The annual Black History observance is a reflection of the current political climate, so how do we revamp it?
We are in Black History Month in the United Kingdom, and it feels like it’s time for a rethink. As time has passed, an celebration that started out as a celebration and reminder of heritage, traditions and links between Black populations worldwide, has adopted a business-like atmosphere, growing to encompass gatherings where Black people are compensated to address white audiences about “unconscious bias” and “allyship”. The 2020s Black Lives Matter protests created a surge in the enterprise of displaying cultural sensitivity. But even that moment has passed. The surge has crested, producing a diluted aftermath of what raising awareness is for.
The History of Black History Month
Originally observed in the United States and Canada, Black History Month was conceived in 1962 as an observance of African American heritage by historian of African descent Carter G. Woodson with multiple days of celebration and reflection in the middle of February. Black History Month evolved from this movement and was publicly established in 1970. Currently it is marked not only in the US and Canada in winter, but also in October in the Britain, Deutschland, the Republic of Ireland and the the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
The observance has developed since those days, giving reduced attention to the narratives of transatlantic enslavement and civil rights battles, and more on notable African descendants in public life, creative fields, and advocacy, and broadly celebrating the contribution Black people have made to mold society. It is in educational institutions where Black History Month is most commonly celebrated, with discussions and heritage festivities. But the manner the month is commemorated is a manifestation of the current political situation. How it progresses is a valuable example in how assimilation leads to dismantling: the restructuring of Black History Month has impeded the objective of it, which is to address systemic and institutional racism.
A Jarring Moment
Hardly anything shows how crucial it is to reevaluate Black History Month as much as the specific period in which it falls this year. In the United Kingdom, a revitalized conservative movement in the guise of the Reform party is leading the polls. In the recent season we observed the biggest extreme right demonstration in the UK's past. Kemi Badenoch, the Black leader of the Tory party, is a staunch adversary of anti-racism activism, and we are in a position where a elected representative feels emboldened to say that “not seeing any white faces” in specific city neighborhoods is a reason for concern. Simultaneously, far-right parties are growing in the European continent as a whole.
In the United States, a colossal assault against inclusion programs and preferential policies has been brought, frequently with success, to the top legal institutions of the state. A campaign to remove Black history and experience from the archives is in progress. One of Donald Trump's early administrative commands aimed at the museum of African American legacy, and the renowned cultural organization, alleging that they of a coordinated and broad attempt to rewrite our Nation’s history” by portraying America “as naturally discriminatory”.
Given these circumstances, the observance represents how minimally it can be effective if it is confined to either routine organizational acknowledgments, or depoliticized commemorations of contributions in the past, rather than addressing the conditions of the current era. It also demonstrates how its restricted time span means that it is separated from the wider consistent effort that is required. Denise Miller, a prof at University of Greenwich, put it best when she raised concerns about the temporary “tokenism” of the observance. “The problem with embracing a superficial method”, she wrote, “is that it often means that Black History Month turns into a fleeting performance rather than a driver of transformation.”
Reevaluating, Not Abandoning
Figuring out how to alter, change and broaden efforts for equal rights and acknowledgment 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, thinking they are simply not fit for purpose, or are vestiges of an era that has failed to deliver.
Yet, in spite of all this, Black History Month, and in fact the whole broad system and tradition of racial movements – community-based BLM initiatives, diversity equity and inclusion initiatives, and certainly, even commercial engagements – represent an infrastructure that a considerable labor has been dedicated to. It is there not just to decay as the political landscape shifts (and in fact, deteriorates), but to be a vital organism.
So what would a contemporary active Black History Month appear as? Firstly, it would be not just one concentrated month: something that is spread out throughout the annual calendar (as various establishments are already commencing), sections of its curriculum (particularly around prominent figures of color) integrated into educational programs. It would also be a era that does not evade governmental matters, and provides room for individuals, particularly young people, to express their concerns and stories. What value has basic knowledge of the past when it fails to address the contemporary truth of ultra-nationalist gatherings in the street? Organizations who observe it should not be reassured with the neutral terminology of implicit prejudice and alertness to subtle slights, but faced with the dangers that impact society if anti-racism is not taken seriously. To summarize, Black History Month should be made contemporary, urgent, and reactive. Maybe an entire name rebrand is necessary – Contemporary Black History Month.