Black History Month is a reflection of the political moment, so what steps can we take to refresh it?
We are in Black History Month in the Britain, and it feels like it’s time for a re-evaluation. Over the years, an event that was initiated as a celebration and reminder of heritage, traditions and links between global Black communities, has developed a business-like atmosphere, growing to encompass events where Black people are compensated to address Caucasian groups about implicit prejudice and supportive partnership. The demonstrations for racial justice in the 2020s created a surge in the industry of showcasing anti-racist commitment. Yet, that phase is now over. The tide has crested, leaving a sort of hollowed out legacy of what promoting consciousness is for.
The History of Black History Celebration
Initially celebrated in the America and its northern neighbor, Black History Month was created in 1962 as a week dedicated to Negro history by historian of African descent Carter G. Woodson with a week of celebration and reflection in the second week of February. Black History Month grew out of this initiative and was officially launched in 1970. Today it is observed not only in the US and Canada in February, but also in autumn in the Britain, Deutschland, the Republic of Ireland and the Netherlands.
The observance has transformed since its inception, placing less emphasis on the narratives of the slave trade across the Atlantic and struggles for equality, and greater focus on influential individuals of color in public life, creative fields, and advocacy, and widely honoring the impact Black people have made to shape the country. It is in educational institutions where Black History Month is most commonly celebrated, with lectures and artistic activities. But the manner the celebration is commemorated is a reflection of the political moment. How it progresses is a instructive case in how assimilation leads to weakening: the reshaping of Black History Month has hindered the purpose of it, which is to tackle structural and organizational discrimination.
A Disconcerting Period
Little demonstrates how critical it is to reevaluate Black History Month more than the specific period in which it takes place this year. In the Britain, a resurgent right in the guise of the Reform party is top in opinion ratings. In the warmer months we witnessed the biggest extreme right demonstration in the UK's past. Kemi Badenoch, the person of color at the helm of the Conservative party, is a staunch adversary of the racial justice movement, and we are in a place where a legislator gains confidence to say that “not seeing any white faces” in parts of a city is a source of worry. Simultaneously, far-right parties are growing in Europe as a entirety.
In the America, a massive attack against inclusion programs and preferential policies has been taken, repeatedly with positive outcomes, to the supreme judicial bodies of the nation. A effort to scrub African American heritage and narrative from the historical documents is ongoing. One of the political figure's first executive orders targeted the National Museum of African American History and Culture, and the renowned cultural organization, claiming they of a “concerted and widespread effort to alter the country's historical narrative” by portraying America “as fundamentally prejudiced”.
Given these circumstances, the month symbolises how little it can be impactful if it is limited to either routine organizational acknowledgments, or stripped of political content celebrations of former accomplishments, rather than challenging the conditions of the contemporary world. It also demonstrates how its short period means that it is disconnected from the wider consistent effort that is needed. Denise Miller, a professor at University of Greenwich, put it best when she expressed apprehension about the fleeting superficial actions of the month. “The problem with adopting a symbolic stance”, she commented, “is that it typically leads to that Black History Month turns into a brief show rather than a agent of progress.”
Rethinking, But Not Jettisoning
Determining how to adapt, revise and extend initiatives for equal rights and acknowledgment in such periods of dismay and anxiety is a challenging endeavor. There is a urge to just do away with events including Black History Month completely, thinking they are inadequate for current needs, or are remnants of an era that has not worked.
Yet, in spite of all this, Black History Month, and in fact the whole broad system and heritage of racial movements – community-based BLM initiatives, DEI programs, and certainly, even commercial engagements – constitute an infrastructure that a significant effort has gone into. It is there not just to decay as the situation evolves (and in fact, declines), but to be a living breathing thing.
So what would a new dynamic Black History Month seem? Well, first, it would be not just one concentrated month: something that is distributed throughout the annual calendar (as certain organizations are already beginning to do), sections of its curriculum (particularly around notable African descendants) incorporated into educational programs. It would also be a era that does not avoid governmental matters, and provides room for citizens, particularly the younger generation, to share their anxieties and narratives. What value has simple recognition of the past when it ignores the present reality of far-right rallies in the street? Institutions who mark it should not be pacified with the neutral terminology of implicit prejudice and alertness to “microaggressions”, but challenged by the risks that face all if anti-racism is not taken seriously. In short, Black History Month should be made contemporary, urgent, and adaptive. Maybe an entire name rebrand is necessary – Present-Day African Heritage Celebration.
