🔗 Share this article

It's Black History Month in the United Kingdom, and it feels like it’s time for a reassessment. Over the years, an celebration that started out as a commemorative event of heritage, traditions and links between Black populations worldwide, has taken on a commercial tone, broadening to incorporate gatherings where African descendants are remunerated to speak with Caucasian groups about implicit prejudice and active solidarity. The 2020s Black Lives Matter protests created a surge in the industry of displaying cultural sensitivity. But even that moment has passed. The surge has peaked, resulting in a somewhat empty inheritance of what increasing understanding is for.

The Origins of Black History Month

First commemorated in the United States and Canada, Black History Month was established in 1962 as “Negro History Week” by Black scholar Carter G. Woodson with seven days of celebration and reflection in the middle of February. Black History Month grew out of this movement and was formally inaugurated in 1970. Today it is observed not only in the United States and Canada in winter, but also in October in the United Kingdom, Germany, the Republic of Ireland and the Netherlands.

The observance has developed since its inception, giving reduced attention to the accounts of colonial slavery and civil rights battles, and increasingly on influential individuals of color in public life, creative fields, and advocacy, and widely honoring the impact 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 commemorated is a indication of the contemporary political context. How it evolves is a good lesson in how assimilation leads to dismantling: the transformation of Black History Month has impeded the point of it, which is to confront structural and organizational discrimination.

---

A Jarring Moment

Few things illustrate how critical it is to reconsider Black History Month more than the current time in which it falls this year. In the UK, a reemerging right-wing in the shape of the Reform party is ahead in surveys. In the warmer months we witnessed the most significant ultra-conservative gathering in the history of Britain. the Conservative leader, the African descendant in charge of the Conservative party, is a strong critic of anti-racism activism, and we are in a situation where a member of parliament gains confidence to say that “not seeing any white faces” in specific city neighborhoods is a source of worry. At the same time, extreme conservative groups are growing in the EU as a whole.

In the US, a colossal assault against DEI and affirmative action has been carried, often successfully, to the supreme judicial bodies of the state. A campaign to scrub African American heritage and legacy from the historical documents is in progress. One of Donald Trump's initial presidential directives aimed at the institution dedicated to Black heritage, and the prestigious establishment, alleging that they of a coordinated and broad attempt to rewrite our Nation’s history” by depicting the United States “as naturally discriminatory”.

Given these circumstances, the month represents how minimally it can be influential if it is confined to either dutiful corporate observances, or stripped of political content festivities of contributions in the past, rather than confronting the situation of the current era. It also demonstrates how its limited duration means that it is separated from the broader ongoing work that is needed. Denise Miller, a educator at University of Greenwich, expressed it perfectly when she raised concerns about the temporary “tokenism” of the month. “The problem with taking a tokenistic approach”, she commented, “is that it typically leads to that Black History Month becomes a brief show rather than a agent of progress.”

---

Reevaluating, Not Abandoning

Establishing how to adapt, revise and extend initiatives for racial equality and recognition in such moments of dejection and worry is a difficult task. There is a urge to just eliminate observances such as Black History Month altogether, assuming they are no longer suitable, or are remnants of an time that has failed to deliver.

But despite everything, Black History Month, and in fact the complete comprehensive structure and tradition of activism for racial justice – local anti-racism groups, DEI programs, and indeed, including corporate presentations – form an infrastructure that a considerable labor has been invested in. It is there not just to decay as the politics moves on (and in fact, deteriorates), but to be a vital organism.

So what would a fresh vibrant Black History Month appear as? Well, first, it would be not just one concentrated month: something that is dispersed throughout the annual calendar (as various establishments are already beginning to do), elements of its material (particularly around historic Black characters) included in academic syllabi. It would also be a era that does not evade political issues, and allows opportunity for people, particularly youth, to share their anxieties and narratives. What purpose serves basic knowledge of the past when it doesn’t reckon with the contemporary truth of ultra-nationalist gatherings in the public spaces? Establishments who celebrate it should not be comforted with the non-confrontational words of implicit prejudice and sensitivity to minor insults, but faced with the risks that face all if opposition to discrimination is not approached earnestly. Briefly stated, Black History Month should be made contemporary, critical, and reactive. It could be that an entire name rebrand is required – Black History is Now Month.