Katelyn P - Both Washington and Du Bois had good intentions with their plans. Washington wanted an economical approach that would appeal to white Southerners so that they would see the financial income African Americans can withhold in order to be equal to them. Du Bois wanted a more direct approach to follow what the exact objective was for African American rights. If there is one I would think had a better plan for civil rights, it would probably be Du Bois’s plan. As said, his vision was more directed towards what African Americans wanted, which was higher education with the ability to influence and make thoughtful decisions. A flaw with Washington’s plan is that it’s dependent on whether Americans will turn their view on their beliefs when African Americans have proven they’re deserving of it. There’s a chance that African Americans wouldn’t be seen more than what their economical status is and that’s all their person is based on, not necessarily their actual social individualism. I think the point of social equality isn’t to conform to what others want in order to be accepted, but more so to accept the differences of a person while not viewing them any lesser or greater than anyone else. The beliefs that many Americans had on African Americans were one-sided at the time, however, there usually needs to be a direct stance and footing in order to cause change, which is why persistence is a powerful tool in an approach like Du Bois’s.