This commemorative month is a reflection of the political moment, so how do we revamp it?
It's Black History Month in the United Kingdom, and it appears it’s time for a reassessment. Over the years, an celebration that started out as a festivity and recollection of heritage, traditions and links between Black populations worldwide, has taken on a business-like atmosphere, expanding to include gatherings where Black people are remunerated to speak with white audiences about hidden biases and active solidarity. The 2020s Black Lives Matter protests sparked an increase in the enterprise of displaying cultural sensitivity. But even that moment has passed. The surge has peaked, leaving a sort of hollowed out legacy of what increasing understanding is for.
The Origins of Black History Observance
Initially celebrated in the America and its northern neighbor, Black History Month was established in 1962 as an observance of African American heritage by historian of African descent Carter G. Woodson with seven days of celebration and reflection in the middle of February. Black History Month developed from this movement and was publicly established in 1970. Now it is celebrated not only in the United States and Canada in the second month, but also in the tenth month in the Britain, the Federal Republic of Germany, Éire and the the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
The month has developed since its inception, placing less emphasis on the histories of the slave trade across the Atlantic and struggles for equality, and more on influential individuals of color in politics, culture, and activism, and broadly celebrating the impact Black people have made to mold society. It is in educational institutions where Black History Month is most regularly observed, with discussions and heritage festivities. But the way the celebration is celebrated is a indication of the contemporary political context. How it evolves is a valuable example in how assimilation leads to erosion: the transformation of Black History Month has impeded the purpose of it, which is to confront systemic and institutional racism.
A Jarring Moment
Few things illustrate how critical it is to rethink Black History Month better than the particular moment in which it occurs this year. In the UK, a revitalized conservative movement in the shape of the Reform political group is ahead in surveys. In the recent season we saw the biggest extreme right demonstration in British history. Kemi Badenoch, the African descendant in charge of the right-wing political group, is a strong critic of Black Lives Matter, and we are in a position where a member of parliament gains confidence to say that “not seeing any white faces” in certain urban areas is a cause for alarm. Meanwhile, extreme conservative groups are surging in Europe as a whole.
In the US, a colossal assault against inclusion programs and preferential policies has been taken, often successfully, to the top legal institutions of the country. A campaign to erase the history of people of color and narrative from the archives is in progress. One of the political figure's first executive orders targeted the National Museum of African American History and Culture, and the Smithsonian Institution, claiming they of a “concerted and widespread effort to rewrite our Nation’s history” by portraying America “as naturally discriminatory”.
Given these circumstances, the month illustrates how insufficiently it can be influential if it is confined to either dutiful corporate observances, or depoliticized festivities of former accomplishments, rather than confronting the realities of the contemporary world. It also demonstrates how its restricted time span means that it is disconnected from the wider consistent effort that is necessary. A university professor, a educator at a learning establishment, articulated it most accurately when she expressed apprehension about the short-term symbolic gestures of the month. “The issue with adopting a symbolic stance”, she commented, “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
Determining how to adjust, modify and expand efforts for fair treatment and appreciation in such moments of dejection and worry is a treacherous thing. There is a temptation to just eliminate events including Black History Month entirely, thinking they are no longer suitable, or are relics of an period that has been ineffective.
However, regardless of the situation, Black History Month, and in fact the whole broad system and legacy of racial movements – local anti-racism groups, DEI programs, and certainly, even commercial engagements – constitute an infrastructure that a significant effort has been dedicated to. It is there not only to deteriorate as the situation evolves (and in fact, regresses), but to be a dynamic entity.
So what would a fresh vibrant Black History Month look like? Well, first, it would be more than a single focused period: something that is distributed throughout the annual calendar (as some institutions are already beginning to do), sections of its curriculum (particularly around historic Black characters) incorporated into academic syllabi. It would also be a time that does not avoid governmental matters, and leaves space for individuals, particularly the younger generation, to express their concerns and stories. What use is basic knowledge of the history when it ignores the present reality of far-right rallies in the street? Organizations who celebrate it should not be pacified with the neutral terminology of implicit prejudice and alertness to “microaggressions”, but confronted with the dangers that affect everyone if fight against prejudice is not taken seriously. In short, Black History Month should be made up-to-date, urgent, and reactive. Perhaps an complete renaming is necessary – Contemporary Black History Month.
