Category Archives: Uncategorized

Nothing is more disturbing to hear about individual or organizational success-especially if you have contributed to such success-than that such success should be attributed to “luck” and not “hard work”. Hard work involves deliberate and persistent effort directed towards a designated end that is often easy to gloss over when witnessing the outcome and not the work preceding it. And such was Mr. Washington’s work in the advancement and development efforts of Tuskegee Institute (University). Here was a man who did not scoff at any amount received into the coffers of Tuskegee whether great or small.  Without regard to the amount, he “made up [his] mind” to be resolute about his pursuit for even larger ones with his chief aid being “tangible results.” Or, as he wrote elsewhere, “Let[ting] Examples Answer.” For when an organization’s “examples answer,” it becomes easier to proceed from strength to strength because past successes are often the surest indicators of future successes.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. offers the following concerning men and women whose actions are similar to the young man described in Booker T. Washington’s aforementioned passage: “Controversy equalizes fools and wise men in the same way – and the fools know it.” And the founding principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University provides several important lessons about both the young man-as well as all men and women of his ilk-who seek to establish their name and reputation on the basis of disparaging the name and reputation of others-particularly those whose accomplishments they will only be brought in close proximity to only upon the basis of “controversy.” First, Mr. Washington never ever mentions this young man’s name. While this unidentified young man knew full well that persons might give him a hearing-not upon the basis of his own person and accomplishments, but based upon the person and accomplishments of his topic, “The Mistakes of Booker T. Washington,”-identifying or responding to this young man provided not a single, solitary benefit to Mr. Washington and Tuskegee. Second, Mr. Washington understood that the young man’s premises were flawed from the onset, and it is the clearest telltale example of Mr. Washington’s oft-repeated phrase, “Let examples answer.” To be sure, the actions of no man or woman are all “good” or all “bad.” (This is naïve, simplistic and child-like thinking.) Yet, in the face of the clear, overwhelming and documentable evidence that testify to the good that Mr. Washington had done locally, regionally and nationally, this young man titled his lecture series according to what he perceived were the mistakes of Mr. Washington. Here again, what one consistently reads and hears, one will consistently become. And this young man ought to have taken heed to how and to what he was hearing for it ultimately led to what he had become. (For this young man’s attempt to categorize and confine a man of Booker T.Washington’s eminence and accomplishments to a series of perceived mistakes that his limited training, limited knowledge and limited life experience identified did nothing but demonstrate his failure to understand the significance of the (2) greatest 9-letter words and the single, most dangerous 9-letter word: (1) “Integrity,” (2) “Knowledge,” and (3) “Ignorance.”) Finally, we should consider Mr. Washington’s demonstration of another one of his famous aphorisms: “I let no man drag me down so low as to make me hate him.” The very same young man who sought to disparage and defame Mr. Washington later sought him for assistance, and Mr. Washington “tried to find something for him to do.” (This dynamic needs no additional commentary.) Yet what is deserving of additional commentary is that this young man might have spent his time and work writing, lecturing and building his own legacy and life worth reading as opposed to seeking to denigrate another’s whose legacy and life of building Tuskegee (Institute) University spanned 34 years (1881-1915) and remains and is read to this very day.

Of the many truths the founding principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University proffered in his many speeches, writings and correspondence, the following is perhaps the single most profound and difficult one to grasp: “Unless you get the idea of truth so pure that you cannot be false in anything, your education is a failure.” Now it may appear to the naysayer that Mr. Washington makes a rather prideful or arrogant assertion but C.S. Lewis’s idea that “perfect humility dispenses with modesty” rejects such an accusation.  (“Humility” is the greatest 8-letter word and “Fearless” is the second greatest 8-letter word in succession with good reason.) To be clear, there is no man or woman who will have not had error or failure at some point in their vocational path or journey. Yet, Mr. Washington’s conception of “education” encompasses those who have erred and failed because a “truth so pure that you cannot be false in anything” permits a single man or woman to ascertain valuable and truthful lessons whether through triumph or tragedy. For this man or woman-the truly educated man or woman-never experiences “falsity [or failure] in anything” because he or she lives, learns and then leads others to wrest the valuable water of “knowledge”-the second greatest 9-letter word-from any dampening circumstance. Moreover, these men and women proceed undauntedly, unflinchingly and unwaveringly day-to-day, month-to-month and year-to-year to continuous and ongoing “success”-one of the greatest 7-letter words-without ever experiencing real “falsity” or “failure” in the truest sense of the words.  For never can a man or woman who possesses and applies the sort of education Mr. Washington established at Tuskegee University can ever rightly be called “false” or a “failure” because a truly educated man or woman ultimately views success and failure rightly according to the greatest 8-letter words: “Humility” and “Fearless,” which again are the greatest 8-letter words in succession.

 Booker T. Washington possessed many detractors who railed against the founding principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University for not being “active in politics.” In spite of this, we repeatedly find in his letters and correspondence that he was simply not “active” in the precise manner at the precise time that persons wanted him to be. Such was the case in his communication to William Boyd Allison. Although Mr. Washington was not loud, boisterous nor public in communicating the whole of his ideas and activities, he moved “in a rather quiet way” as demonstrated in this letter marked “personal and private.” Unlike those without such responsibilities, many leaders of large and vast organizations like Booker T. Washington are not at liberty to publicly communicate all of their opinions or activities directed towards particular ends. Whether in the 19th century where leaders communicated through pen and paper or in the 21st century where men and women communicate via email or social media, you will rarely find the most effective leaders revealing the whole of their minds and the whole of their undertakings upon a matter. (The weightier their position, the weightier their word.) It is a small and insignificant thing for a person who possesses no public reputation or great authority to offer opinion on highly charged political matters. Yet for a man in Booker T. Washington’s position, every move and word was scrutinized because of the eminence of his role and institution. For some 34 years, he was not simply Booker Washington; He was Booker Washington, principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University. As such, prudence dictated that he move “in a rather quiet way” on a great majority of matters for a great majority of his 34 years at the helm of Tuskegee (Institute) University.

In life, leadership and a host of other endeavors, one can hardly expect to move “forward” or “upward” while “stand[ing] still”. As the founding principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University eloquently articulates in one of his “Sunday Evening Talks” with students, “you are going to go backward or you are going to go forward.” To be sure, Mr. Washington’s idea of moving “forward,” “backward,” “upwards,” or “downwards” is not an absolute formula. There are a great many occasions where perceived “backward” movements propel individuals and organizations “forward,” and perceived “upward” movements move individuals and organizations “downward.” Notwithstanding, the idea contained in Mr. Washington’s aforementioned formulation speaks most precisely to “activity” or “inactivity,” which is otherwise known as, “stand[ing] still”. History and contemporary society are replete with examples of men, women and organizations whose constant activity have led to a single monumental success after many repeated failures. Yet, what is constant in both the successes and failures is “activity.” Mr. Washington has also described it as, “going”. And while it is true that busyness is not the same as effectiveness, it is equally true that the man, woman or organization that is busy “going” is more likely to become successful as opposed to those who are “standing still.”

The founding principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University was not only an affectionate father who wanted to hear from his sons, he was also a father that provided instruction to them as well. His namesake attended the Wellesley School for Boys in Wellesley, MA, and Mr. Edward Augustine Benner was principal of the school during young Booker’s tenure. Similar to his stewardship over the affairs of Mother Tuskegee, he equally considered important the stewardship over his children as a father. A consummate educator, his letters, speeches and writings demonstrate that he used every incident occurring in the walls of the university to provide object lessons to his students for their betterment. Similarly, he used the opportunity to inquire of his son’s well -being while simultaneously requesting that the principal make note of his recommendations concerning his son’s posture. Like a good teacher, Mr. Washington well understood that paternal love is not constrained to a demonstration of empathy and concern, it also involves correction. For love, empathy and concern properly understood involves both.