Black History Month serves as a mirror of the current political climate, so what steps can we take to refresh it?
We are in Black History Month in the United Kingdom, and it seems it’s time for a rethink. Over the years, an observance that started out as a festivity and recollection of heritage, traditions and links between Black populations worldwide, has taken on a corporate feel, expanding to include gatherings where Black people are paid to speak with predominantly white listeners about implicit prejudice and supportive partnership. The 2020s Black Lives Matter protests created a surge in the industry of demonstrating racial awareness. Yet, that phase is now over. The surge has reached its height, producing a diluted aftermath of what increasing understanding is for.
The Origins of Black History Month
Originally observed in the America and its northern neighbor, Black History Month was conceived in 1962 as an observance of African American heritage by historian of African descent Carter G. Woodson with a week of celebration and reflection in the middle of February. Black History Month developed from this movement and was formally inaugurated in 1970. Currently it is marked not only in the United States and Canada in the second month, but also in the tenth month in the Britain, Deutschland, the Republic of Ireland and the Holland.
The observance has developed since those days, placing less emphasis on the histories of the slave trade across the Atlantic and fights for racial justice, and increasingly on influential individuals of color in government, the arts, and social movements, and extensively acknowledging the input Black people have made to influence the nation. It is in educational institutions where Black History Month is most commonly celebrated, with talks and cultural events. But the method the celebration is observed is a manifestation of the contemporary political context. How it develops is a valuable example in how appropriation leads to dismantling: the reshaping of Black History Month has impeded the objective of it, which is to tackle embedded and established prejudice.
A Jarring Moment
Few things illustrate how important it is to reevaluate Black History Month better than the current time in which it occurs this year. In the Britain, a reemerging right-wing in the shape of the Reform political group is ahead in surveys. In the summer we observed the most significant ultra-conservative gathering in the UK's past. Kemi Badenoch, the African descendant in charge of the Tory party, is a firm opponent of Black Lives Matter, and we are in a situation where a legislator gains confidence to state that a lack of white people in certain urban areas is a cause for alarm. At the same time, far-right parties are surging in the European continent as a entirety.
In the United States, a significant offensive against diversity initiatives and positive discrimination has been brought, often successfully, to the top legal institutions of the state. A drive to remove the history of people of color and experience from the records is in progress. One of the former president's initial presidential directives targeted the National Museum of African American History and Culture, and the Smithsonian Institution, alleging that they of a “concerted and widespread effort to rewrite our Nation’s history” by representing the nation “as inherently racist”.
Given these circumstances, the month illustrates how little it can be effective if it is confined to either obligatory business commemorations, or stripped of political content celebrations of historical achievements, rather than addressing the situation of the present. It also shows how its short period means that it is separated from the more extensive continuous action that is necessary. A university professor, a professor at University of Greenwich, articulated it most accurately when she expressed apprehension about the temporary “tokenism” of the month. “The problem with adopting a symbolic stance”, she stated, “is that it typically leads to that Black History Month turns into a fleeting performance rather than a catalyst for change.”
Rethinking, But Not Jettisoning
Establishing how to adjust, modify and expand efforts for equal rights and acknowledgment in such times of discouragement and concern is a treacherous thing. There is a inclination to just do away with events including Black History Month altogether, assuming they are simply not fit for purpose, or are vestiges of an era that has failed to deliver.
But despite everything, Black History Month, and in fact the whole broad system and legacy of activism for racial justice – grassroots Black Lives Matter organisations, DEI programs, and yes, even those talks to businesses – represent an infrastructure that a lot of work has been dedicated to. It is there not only to deteriorate as the political landscape shifts (and in fact, regresses), but to be a dynamic entity.
So what would a fresh vibrant Black History Month look like? Firstly, it would be more than a single focused period: something that is dispersed across all seasons (as various establishments are already commencing), parts of its content (particularly around prominent figures of color) incorporated into academic syllabi. It would also be a time that does not avoid governmental matters, and provides room for people, particularly the younger generation, to air their fears and experiences. What purpose serves simple recognition of the history when it ignores the present reality of ultra-nationalist gatherings in the urban areas? Institutions who observe it should not be pacified with the non-confrontational words of “unconscious bias” and sensitivity to “microaggressions”, but confronted with the dangers that affect everyone if opposition to discrimination is not treated with importance. In short, Black History Month should be made contemporary, pressing, and responsive. It could be that an complete renaming is required – Contemporary Black History Month.
