, Malcolm X argued against the idea of peace as blacks fought for their rights because, as evidenced by the title of his 1964 speech Ballot or Bullet, it was high time blacks employed other methods (123). By ballot or bullet, he meant that the American government must allow African Americans to cast their votes in a legitimate manner or let violence and aggression prevail if the government fails to recognize Black individualism. Notably, Malcolm X voiced his views a year after Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his speech and for that reason, it is plausible the former man realized the slow effects of peaceful protests. Still, the importance of 1964 cannot be neglected as the black segregation ended the same year. Nevertheless, propelled by his position as the leader of a Muslim organization born out of his membership in a Militant group of Black Muslims, Malcolm X considered violence instead of King’s civil disobedience. Apparently, democracy for black people was “disguised hypocrisy” and without action, blacks were bound to have a lifetime of unending struggles (Malcolm X, 124).
Conclusively, the Civil Rights Movement succeeded without violence on the part of the African Americans and for that reason, King’s approach of peace was most useful. In fact, it is possible that Malcolm X’s calls for a last stand would have encouraged an equally violent response from the government. It must be noted here that Washington did not reject education on the whole. He was particularly supportive of technical education and vocational training. He gave more emphasis to such types of education over the conventional liberal arts education. Still, it must also be realized that King would not have been able to study Gandhi at a vocational or technical school. In fact, the learning Du Bois supported introduced King to Gandhi’s civil disobedience.
