Washington's View of the Future

Booker T. Washington envisioned a future where if everyone worked hard, quickly and efficiently in a field and most of all, do their absolute best, there would be no racial discrimination.  I only partially agree with this theory.  Why?  Because although many people would be impressed with a certain person’s hard work and perseverance, there will always be people who won’t buy the product because it was made by a person of a different skin color or culture.  So yes, they may be working harder and better than most people, but that’ll NEVER take away all racism.  One other theory he brought up was that if a black man was a better plumber than a white person, people would go to the black man and not the white man.  I would agree with this statement one hundred percent…  BUT unfortunately, like I stated before, there is always going to be racial discrimination no matter how good you are at your field of work.  It’s just how the human race works.  The better the worker, the worse the haters.

Free Market VS the Welfare State

Which promotes greater personal responsibility, the free market, or the state?  The free market gives you the most personal responsibility.  In the free market, there is no legal pirating, and morality is highly considered and respected. Not only does the free market encourage personal responsibility and impedes legal plunder, but it produces momentous results: personal responsibility/gain, wealth, and better morals.  Contrary to these wonderful gifts, the welfare state results in a decline in personal responsibility by maintaining/controlling the people’s lives. People usually think that it’s not worth the hard work if they are taken care of by the government. They decide that having personal responsibility is worthless. Either way, these lead to a decline in personal responsibility and immorality.   So the free market allows much more personal responsibility than the state because it forces people to work hard and efficiently to provide a living and get resources for their family in return.

Is the State the Source of Human Rights?

Is the state the source of human rights?  No, the state isn’t the source of human rights because they don’t know what’s best for the people.  Imagine that you just met a person and only after like a day of knowing them they ask if they can rule your life.  Would you say yes?  Most likely not!  Unfortunately though, that’s how we treat the state.  Our hour of knowing them is the presidential debates/campaigns we watch!  But magically we somehow expect them to be mind readers and do everything that we want and need.  The worst politicians are the power hungry people who run for office because they want control of everyone.  They get on your good side in their campaigns and say that they only want what’s best for the people when in reality, once they’re in office, they throw all of their staged morals out the window.  Our problem is that even though we have many politicians like this, we still want the state to have total control over our rights.  In conclusion, if we just stopped giving the state control over our rights, then, we wouldn’t have to worry about complete, power hungry, strangers taking away our rights and destroying our morals.

Booker T. Washington's Elitist Program

I think that Washington’s program was an elitist program because he truly believed that for blacks to become accepted by all whites and to be respected by all whites, blacks must learn how to work hard, well, and better.  In Washington’s program, one of the many things he teaches his students is how to make bricks.  Because of this, his program soon becomes one of the largest brick manufacturers in the south.  He taught them how to create their own successful business.  Washington was convinced that if his students listened and followed his teachings, they would become extremely successful in business and would be able to live with knowledge that he believed to be very important (how to make goods people want and need).  I believe that Washington’s program was an elitist program.  Why?  Because he taught his students that if they learned hard work and were willing to dirty their hands they would be successful in life.

Memorable Story from Washington's Autobiography

The most memorable story from Booker T. Washington’s autobiography Up From Slavery that sticks out in my mind is when he was helping with missionary efforts in Alabama.  He visited black families and he was astonished to find that they had practically nothing.  Their living conditions were completely unsanitary.  They had to use their hands to cook, clean and eat because they had no utensils or cookware.  They lived in broken-down old homes, barely making a living.  What was insane was that these people were so poor and in debt because rather than spending what little money they had on food, clothing and the necessities of life, they spent their money on practically useless things like organs, clocks or sewing machines and other expensive items that they never really used.  This is memorable to me because many people are like that today, getting in debt for things they rarely use or cannot really afford.  For example, some people just have to have the latest and greatest new iPhone, video games, computer, electronic device, etc.  Or they have to have a really nice car or expensive clothes.  Why do they do this?  Because they want to look good.  They want attention and respect from others around them.  But that false respect comes at a very great price (pun definitely intended).  It is amazing how people are willing to basically sell their soul for anything to make them look better.  Having lots of stuff, even if it is “cool stuff”, won’t make you happy.  If anything, it makes you more greedy, less grateful, and stressed about how to keep affording a lifestyle you really can’t afford.  It is a vicious cycle that has existed probably since the beginning of time.

Restitution vs Jail Time

I believe that criminals should not be put into jails.  Instead, they should have to make some sort of restitution to the victim or the victim’s family to pay off the debt or make amends for what he or she did.  This would be better for society because the victim would get something out of it and the criminal would learn to do good, pay for his or her mistakes and to work hard.  When a criminal goes into jail, the victim does not benefit, nor does the prisoner really learn anything.  In addition, jails require tax payer money.  This is a drain on society.  If a criminal had to make restitution, it would not cost any tax payer money.  The criminal may never completely “right the wrong,” but he or she would be forced to face their consequences and would have to face the person or family they hurt and actually work for them and serve them.  This could teach the criminal hard work and patience.  It could also teach them how to fix mistakes and become a better person.  It could be a very powerful and transformative experience for both the criminal and the victim.

Washington’s Arguments Against the Slave System

What were Washington’s arguments against the slave system?  Slavery is immoral and undermines people of their work ethic while giving the receivers of this work luxury and ease.  Though the majority of the slaves didn’t loathe their owners, they wanted their freedom back.  They missed being able to choose and think for themselves.  The slave system often kept them from practicing their religious beliefs and from voicing their thoughts and concerns out loud.  Though where housing and living facilities were concerned, the slaves were able to survive and live, not in comfort though.  If there was bedding, it was often just a lump of hay or they’d sleep with the animals in the barn if the outside was  way too chilly.  There was also no way of cooking food, making Washington’s mother think of creative and not so sanitary ways of preparing and cooking food for her children and the other slaves.  Washington believed that slavery was immoral and undermining; it brought egos up and harmony down.  He rejoiced greatly when the fight for the slaves' rights was over.