Hey guys can you ill give

w. e.b. dubois, was an author and member of the naacp. below is an excerpt from his article “separation”.
[ here is the letter of an honest colored man in the new orleans times-democrat.]
"whatever may be the opinion of others concerning the drawing of the color line in the south, the thoughtful negro has accepted it as a fixed principle, realizing that the race has absolutely nothing to fear or lose by social negro does not desire racial intermingling. all he wants is a square deal before the law."
[du bois responded] . . this black man would better ask himself good and hard is this: is such separation physically and politically possible, and under it is there the slightest likelihood of the segregated getting "a square deal"? . . the white south does not want separation, but subordination. they do not want separate negro schools, but negro schools under the control of white superintendence who hold the purse strings. . every man, then, that bows to the dogma of race separation must accept subordination and humiliation along with the destruction of the best ideals of democracy.

answer the following questions and include a 3-5 sentence reflection for the last question.

1. what do you think dubois is referring to when he mentions a “square deal”?

2. does dubois think african americans will be able to achieve a “square deal”? why/why not?

3. what were some of the social inequalities african americans were experiencing at this time, especially in the south?

4. reflection: in your opinion, why do you think the man speaking in the new orleans times-democrat believes african americans have “nothing to fear or lose by social separation”?

1. The term square deal is used to refer to one being treated equally and having access to the same resources and opportunities as others in the same environment. Dubois use of the term was in a slightly sarcastic and skeptical tone implying that in the context of the situation at hand, a "square deal" would not occur based on the politics and perspective at the time.

2. Linked to the statement above, Dubois did not believe even slightly in the idea that the separation of races would create a "square deal" for the people of African descent. He cites physical and political reasons for his disbelief in such an arrangement; namely that even where the black population was separated from the white population, there would be a gross difference in the quality of life between the two. He mentions that that there would be Subordination and he believes as such because the white population would have the best of the resources and the black population would thus be dependent on them.

3. This period encapsulated the  Segregation Era and true to the words of Dubois, the African American population faced grave injustices. There were separate restrooms, drinking fountains and communities for the black population which were far below the standard of those allotted to the white community. African Americans also were to travel at the back of buses and were to give up their seat to any white passenger when asked to do so. Schools were overcrowded and underfunded in black communities with a reduced school day so the students were not as adept academically as their white counterparts.

4. It was the sentiment at that time that the races were best separated. The illusion was that the races would thrive best under this separation-this is the "square deal" which was referred to initially. This was a shallow outlook however, as separating the idea of separating the races did not take into the consideration the disparity in the ownership of resources.

a because i tried to vote with just my college id and the answer was no

- a government ruled by the people, or assembly. officials monarchy - a single ruler like a king. over time some city-states, like athens would change governments. what this means is that all the citizens voted on all the laws.