Black History Month acts as a gauge of the prevailing political atmosphere, so how do we revamp it?
It's Black History Month in the United Kingdom, and it appears it’s time for a re-evaluation. Over the years, an observance that was initiated as a commemorative event of the past, cultural identity and bonds between Black populations worldwide, has adopted a business-like atmosphere, expanding to include gatherings where individuals of African heritage are paid to talk to white audiences about hidden biases and active solidarity. The demonstrations for racial justice in the 2020s generated a rise in the enterprise of demonstrating racial awareness. However, that period has concluded. The tide has reached its height, resulting in a somewhat empty inheritance of what promoting consciousness is for.
The History of Black History Observance
Initially celebrated in the US and Canada, Black History Month was established in 1962 as “Negro History Week” by historian of African descent Carter G. Woodson with multiple days of celebration and reflection in the second week of February. Black History Month grew out of this initiative and was formally inaugurated in 1970. Today it is observed not only in the US and Canada in the second month, but also in October in the Britain, the Federal Republic of Germany, Ireland and the Netherlands.
The observance has evolved since that time, focusing less on the accounts of the slave trade across the Atlantic and fights for racial justice, and greater focus on influential individuals of color in politics, culture, and activism, and widely honoring the contribution Black people have made to shape the country. It is in schools where Black History Month is most frequently marked, with discussions and heritage festivities. But the way the month is commemorated is a manifestation of the political moment. How it progresses is a good lesson in how assimilation leads to dismantling: the restructuring of Black History Month has impeded the purpose of it, which is to tackle structural and organizational discrimination.
A Jarring Moment
Few things illustrate how important it is to rethink Black History Month more than the particular moment in which it falls this year. In the UK, a revitalized conservative movement in the form of the Reform political group is leading the polls. In the summer we witnessed the largest far-right rally in the UK's past. Kemi Badenoch, the Black leader of the Tory party, is a firm opponent of the racial justice movement, and we are in a place where a member of parliament feels emboldened to declare that “not seeing any white faces” in parts of a city is a cause for alarm. Meanwhile, far-right parties are expanding in the European continent as a entirety.
In the America, a significant offensive against inclusion programs and preferential policies has been brought, frequently with success, to the highest courts of the country. A campaign to scrub the history of people of color and legacy from the records is in progress. One of the former president's early administrative commands focused on the museum of African American legacy, and the Smithsonian Institution, alleging that they of a organized and extensive campaign to alter the country's historical narrative” by depicting the United States “as fundamentally prejudiced”.
In this context, the month represents how insufficiently it can be impactful if it is confined to either obligatory business commemorations, or politically neutered commemorations of contributions in the past, rather than confronting the situation of the contemporary world. It also reveals how its limited duration means that it is detached from the broader ongoing work that is necessary. Denise Miller, a educator at a learning establishment, expressed it perfectly when she raised concerns about the temporary “tokenism” of the month. “The issue with adopting a symbolic stance”, she wrote, “is that it typically leads to that Black History Month turns into a brief show rather than a driver of transformation.”
Reconsidering, Not Discarding
Determining how to adjust, modify and expand initiatives for racial equality and recognition in such periods of dismay and anxiety is a treacherous thing. There is a urge to just discontinue events including Black History Month altogether, assuming they are inadequate for current needs, or are vestiges of an period that has not worked.
Yet, in spite of all this, Black History Month, and in fact the whole broad system and tradition of activism for racial justice – local anti-racism groups, DEI programs, and yes, even those talks to businesses – form an framework that a considerable labor has been dedicated to. It is there not merely to decline as the political landscape shifts (and in fact, declines), but to be a living breathing thing.
So what would a fresh vibrant Black History Month seem? Firstly, it would be not just one concentrated month: something that is distributed throughout the annual calendar (as various establishments are already commencing), elements of its material (particularly around notable African descendants) integrated into academic syllabi. It would also be a time that does not evade politics, and leaves space for individuals, particularly the younger generation, to express their concerns and stories. What use is mere awareness of the past when it ignores the contemporary truth of extreme conservative demonstrations in the street? Institutions who mark it should not be comforted with the neutral terminology of implicit prejudice and sensitivity to minor insults, but confronted with the risks that impact society if fight against prejudice is not approached earnestly. To summarize, Black History Month should be made contemporary, critical, and responsive. Maybe an complete renaming is necessary – Black History is Now Month.
