🔗 Share this article

We are in Black History Month in the United Kingdom, and it feels like it’s time for a reassessment. Over the years, an observance that started out as a festivity and recollection of heritage, traditions and links between global Black communities, has developed a corporate feel, growing to encompass gatherings where Black people are paid to address predominantly white listeners about implicit prejudice and “allyship”. The anti-racism rallies of the last decade sparked an increase in the business of demonstrating racial awareness. But even that moment has passed. The wave has crested, leaving a sort of hollowed out legacy of what raising awareness is for.

The Background of Black History Observance

Initially celebrated in the America and its northern neighbor, Black History Month was established in 1962 as “Negro History Week” by Black scholar Carter G. Woodson with seven days of remembrance and recognition in the February's second week. Black History Month evolved from this initiative and was formally inaugurated in 1970. Currently it is marked not only in the US and Canada in February, but also in autumn in the UK, Deutschland, Éire and the Netherlands.

The period has developed since its inception, giving reduced attention to the narratives of transatlantic enslavement and fights for racial justice, and more on prominent Black figures in politics, culture, and activism, and broadly celebrating the contribution Black people have made to shape the country. It is in educational institutions where Black History Month is most regularly observed, with lectures and artistic activities. But the method the celebration is celebrated is a manifestation of the political moment. How it progresses is a valuable example in how assimilation leads to dismantling: the restructuring of Black History Month has hindered the purpose of it, which is to confront systemic and institutional racism.

---

A Jarring Moment

Hardly anything shows how important it is to reconsider Black History Month more than the specific period in which it falls this year. In the UK, a revitalized conservative movement in the shape of the Reform political group is top in opinion ratings. In the recent season we saw the most significant ultra-conservative gathering in the history of Britain. Kemi Badenoch, the Black leader of the Tory party, is a firm opponent of the racial justice movement, and we are in a position where a elected representative feels emboldened to say that “not seeing any white faces” in certain urban areas is a reason for concern. Simultaneously, ultra-nationalist movements are expanding in Europe as a whole.

In the America, a colossal assault against inclusion programs and preferential policies has been taken, repeatedly with positive outcomes, to the highest courts of the nation. A effort to scrub Black history and experience from the records is in progress. One of the political figure's early administrative commands focused on the museum of African American legacy, and the Smithsonian Institution, claiming they of a “concerted and widespread effort to rewrite our Nation’s history” by representing the nation “as inherently racist”.

Against this backdrop, the month illustrates how minimally it can be impactful if it is restricted to either dutiful corporate observances, or politically neutered festivities of historical achievements, rather than challenging the situation of the present. It also shows how its limited duration means that it is detached from the wider consistent effort that is necessary. An academic expert, a prof at an educational institution, articulated it most accurately when she raised concerns about the fleeting superficial actions of the month. “The issue with embracing a superficial method”, she stated, “is that it frequently results in that Black History Month becomes a brief show rather than a driver of transformation.”

---

Rethinking, But Not Jettisoning

Determining how to alter, change and broaden efforts for equal rights and acknowledgment in such moments of dejection and worry is a treacherous thing. There is a inclination to just discontinue events including Black History Month entirely, assuming they are inadequate for current needs, or are remnants of an era that has failed to deliver.

However, regardless of the situation, Black History Month, and in fact the complete comprehensive structure and heritage of racial movements – community-based BLM initiatives, DEI programs, and certainly, even commercial engagements – form an foundation that a significant effort has gone into. It is there not just to decay as the situation evolves (and in fact, declines), but to be a living breathing thing.

So what would a new dynamic Black History Month appear as? To begin with, it would be not just one concentrated month: something that is dispersed through the year (as some institutions are already beginning to do), sections of its curriculum (particularly around notable African descendants) integrated into educational programs. It would also be a period that does not shy away from politics, and allows opportunity for citizens, particularly youth, to express their concerns and stories. What purpose serves basic knowledge of the history when it fails to address the current situation of extreme conservative demonstrations in the street? Organizations who observe it should not be pacified with the neutral terminology of hidden discrimination and awareness of minor insults, but faced with the risks that impact society if opposition to discrimination is not treated with importance. Briefly stated, Black History Month should be made up-to-date, urgent, and adaptive. Perhaps an entire name rebrand is in order – Black History is Now Month.