Black History Month is a reflection of the prevailing political atmosphere, so in what ways can we modernize it?
It's Black History Month in the UK, and it seems it’s time for a re-evaluation. As time has passed, an observance that was initiated as a festivity and recollection of the past, cultural identity and bonds between international African diaspora communities, has taken on a corporate feel, expanding to include events where African descendants are compensated to address predominantly white listeners about implicit prejudice and supportive partnership. The anti-racism rallies of the last decade sparked an increase in the business of displaying cultural sensitivity. However, that period has concluded. The tide has crested, resulting in a somewhat empty inheritance of what raising awareness is for.
The Origins of Black History Month
Initially celebrated in the America and its northern neighbor, Black History Month was created in 1962 as an observance of African American heritage by African American historian Carter G. Woodson with a week of commemoration and observance in the middle of February. Black History Month developed from this movement and was formally inaugurated in 1970. Today it is observed not only in the US and Canada in February, but also in autumn in the Britain, the Federal Republic of Germany, Ireland and the Holland.
The period has developed since its inception, placing less emphasis on the histories of transatlantic enslavement and struggles for equality, and greater focus on influential individuals of color in government, the arts, and social movements, and widely honoring the input Black people have made to mold society. It is in learning environments where Black History Month is most frequently marked, with talks and cultural events. But the method the month is commemorated is a reflection of the political moment. How it progresses is a good lesson in how assimilation leads to erosion: the reshaping of Black History Month has impeded the point of it, which is to tackle embedded and established prejudice.
A Jarring Moment
Little demonstrates how critical it is to reevaluate Black History Month as much as the specific period in which it falls this year. In the UK, a resurgent right in the form of the Reform political group is top in opinion ratings. In the recent season we observed the biggest extreme right demonstration in the history of Britain. Kemi Badenoch, the African descendant in charge of the Tory party, is a staunch adversary of Black Lives Matter, and we are in a position where a legislator gains confidence to declare that the absence of Caucasian individuals in certain urban areas is a cause for alarm. Meanwhile, ultra-nationalist movements are growing in the European continent as a complete entity.
In the United States, a significant offensive against inclusion programs and preferential policies has been brought, repeatedly with positive outcomes, to the top legal institutions of the state. A drive to scrub the history of people of color and narrative from the records is in progress. One of Donald Trump's first executive orders targeted the institution dedicated to Black heritage, and the Smithsonian Institution, accusing them of a coordinated and broad attempt to change the national past” by portraying America “as inherently racist”.
Against this backdrop, the observance symbolises how minimally it can be influential if it is restricted to either obligatory business commemorations, or politically neutered festivities of former accomplishments, rather than confronting the situation of the present. It also reveals how its restricted time span means that it is detached from the broader ongoing work that is required. Denise Miller, a prof at an educational institution, put it best when she raised concerns about the short-term symbolic gestures of the month. “The problem with taking a tokenistic approach”, she commented, “is that it frequently results in that Black History Month evolves into a fleeting performance rather than a agent of progress.”
Reevaluating, Not Abandoning
Figuring out how to alter, change and broaden initiatives for fair treatment and appreciation in such times of discouragement and concern is a difficult task. There is a temptation to just do away with things like Black History Month entirely, believing they are simply not fit for purpose, or are vestiges of an period that has not worked.
However, regardless of the situation, Black History Month, and in fact the complete comprehensive structure and tradition of campaigns for equality – community-based BLM initiatives, DEI programs, and indeed, including corporate presentations – form an framework that a lot of work has gone into. It is there not just to decay as the political landscape shifts (and in fact, regresses), but to be a vital organism.
So what would a contemporary active Black History Month appear as? Firstly, it would be more than a single focused period: something that is dispersed across all seasons (as certain organizations are already beginning to do), elements of its material (particularly around prominent figures of color) integrated into academic syllabi. It would also be a era that does not shy away from governmental matters, and provides room for citizens, particularly young people, to air their fears and experiences. What use is mere awareness of the bygone era when it fails to address the contemporary truth of extreme conservative demonstrations in the street? Establishments who mark it should not be comforted with the neutral terminology of hidden discrimination and awareness of minor insults, but confronted with the dangers that impact society if opposition to discrimination is not treated with importance. In short, Black History Month should be made contemporary, critical, and adaptive. It could be that an complete renaming is in order – Contemporary Black History Month.
