Should we have a Black History Month? A contentious topic, indeed, however I am often baffled by the reasoning that so often supports the arguments opposed to Black History Month.
In light of this frustration, below I will outline some of the arguments against black history month and suggest why they do not adequately address the need for such a month.
A brief look into Canadian and American history will reveal some very ugly realities that many of us simply cannot face. Often they are ignored, downplayed, or denied. Intergenerational effects of historical inequality are so rigorously debated because the extent to which history matters in contemporary society is so seldom agreed upon. The division of these attitudes is quite commonly drawn between different races, classes, genders, sexual orientation, and I could go on.
The reasons for this vary; however, I offer a cause. I believe that the experiences we have in life, which are influenced by these factors I’ve outlined above, constitute the lens through which we view our society and influence how we contextualize our existence within a society who may or may not have always readily accepted us. Thus, our opinions on issues that arise within the context of this society will invariably be shaded by how society has received us.
I write all of this to say that although I whole heartedly disagree with those who are opposed to Black History Month, I understand the position from which this opinion comes. Perhaps more appropriately, I understand the situational circumstances that may inform your opinions. Although opinions for the support or not of Black History Month may be largely drawn on lines of race, one can only draw generalities. Of course there are people of all shades who support or are against Black History Month.
However, I hope to address some common arguments from those who are against Black History Month and share a perspective that may not be readily available to oneself.
Argument 1: Recognition is Subordination
This is a common argument when minorities speak out about issues in society. Black Lives Matter is yet another social movement that has far too often had to address the belief that the recognition of one group is tantamount to the subordination of another. Let me explain.
Black History Month recognizes black achievement. It celebrates history and the many struggles that have been overcome over the centuries. It is also a reminder of the work that lay ahead for racial justice to be achieved.
However, does the recognition of one group necessitate the subordination of another? Of course not. The recognition of black excellence in no way attacks other groups defined by race. How could it? There is no malice inherent in the support of a group that has been historically subordinated and continues to be in contemporary society. That is the key, though. Blacks have, and continue to be, discriminated against. It is impossible to then draw a parallel to whites in this instance and claim that “if we had a white history month, everyone would be so mad! This is a double standard!”. In order to correctly be a double standard, it necessitates the presumption that blacks and whites are on equal ground socially. This is simply not true. To have a white history month would be nonsensical because they have not been oppressed in the same way other minority groups have been throughout history. The necessary condition is utterly devoid for such a month to make sense, or for such a parallel to be drawn. In other words, the argument makes no sense.
Would straight people claim to be discriminated against if the LGBT community had their own month? Of course not. Because it would make no sense. Oh, and they do have their own month. October for the United States and February in the U.K. A lot of people likely do not even know that. I would take this a step further and assume that most people who did not know this are straight. Why does this matter? When one has a certain privilege in their society, they do not have to celebrate how far they have come. It is understood that the LGBT community has been and is discriminated against. Racism, however, is so commonly denied that the existence of a Black History Month leaves many dumbfounded as to what necessitates its existence. To them, I suggest a history course.
But… wait. Doesn’t this further the racial divide in North America?
Argument 2: Colorblind and Quiet
No.
No social change would be achieved if subordinated groups were quiet. None. Racial equality, rights for women, and for the LGBT community have only been achieved with thunderous volumes. Not only that, but sustained for decades, centuries even.
How could dialogue be damaging to race relations? It helps to foster empathy and allows both minority and majority groups to have their voices heard on issues and provides a platform to reconcile discrepancies. Silence would do none of these things. Rather, it would reinforce in equality through encouraging apathy and ignorance. The eradication of these things remains necessary for any type of meaningful change to be had in a society where legitimate complaints from marginalized groups are so often ignored and ironically attributed to individualized failings or inherent failings due to race.
Being quiet is likely the impetus for social equality in almost any sphere.
What about being colorblind? I see no color, isn’t this useful?
I like the sentiment, but the approach is ill informed. The sentiment is to have equality based on race. If I am color blind, I do not see your color and therefore have no grounds to discriminate against you, right? Well, not really. Firstly, you can be discriminated against for a multitude of reasons that color blind vision would be able to detect. Secondly, it is simply not realistic. Not only do people see color, and will continue to see color, it is likely the first thing they notice about someone.
This is not inherently wrong, although many may assume it is. However, when we consider this reality within the context of a region where race has been the defining factor for the discrimination of generations, it is problematic. To be colorblind in a society that sees color so vividly is to deny the reality of minority groups. For them, life is not color blind. They do not have the luxury. It rests on the presumption of racial equality, and this never has been the case.
Black History Month reminds black people of the many things they have achieved as a group and may inspire others to continue the legacy of black achievement in the face of a society that places many unique barriers in their way.
Argument 3: So Only Blacks Get a Month? That’s Racist
The problem with this belief is that it is not true.
Many groups get a month. Yes, even white groups. I’ll list some of the most notable groups who get months: Women’s History Month, Irish-American Heritage Month, Arab American Month, Caribbean American Month, and I could go on. There is even a National Ice Cream Month. But this would discriminate against other foods, right?
This link has a full list of commemorative months.
To conclude, the celebration of one group does not denigrate another. This shouldn’t have to be articulated, but it needs to be.
Learning about the historical circumstances that have made these months necessary in the eyes of those who constitute the group can be a very useful exercise if you find yourself denying the importance of another groups history.
Empathy is required for racial justice. Many marginalized groups have been forced to develop an acute sense of empathy because of the daily indignities that plague the lives of many. But it is useful for everybody. Change cannot happen without it.
About the Author
Kumsa Yuya is an Ethiopian born Canadian who has recently graduated from the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada. In the pursuit of his Criminal Justice and Public Policy degree he has become particularly interested in issues surrounding social justice and human rights. Law, politics, prison reform, religion, sexuality, education, and race are among the topics that he is most interested in.