Talk:Atlanta Compromise

I realize that this was not an actual written agreement, but the Atlanta Compromise is portrayed as "an agreement ... between Booker T. Washington ... and Southern white leaders." Which Southern white leaders? Booker T. Washington is sometimes portrayed as a "sellout" for this compromise, but there had to be someone on the other side for him to sell out to. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:58, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

This article is just wrong. Booker T. Washington's speech, "Address at the Atlanta Cotton Exposition," was labeled the "Atlanta Compromise" by W.E.B. Du Bois later as a criticism of the views Washington presented in that speech. There was no actual compromise.

JessicaHecht (talk) 19:12, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

This article is largely written from the view of W.E.B. Du Bois, who was an intellectual elitist who criticized Washington and the “compromise” attributed to him here. In particular the lead in suggests African Americans would not seek justice when that subject is specifically addressed in the Washington speech associated with this issue.

: My thoughts exactly. The article is exceptionally poorly written; it makes no sense to write it from the viewpoint of Du Bois rather than a neutral third-party observer. Nowhere in the Atlanta speech does BTW suggest that African-Americans should not focus on higher education, which is stated in the lede of this article (cribbed from Du Bois in The Souls of Black Folk), for example. What Washington actually said on the matter in his speech was:

There is no defense or security for any of us except in the highest intelligence and development of all. If anywhere there are efforts tending to curtail the fullest growth of the Negro, let these efforts be turned into stimulating, encouraging, and making him the most useful and intelligent citizen.

:There's no way an honest person could interpret that as being opposed to higher education. Bueller 007 (talk) 13:34, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

{{Talk:Atlanta Compromise/GA1}}

{{Template:Did you know nominations/Atlanta Compromise}}

{{Wikipedia:Peer review/Atlanta Compromise/archive1}}

• "the federal government enacted many progressive in the South" Feels like a word is missing
• "Southern states systematically implemented laws designed to disenfranchise black citizens and bar them from holding public office" That was only part of the laws that were implemented, right? They were much more broadly discriminatory.
• " "the Reconstruction experiment in racial democracy failed because it began at the wrong end, emphasizing political means and civil rights acts rather than economic means and self-determination."" Since so much of understanding Washington's approach hinges on this point (what he thought were the failures of Reconstruction), I think it's worth trying to paraphrase this into simpler language. I generally think the background might benefit from a bit more information on Washington's philosophy and events that influenced it.
• "dominated the African American ... political appointments" Were there even African American political appointments of note during this era? Certainly not in the south. I can't think of any, but there may have been some. Anyways, how did Washington control this?
• Our article on the exposition states that the idea was "first proposed in November 1893", not, as we say here, in early 1895. Which was it?
• "In exchange, whites" I would preface this sentence with " In exchange, Washington hoped that" or something, since the big problem with the compromise is that one side (White people) was never actually willing to concede anything
• Do you really need seven citations for the end of this paragraph? It feels a bit overkill (WP:CITEKILL). I think there's a few instances of this in the article. Too many citations can make it hard to verify claims
• Do we actually know that, for instance, the Atlanta Compromise was the reason that "Northern white philanthropists provided funding for thousands of schools"? I think you generally want to be careful to attribute direct effects to this, since it was a sort of informal aim, rather than a clearly understood/agreed upon compromise, no?
• "In his 1895 speech, Washington urged Southern African Americans to remain in their home states and find prosperity by working within the local economy" Do you need to restate this, since you already said the same thing in the earlier section?
• "Black Southerners upheld their end of the bargain by tolerating segregation" I'd be careful to avoid implying that all Black Southerners a) did all tolerate segregation (after all, Millions left the south!) and b) that they did it consciously upholding an "end of a bargain". Is there any indication that most Black southerners would have been aware of, and actively supported, the compromise? It is quite conceivable to me that many simply felt they had no other chance (fearing, for instance, lynching). While the main people to openly criticize the Compromise were those living in the North, I don't think you can take that to mean that Southerners universally supported it.
• I don't think you clearly delineate what content fits in 'results and aftermath' versus 'Reception by African Americans'. For instance, "Du Bois believed that the massacre was partially the result of the Atlanta Compromise." feels like a reception by an African American. And the chronological jump from the 1960s civil rights movement back to 1895 feels odd. I would suggest re thinking the structure somehow
• "he emerged as the preeminent leader of the African American community" But earlier you say he stepped into Douglass's role before giving the speech. Which was it?
• Why does William Calvin Chase not get a gloss?
• I kinda am of the opinion that support behind the Atlanta Compromise had begun to falter even before Washington's death. The NAACP of course was founded in 1910, and The Crisis was quite successful shortly after creation. Thoughts?
• I'm glad to see a strong base of scholarly sources! I think that two good additional sources might be Factor, Robert L. (1970). The Black Response to America: Men, Ideals, and Organization, from Frederick Douglass to the NAACP (1970); and Shawn Alexander, An Army of Lions: The Civil Rights Struggle Before the NAACP (2013). Norrell also wrote the very important book Up From History on Washington, which I think would be essential to incorporate here. Have you gotten a chance to look a those?

:: No, I have not looked at those sources yet ... I'll hunt them down. Noleander (talk) 17:44, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

Overall, nice work! Here's some initial comments :) Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:04, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks for the excellent, as usual, feedback. I'll implement those suggestions soon. Noleander (talk) 17:43, 26 June 2025 (UTC)