The annual Black History observance acts as a gauge of the political moment, so how do we revamp it?
We are in Black History Month in the United Kingdom, and it seems it’s time for a rethink. Over the years, an event that began as a festivity and recollection of history, culture and the connections between international African diaspora communities, has adopted a corporate feel, growing to encompass functions where African descendants are paid to address Caucasian groups about “unconscious bias” and active solidarity. The anti-racism rallies of the last decade sparked an increase in the industry of displaying cultural sensitivity. Yet, that phase is now over. The tide has reached its height, resulting in a somewhat empty inheritance of what raising awareness is for.
The Background of Black History Observance
First commemorated in the America and its northern neighbor, Black History Month was created in 1962 as an observance of African American heritage by historian of African descent Carter G. Woodson with multiple days of commemoration and observance in the middle of February. Black History Month evolved from this initiative and was officially launched in 1970. Now it is celebrated not only in the United States and Canada in February, but also in October in the United Kingdom, Germany, Éire and the Netherlands.
The observance has developed since that time, focusing less on the accounts of the slave trade across the Atlantic and fights for racial justice, and increasingly on prominent Black figures in public life, creative fields, and advocacy, and broadly celebrating the impact Black people have made to influence the nation. It is in learning environments where Black History Month is most frequently marked, with discussions and heritage festivities. But the manner the observance is celebrated is a manifestation of the political moment. How it progresses is a instructive case in how co-option leads to dismantling: the reshaping of Black History Month has hindered the point of it, which is to confront embedded and established prejudice.
A Troubling Time
Hardly anything shows how crucial it is to reevaluate Black History Month more than the specific period in which it takes place this year. In the United Kingdom, a reemerging right-wing in the shape of the Reform political group is top in opinion ratings. In the summer we saw the largest far-right rally in the history of Britain. Kemi Badenoch, the person of color at the helm of the Conservative party, is a firm opponent of the racial justice movement, and we are in a place where a member of parliament feels emboldened to state that the absence of Caucasian individuals in parts of a city is a cause for alarm. Meanwhile, ultra-nationalist movements are expanding in Europe as a whole.
In the America, a colossal assault against DEI and affirmative action has been brought, repeatedly with positive outcomes, to the top legal institutions of the country. A effort to scrub African American heritage and narrative from the records is under way. One of the political figure's first executive orders focused on the institution dedicated to Black heritage, and the renowned cultural organization, accusing them of a “concerted and widespread effort to alter the country's historical narrative” by representing the nation “as fundamentally prejudiced”.
In this context, the celebration illustrates how little it can be influential if it is limited to either routine organizational acknowledgments, or politically neutered commemorations of contributions in the past, rather than confronting the situation of the current era. It also demonstrates how its short period means that it is detached from the more extensive continuous action that is necessary. A university professor, a prof at an educational institution, expressed it perfectly when she expressed apprehension about the short-term symbolic gestures of the observance. “The difficulty with adopting a symbolic stance”, she commented, “is that it often means that Black History Month turns into a transient display rather than a catalyst for change.”
Rethinking, But Not Jettisoning
Establishing how to alter, change and broaden initiatives for fair treatment and appreciation in such times of discouragement and concern is a challenging endeavor. There is a inclination to just eliminate things like Black History Month entirely, believing they are inadequate for current needs, or are vestiges of an period that has not worked.
But despite everything, Black History Month, and in fact the whole broad system and heritage of activism for racial justice – community-based BLM initiatives, inclusion and equity efforts, and certainly, even commercial engagements – represent an framework that a considerable labor has gone into. It is there not merely to decline as the political landscape shifts (and in fact, regresses), 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 spread out across all seasons (as various establishments are already starting to implement), sections of its curriculum (particularly around historic Black characters) integrated into academic syllabi. It would also be a period that does not avoid politics, and allows opportunity for individuals, particularly the younger generation, to express their concerns and stories. What value has mere awareness of the history when it fails to address the present reality of ultra-nationalist gatherings in the street? Institutions who mark it should not be reassured with the non-confrontational words of hidden discrimination and alertness to “microaggressions”, but challenged by the risks that face all if opposition to discrimination is not taken seriously. Briefly stated, Black History Month should be made up-to-date, pressing, and reactive. Perhaps an entire name rebrand is necessary – Contemporary Black History Month.
