Sankofa: Retracing to Deconstruction

The Ideologies of Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. Du Bois: Lessons for Teachers and Students

Recently, a student in my African American Studies class casually referred to Booker T. Washington as a "coon," dismissing his entire body of work and philosophy in one fell swoop. This moment, while disheartening, sparked a necessary discussion about how history—particularly Black history—is often oversimplified and filtered through lenses that do not account for complexity, nuance, or the multiplicity of Black thought. It also highlighted a deeper issue: the internalization of white supremacist narratives that portray African Americans as a monolith, flattening our diverse perspectives into a singular narrative of right or wrong, hero or villain.

To understand the tension between Washington and W.E.B. Du Bois is to understand a larger conversation about survival, resistance, and advancement in a society built on the exclusion and exploitation of Black people. For teachers and students, these ideologies are not relics of the past; they continue to shape how we navigate education, identity, and societal expectations today.

Washington’s Pragmatism: Education as Survival

Booker T. Washington, born into slavery, believed in the power of industrial and vocational education as a pathway to self-reliance for African Americans. His famous Atlanta Compromise speech in 1895 called for Black people to "cast down their buckets" where they were, advocating for economic self-sufficiency and a gradual approach to civil rights. Washington’s philosophy was deeply rooted in the context of his time—a period of violent white backlash during Reconstruction and the rise of Jim Crow laws.

For Washington, survival meant pragmatism. He understood that overt demands for equality might provoke even harsher oppression. He believed that by proving their economic value through skilled labor, African Americans could build a foundation for eventual social and political equality. While his strategy may seem overly accommodating to white supremacy, it was, in many ways, a protective mechanism—an attempt to carve out a space for Black progress in a hostile environment.

Du Bois’ Vision: Education as Liberation

In contrast, W.E.B. Du Bois, the first African American to earn a Ph.D. from Harvard, championed the idea of the "Talented Tenth"—a leadership class of educated Black individuals who would uplift the entire race. Du Bois argued for full civil rights and access to higher education, rejecting Washington’s emphasis on vocational training as too limiting. For Du Bois, education was not merely a means of survival; it was a tool for liberation and self-determination.

Du Bois believed that accommodating white supremacy, as he interpreted Washington’s approach, risked reinforcing the very structures that oppressed Black people. His approach was unapologetically demanding, rooted in the belief that African Americans deserved the same rights, opportunities, and respect as their white counterparts—not at some undefined future point, but immediately.

The Classroom Connection

As educators, we often see Washington’s and DuBois' ideologies play out in our classrooms. Some students are pragmatic, focusing on immediate, tangible goals—a good grade, a steady job, a pathway to stability. Others are idealistic, yearning for systemic change and driven by a sense of justice and empowerment. Both perspectives are valid, and both are necessary.

But what happens when students internalize the idea that one way is "right" and the other "wrong"? How do we deconstruct the concept of either/or. When my student dismissed Washington as a "coon," it reflected a broader issue: the ways in which white supremacist narratives have trained us to see Black thought as a zero-sum game and the ways in which I have failed as an educator to remove personal and worldly bias from the learning environment and perhaps focus only on the facts as I have in the past and If Du Bois was "right," then Washington must be "wrong." This binary thinking erases the complexity of both men’s ideologies and the historical contexts in which they lived. 

Unpacking the Monolith

The idea that African Americans must present a unified front—one voice, one strategy, one narrative—is itself a product of white supremacy. It stems from a long history of portraying Black people as a homogenous group, incapable of diversity in thought or experience. This narrative denies the richness of Black intellectual traditions and the reality that Black people, like any other group, are multifaceted individuals with varied beliefs, goals, and strategies.

For students, understanding this diversity is crucial. It helps them see themselves as part of a continuum of Black thought, where disagreement is not betrayal but a sign of intellectual vitality. For teachers, it is a reminder to present history not as a series of binaries but as a tapestry of interconnected ideas, each contributing to the larger struggle for justice and equality.

This thinking also consistently rest within the constructed DNA of my African American Students 

Moving Forward

As educators, we must challenge students to think critically about historical figures like Washington and Du Bois, encouraging them to analyze rather than dismiss, to question…the rationale behind the ideologies of the two men, rather than accept oversimplified narratives. 

We must also address the ways in which white supremacist ideologies have shaped how history is taught and understood, working to dismantle the notion that there is only one "correct" way to be Black.

Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. Du Bois were not enemies; they were architects of two different blueprints for Black progress. Both strategies have lessons for us today, as we navigate a world still grappling with systemic racism and inequality. By engaging with their ideas, students and teachers alike can develop a deeper understanding of the complexities of identity, history, and the ongoing fight for justice.

And perhaps, the next time a student encounters Washington’s philosophy, they will see not a caricature to be dismissed but a man grappling with the same questions we face today: How do we survive? How do we thrive? And how do we move forward together?