The annual Black History observance serves as a mirror of the current political climate, so in what ways can we modernize it?
It's Black History Month in the United Kingdom, and it appears it’s time for a re-evaluation. Over the years, an celebration that began as a celebration and reminder of history, culture and the connections between global Black communities, has developed a commercial tone, broadening to incorporate functions where individuals of African heritage are compensated to talk to predominantly white listeners about implicit prejudice and active solidarity. The anti-racism rallies of the last decade created a surge in the enterprise of showcasing anti-racist commitment. However, that period has concluded. The wave has peaked, leaving a sort of hollowed out legacy of what increasing understanding is for.
The Background of Black History Celebration
First commemorated in the United States and Canada, Black History Month was established in 1962 as a week dedicated to Negro history by Black scholar Carter G. Woodson with multiple days of commemoration and observance in the second week of February. Black History Month grew out of this campaign and was publicly established in 1970. Currently it is marked not only in the North America in winter, but also in the tenth month in the UK, Germany, the Republic of Ireland and the Netherlands.
The month has developed since those days, placing less emphasis on the accounts of transatlantic enslavement and struggles for equality, and more on prominent Black figures in public life, creative fields, and advocacy, and widely honoring the impact Black people have made to influence the nation. It is in educational institutions where Black History Month is most commonly celebrated, with discussions and heritage festivities. But the manner the observance is commemorated is a reflection of the current political situation. How it develops is a good lesson in how assimilation leads to dismantling: the restructuring of Black History Month has impeded the objective of it, which is to confront structural and organizational discrimination.
A Jarring Moment
Few things illustrate how important it is to reevaluate Black History Month more than the specific period in which it occurs this year. In the United Kingdom, a revitalized conservative movement in the guise of the Reform organization is leading the polls. In the recent season we witnessed the largest far-right rally in the history of Britain. the Conservative leader, the African descendant in charge of the Tory party, is a firm opponent of Black Lives Matter, and we are in a situation where a elected representative gains confidence to state that “not seeing any white faces” in specific city neighborhoods is a reason for concern. At the same time, extreme conservative groups are surging in the EU as a whole.
In the United States, a significant offensive against DEI and affirmative action has been taken, repeatedly with positive outcomes, to the supreme judicial bodies of the country. A drive to remove the history of people of color and legacy from the archives is under way. One of the political figure's first executive orders focused on the museum of African American legacy, and the Smithsonian Institution, accusing them of a “concerted and widespread effort to change the national past” by representing the nation “as naturally discriminatory”.
Given these circumstances, the observance represents how minimally it can be impactful if it is confined to either obligatory business commemorations, or depoliticized commemorations of historical achievements, rather than confronting the conditions of the present. It also shows how its restricted time span means that it is separated from the broader ongoing work that is necessary. An academic expert, a prof at an educational institution, expressed it perfectly when she raised concerns about the short-term symbolic gestures of the observance. “The difficulty with taking a tokenistic approach”, she stated, “is that it frequently results in that Black History Month evolves into a fleeting performance rather than a driver of transformation.”
Rethinking, But Not Jettisoning
Determining how to adjust, modify and expand initiatives for fair treatment and appreciation in such periods of dismay and anxiety is a challenging endeavor. There is a urge to just discontinue events including Black History Month completely, believing they are simply not fit for purpose, or are vestiges of an time that has been ineffective.
However, regardless of the situation, Black History Month, and in fact the entire extended network and legacy of campaigns for equality – community-based BLM initiatives, inclusion and equity efforts, and indeed, including corporate presentations – constitute an framework that a lot of work has been dedicated to. It is there not merely to decline as the politics moves on (and in fact, deteriorates), but to be a dynamic entity.
So what would a new dynamic Black History Month look like? To begin with, it would be not just one concentrated month: something that is dispersed through the year (as various establishments are already commencing), sections of its curriculum (particularly around historic Black characters) included in educational programs. It would also be a period that does not avoid politics, and allows opportunity for people, particularly youth, to share their anxieties and narratives. What use is mere awareness of the bygone era when it ignores the present reality of far-right rallies in the urban areas? Institutions who celebrate it should not be comforted with the passive language of implicit prejudice and awareness of minor insults, but faced with the dangers that affect everyone if anti-racism is not treated with importance. To summarize, Black History Month should be made contemporary, urgent, and reactive. Maybe an complete renaming is necessary – Black History is Now Month.
