The annual Black History observance serves as a mirror of the prevailing political atmosphere, so in what ways can we modernize it?
This is Black History Month in the United Kingdom, and it seems it’s time for a re-evaluation. Throughout its history, an celebration that was initiated as a celebration and reminder of the past, cultural identity and bonds between international African diaspora communities, has taken on a business-like atmosphere, broadening to incorporate events where African descendants are remunerated to speak with white audiences about hidden biases and “allyship”. The anti-racism rallies of the last decade sparked an increase in the industry of displaying cultural sensitivity. However, that period has concluded. The tide has crested, producing a diluted aftermath of what promoting consciousness is for.
The Background of Black History Month
Originally observed in the United States and Canada, Black History Month was conceived in 1962 as a week dedicated to Negro history by African American historian Carter G. Woodson with a week of commemoration and observance in the February's second week. Black History Month developed from this movement and was formally inaugurated in 1970. Currently it is marked not only in the US and Canada in February, but also in the tenth month in the UK, the Federal Republic of Germany, Ireland and the the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
The observance has evolved since that time, giving reduced attention to the accounts of transatlantic enslavement and fights for racial justice, and more on prominent Black figures in public life, creative fields, and advocacy, and broadly celebrating the input Black people have made to influence the nation. It is in learning environments where Black History Month is most regularly observed, with discussions and heritage festivities. But the manner the observance is celebrated is a indication of the current political situation. How it develops is a valuable example in how co-option leads to weakening: the restructuring of Black History Month has stymied the purpose of it, which is to tackle structural and organizational discrimination.
A Disconcerting Period
Few things illustrate how important it is to reevaluate Black History Month better than the particular moment in which it falls this year. In the Britain, a revitalized conservative movement in the form of the Reform political group is leading the polls. In the summer we saw the biggest extreme right demonstration in British history. Kemi Badenoch, the person of color at the helm of the Conservative party, is a strong critic of anti-racism activism, and we are in a position where a legislator feels emboldened to declare that “not seeing any white faces” in specific city neighborhoods is a cause for alarm. At the same time, extreme conservative groups are expanding in Europe as a whole.
In the US, a colossal assault against inclusion programs and preferential policies has been brought, frequently with success, to the supreme judicial bodies of the state. A effort to remove African American heritage and experience from the historical documents is under way. One of the political figure's first executive orders focused on the National Museum of African American History and Culture, and the renowned cultural organization, accusing them of a organized and extensive campaign to alter the country's historical narrative” by representing the nation “as naturally discriminatory”.
Given these circumstances, the month illustrates how insufficiently it can be impactful if it is confined to either routine organizational acknowledgments, or depoliticized festivities of historical achievements, rather than addressing the situation of the contemporary world. It also demonstrates how its restricted time span means that it is separated from the broader ongoing work that is required. An academic expert, a prof at a learning establishment, put it best when she expressed apprehension about the temporary “tokenism” of the celebration. “The problem with taking a tokenistic approach”, she stated, “is that it often means that Black History Month evolves into a transient display rather than a catalyst for change.”
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 temptation to just do away with things like Black History Month completely, assuming they are simply not fit for purpose, or are relics of an era that has not worked.
Yet, in spite of all this, Black History Month, and in fact the entire extended network and tradition of activism for racial justice – local anti-racism groups, DEI programs, and certainly, even commercial engagements – form an infrastructure 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 living breathing thing.
So what would a new dynamic Black History Month look like? Well, first, it would be more than a single focused period: something that is spread out across all seasons (as some institutions are already commencing), sections of its curriculum (particularly around prominent figures of color) incorporated into academic syllabi. It would also be a period that does not avoid governmental matters, and provides room for citizens, particularly youth, to express their concerns and stories. What purpose serves simple recognition of the history when it fails to address the present reality of ultra-nationalist gatherings in the street? Establishments who mark it should not be comforted with the non-confrontational words of implicit prejudice and sensitivity to minor insults, but challenged by the risks that face all if anti-racism is not taken seriously. To summarize, Black History Month should be made current, pressing, and responsive. It could be that an complete renaming is in order – Contemporary Black History Month.
