This short paper is my contribution to the ongoing debate about the future of Black History Month in the UK. It is in response to the ‘Position Paper’ written by Nubian Jack for discussion at the meeting on African Heritage Month International at the Africa Centre, Covent Garden, London, on 22 February 2013.
During the last 25 years, much has happened that in my view calls into question the provenance and trajectory of BHM, thus making it necessary for us to question our connectedness with it and how we are fashioning it for the current and future generations in the same way that the early pioneers laid the foundations for us.
In no particular order, I would highlight the following developments in the last century, some of which have served as an ocean liner’s anchor to bed down BHM to the point of ossification:
a) The growth in size and diversity of the Global African Diaspora (GAD) in the UK, constituting the historical Diaspora (people of African heritage from the Caribbean and elsewhere, descendants of enslaved Africans), Africans from the continent who have long had an active presence in Britain (since the nineteenth century), Africans from the continent who in the last 30 years have come to Britain in increasing numbers (as economic migrants, as skilled professionals, as students and researchers, as refugees and asylum seekers);
b) The growth of a sizeable portion of the Global African Diaspora youth population in the UK who have little real knowledge of one another and their origins, but who constitute a modern, mainly urban, vibrant section of those shaping the future of Britain into the next millennium;
d) The implications of that for regional entities such as CARICOM, ECOWAS, SADEC, etc. and the relationship between member states within and between these regions and how their nationals and citizens see themselves and one another;
e) The issue of Aid versus Trade and the agreements, policies and practices of donor countries and multilateral agencies that set up trade restrictions that are in their interests, thus sustaining poverty in developing countries (Africa and the Caribbean especially), while plying them with aid and deepening their dependency upon foreign handouts;
f) The implications of that for how the GAD organizes itself to become engaged with the development of Africa, starting with a comprehensive skills database;
g) The Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 and the General Duty it placed upon public bodies to:
– promote equal opportunities
– eliminate unlawful discrimination and
– promote good relations between people of different racial groups
The consequent and often cynical efforts made by such bodies once a year in October to organize programmes that enable them to tick boxes and demonstrate evidence of compliance with the Act, while at the same time:
h) The tendency of such bodies to pick and choose the Black History they recognize and validate and even what they would allow their staff, black or otherwise, to showcase and celebrate;
i) Their tendency to ignore or re-write the history African heritage people in Britain have made in the post-War period, including struggles against their very own policies and institutional practices, thereby failing to assist black children and all children in understanding political events and social movements for equity and justice in their own lifetime;
j) The extent of our complicity in all that;
k) Our own tendency to treat Black History as ‘dead’ history, treat key figures in Black History as icons and dust them off and present them without establishing any connection between the history they made and the relevance of that to our time, to our contemporary struggles and to our state of consciousness;
l) The fact that the history we have made through our presence in the UK even in the last 60 years and the impact we have made on the British social, political and economic landscape has been largely airbrushed out of the British social history narrative, and that consequently neither that expanding GAD population in the UK nor their counterparts of other ethnicities have any knowledge or understanding of much of that history, or of how they must record, interpret and attend to the history they themselves are making;
m) The fact that information technology provides a multiplicity of platforms for accessing, recording, sharing and teaching about Black History.
Against that background, the question arises: What good does it do to encourage the treatment of Black History as if it is organic to the way British institutions and people function, the way history is taught, portrayed and understood by the society, and as if we as African people claim and respect a common heritage?
What are the values that bind us together as a Global African Diaspora? How can we affirm and encourage and empower our communities to live those values such that we build an identity that is based not just on the fact that we share a common heritage and common pigmentation, notwithstanding its increasingly diluted state?
Were we to attend to all the above issues, we might just decide that even if we make February rather than October the month in which we focus our and the nation’s attention on Black History, that month must mark the beginning of a programme that runs each month until the following February.
That programme must prioritize and address the urgent need to inform and educate the current generation of the Global African Diaspora in Britain and everyone else besides about:
If we did this, we would reconfigure Black History Month in the context of our generation, according to the challenges of our time, thus making it relevant and meaningful. It might just enable us to provide tangible evidence of making our mark and fulfilling our mission in this generation, thus adding to Black History.
“Talking on Corners – Speaking in Tongues” by drinksmachine (Flickr/ CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)