🔗 Share this article

We are in Black History Month in the Britain, and it appears it’s time for a reassessment. Over the years, an celebration that began as a commemorative event of heritage, traditions and links between Black populations worldwide, has adopted a business-like atmosphere, growing to encompass functions where Black people are paid to talk to white audiences about hidden biases and active solidarity. The anti-racism rallies of the last decade sparked an increase in the industry of demonstrating racial awareness. Yet, that phase is now over. The wave has crested, producing a diluted aftermath of what promoting consciousness is for.

The Background of Black History Month

First commemorated in the United States and Canada, Black History Month was conceived in 1962 as “Negro History Week” by African American historian Carter G. Woodson with multiple days of remembrance and recognition in the middle of February. 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 winter, but also in autumn in the Britain, Germany, Éire and the Holland.

The observance has developed since those days, giving reduced attention to the accounts of the slave trade across the Atlantic and struggles for equality, and increasingly on influential individuals of color in government, the arts, and social movements, and extensively acknowledging the input Black people have made to mold society. It is in educational institutions where Black History Month is most frequently marked, with talks and cultural events. But the method the observance is observed is a reflection of the political moment. How it develops is a instructive case in how co-option leads to dismantling: the restructuring of Black History Month has hindered the objective of it, which is to address structural and organizational discrimination.

---

A Jarring Moment

Little demonstrates how crucial it is to reconsider Black History Month better than the specific period in which it occurs this year. In the UK, a reemerging right-wing in the form of the Reform political group is top in opinion ratings. In the warmer months we observed the most significant ultra-conservative gathering in the history of Britain. the Conservative leader, the person of color at the helm of the Conservative party, is a staunch adversary of Black Lives Matter, and we are in a position where a legislator feels emboldened to state that the absence of Caucasian individuals in certain urban areas is a cause for alarm. At the same time, far-right parties are surging in the EU as a whole.

In the United States, a massive attack against diversity initiatives and positive discrimination has been taken, frequently with success, to the top legal institutions of the state. A effort to remove Black history and legacy from the archives is ongoing. One of the political figure's initial presidential directives targeted 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”.

Against this backdrop, the month illustrates how little it can be impactful if it is limited to either obligatory business commemorations, or depoliticized festivities of historical achievements, rather than challenging the situation of the present. It also reveals how its limited duration means that it is detached from the wider consistent effort that is required. A university professor, a professor at an educational institution, articulated it most accurately when she expressed apprehension about the fleeting superficial actions of the observance. “The issue with adopting a symbolic stance”, she commented, “is that it often means that Black History Month becomes a brief show rather than a driver of transformation.”

---

Reevaluating, Not Abandoning

Establishing how to adapt, revise and extend efforts for racial equality and recognition in such moments of dejection and worry is a difficult task. There is a temptation to just do away with observances such as Black History Month completely, assuming they are simply not fit for purpose, or are remnants of an time that has failed to deliver.

Yet, in spite of all this, Black History Month, and in fact the whole broad system and tradition of activism for racial justice – community-based BLM initiatives, DEI programs, and yes, even those talks to businesses – constitute an infrastructure that a significant effort has been dedicated to. It is there not just to decay as the situation evolves (and in fact, regresses), but to be a dynamic entity.

So what would a fresh vibrant Black History Month appear as? Well, first, it would be extended beyond a brief observance: something that is spread out through the year (as some institutions are already starting to implement), sections of its curriculum (particularly around notable African descendants) included in academic syllabi. It would also be a era that does not evade politics, and provides room for citizens, particularly youth, to share their anxieties and narratives. What use is simple recognition of the bygone era when it doesn’t reckon with the current situation of far-right rallies in the street? Establishments who mark it should not be comforted with the passive language of “unconscious bias” and alertness to minor insults, but challenged by the risks that affect everyone if fight against prejudice is not approached earnestly. To summarize, Black History Month should be made up-to-date, urgent, and responsive. Perhaps an total re-identification is required – Contemporary Black History Month.