🔗 Share this article

We are in Black History Month in the United Kingdom, and it appears it’s time for a reassessment. Over the years, an observance that began as a festivity and recollection of heritage, traditions and links between global Black communities, has adopted a commercial tone, expanding to include gatherings where African descendants are remunerated to talk to Caucasian groups about implicit prejudice and “allyship”. The anti-racism rallies of the last decade sparked an increase in the business of showcasing anti-racist commitment. But even that moment has passed. The tide has peaked, producing a diluted aftermath of what promoting consciousness is for.

The Origins of Black History Observance

Originally observed in the United States and Canada, Black History Month was established in 1962 as an observance of African American heritage by African American historian Carter G. Woodson with multiple days of remembrance and recognition in the middle of February. Black History Month grew out of this movement and was publicly established in 1970. Currently it is marked not only in the North America in the second month, but also in October in the United Kingdom, Germany, the Republic of Ireland and the Netherlands.

The observance has transformed since its inception, placing less emphasis on the histories of the slave trade across the Atlantic and fights for racial justice, and more on influential individuals of color in government, the arts, and social movements, and widely honoring the input Black people have made to influence the nation. It is in educational institutions where Black History Month is most frequently marked, with lectures and artistic activities. But the method the month is celebrated is a manifestation of the contemporary political context. How it progresses is a instructive case in how assimilation leads to weakening: the reshaping of Black History Month has impeded the objective of it, which is to address structural and organizational discrimination.

---

A Disconcerting Period

Little demonstrates how critical it is to reconsider Black History Month more than the specific period in which it takes place this year. In the Britain, a revitalized conservative movement in the shape of the Reform organization is ahead in surveys. In the recent season we observed the largest far-right rally in the UK's past. a prominent political figure, the person of color at the helm of the Tory party, is a staunch adversary of the racial justice movement, and we are in a situation where a elected representative feels empowered to say that the absence of Caucasian individuals in specific city neighborhoods is a reason for concern. Meanwhile, ultra-nationalist movements are growing in Europe as a whole.

In the America, a colossal assault against DEI and affirmative action has been taken, frequently with success, to the highest courts of the nation. A drive to remove the history of people of color and experience from the historical documents is under way. One of Donald Trump's first executive orders aimed at the institution dedicated to Black heritage, and the renowned cultural organization, alleging that they of a organized and extensive campaign to alter the country's historical narrative” by representing the nation “as naturally discriminatory”.

Given these circumstances, the celebration represents how minimally it can be influential if it is restricted to either dutiful corporate observances, or politically neutered celebrations of contributions in the past, rather than addressing the situation of the contemporary world. It also shows how its short period means that it is detached from the broader ongoing work that is necessary. An academic expert, a prof at a learning establishment, put it best when she voiced worries about the fleeting superficial actions of the month. “The problem with embracing a superficial method”, she wrote, “is that it often means that Black History Month becomes a fleeting performance rather than a catalyst for change.”

---

Reevaluating, Not Abandoning

Figuring out how to alter, change and broaden efforts for equal rights and acknowledgment in such times of discouragement and concern is a treacherous thing. There is a urge to just do away with observances such as Black History Month completely, believing they are simply not fit for purpose, or are relics of an period that has failed to deliver.

Yet, in spite of all this, Black History Month, and in fact the complete comprehensive structure and tradition of racial movements – community-based BLM initiatives, inclusion and equity efforts, and certainly, even commercial engagements – represent an framework that a considerable labor has been invested in. It is there not just to decay as the political landscape shifts (and in fact, deteriorates), 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 beginning to do), elements of its material (particularly around prominent figures of color) incorporated into educational programs. It would also be a time that does not shy away from governmental matters, and provides room for people, particularly youth, to share their anxieties and narratives. What purpose serves basic knowledge of the bygone era when it doesn’t reckon with the contemporary truth of far-right rallies in the street? Organizations who observe it should not be pacified with the passive language of implicit prejudice and awareness of minor insults, but challenged by the threats that face all if fight against prejudice is not taken seriously. To summarize, Black History Month should be made current, pressing, and reactive. Maybe an entire name rebrand is required – Black History is Now Month.