
I really disagree with Black History Month.
In my school at least, February would roll around and we'd break out the Black History Materials. For 28 (or 29) days we'd talk about George Washington Carver, W.E.B. DuBois, King, and Malcolm X. We'd celebrate cultural diversity, cultural health, cultural history...
And then, come March, we'd go back to the history curriculum as normal.
My problem with Black History Month is that it makes the rest of the class "White History Months." Black people made real and substantive contributions throughout the course of human history. Admittedly, there were some large swaths of history where is really sucked to be a Black person, particularly if your region of the world happened to be overrun by imperialist Europeans.
But pulling all of the accomplishments of Black people out of their historical context just so we can study them in February strikes me as historically dishonest. It seems to me like we're saying "we've marginalized Black people in our curriculum so much that we're going to take February to talk about what Black people did." I wouldn't mind that quite so much except that it seems to be regarded as "good enough" by so many people. "Now that we've dedicated February to the study of Black people we can go back to studying White people."
That's messed up.
Look - if you're studying US history I'm all for talking about the serious and real contributions made by Black people when you reach the appropriate point in the curriculum. Ditto for World History, Western Civilization, or anything else. Taking all of those accomplishments out and stuffing them into one month is a good first step I suppose. It's certainly better than not studying them at all. But I think it's still a disservice to Black Americans to essentially segregate off a portion of the school year to talk about them.
To make matters worse, given the rushed pace of most history classes, when the appropriate historical context comes up, the contributions of Black people are skimmed over or dismissed entirely. "We cover that in February," throws off the historical perceptions of untold thousands of students every year. How can we possibly learn of the historical import of Black people and Africans if their study is relegated to the dark of winter?
That it happens to be the shortest month simply adds insult to injury.
Black History is important. It's part of world history, US history, indeed everyone's history.
By all means, let us work to make sure that, after centuries of marginalization and denigration, we appropriately include the numerous accomplishments and contributions of Africans and Black people in our study of history, but Black History month, if anything, is a means to an end - not an end in and of itself.
History is not primarily about accomplishments but accounting.
I don't have much use for BHM but it's at least something. How many people really accept that world history has been Eurocentric and whole generations of peoples have had their histories washed out? It continues today in so many ways. In Social Science so much of this explicit wrongness is built into whole belief systems.
So if you want BHM taken out that's fine but you must simultaneously make a very strong case for a full and complete accounting of history.
Let's start by giving back all the African treasure in museums in Paris, New York, Berlin, Turin etc that was stolen. It's an important first step. Give it back so that Africans can account for their own history.
Next stop is regime change against African governments that are still systematically feeding their people the European brainwashing, whether in teaching the word "tribe" to mean Ethnic Group or in teaching the "ethnically cleansed" version of history or just in failing to find ways to build modern societies on the foundations of classical African values.
It seems like we're "celebrating" the historical equivalent of Affirmative Action.
I think you've hit the nail on the head right there. Both programs, to me, were sort of applied as a band-aid while society was supposed to be thinking of more long term solutions. Somewhere along the way people started thinking of these stop-gap measures as actual answers to problems and so creative thought on how to address the real problems of racial inequality and the "white-washing" of history ground to a halt. I think, as a society, we've done a great disservice to the Civil Rights Movement by simply accepting the small gains they fought so hard for without, in general, trying to build on their successes.
We have 12 months, how many ethnic groups do we have?
I think there is a need for BHM, but I don't see it addressed in BHM curicula. There has never been a Black President of the US - why is that? It is necessary to connect the oppression of Blacks in the US and elsewhere to their conspicuous absense in many other parts of the curricula. That means not just talking about WEB Dubois and George Washington Carver or talking about slavery and Jim Crow, but talking about how the legacy of oppression is still with us in our Histories.
While....as a U.S. history teacher, I agree that portioning of a part of the year is ridiculous...but I don't do that and I don't know of too many other teachers who stop and exclusively teach black history during this month. I did just finish teaching a unit on Jim Crow, but now we're in the roaring 20s and the Depression and I don't see a need to pick up the Civil Rights movement until later this spring.
Furthermore, I teach predominantly black students and you'd be surprised at how many of them either a) know a lot of black history because its been jammed down their throats since grade school and desire to learn about other parts of history OR b) don't know it that well but find it painful to continually watch the painful history of slavery and segregation.
I think its clear that BHM was created so that white people could lessen the so-called "white guilt" that many have. If it has structured the way it is actually taught, then those teachers need a lesson of their own in pedagogy.
Besides....how could you fit it all in a month?
don't know it that well but find it painful to continually watch the painful history of slavery and segregation.
I don't know that that is a reason to not emphasize that. I mean, if it's coupled with, as ignoblus described above, a discussion about the lasting effects of slavery, how it impacts modern life and how to deal with those effects, then it's most defenitely a worthwhile method.
I don't mean to tell you how to do your job, just pointing out something that might be very interesting and engaging from a student's perspective.
I don't know that that is a reason to not emphasize that. I mean, if it's coupled with, as ignoblus described above, a discussion about the lasting effects of slavery, how it impacts modern life and how to deal with those effects, then it's most defenitely a worthwhile method.
I never said I don't teach it because of that, but rather that those are the feelings of some of my students. If I gave in to what they wanted, I wouldn't be a very good teacher....:)
dude, you sound like a good history teacher... too bad i wasn't privy to as much... i remember having a teacher (a typical stereotypical southern belle) tell our mixed ethnicity class that slavery wasn't as bad as it has been portrayed... seriously she said that... i remember like it was yesterday...
but i will say this without being my usually longwinded self, is that we see glimpses of things today that are reminiscent of those days...
for example: * the slave codes outlawed more than 3 slaves congregrating anywhere without permission... today such groups of 3 or more are prohibited from doing such on certain inner city corners today ....
* slaves were prohibited from reading for fear a good education would threaten the status quo... today no books or lack of books and/or good teachers accomplish the same goal...
* unarmed slaves were killed by the police (amongst other people) ... today an unusually high amount of unarmed minorties have met the same fate...
just some thoughts...
Hetep and Respect Newguru, sorry to be late to the discussion but I just had to comment.
i remember having a teacher (a typical stereotypical southern belle) tell our mixed ethnicity class that slavery wasn't as bad as it has been portrayed...
I would not have been able to sit still on that one. I would have had to see to it that she remembered my reaction to here words for the rest of her life.
Tnx for sharing, it is interesting how Cultural Poisoning manifests itself.
I'm still waiting for Native American Week/Month, considering it was a genocide by both the US civilian population and US Government.
Slavery is sad, but it doesn't hold a light to the mass slaughterings, biological warfare, and oppression done to the indigenous people of the Americas.
It is ethnocentric that African Americans get a whole month, while in US history books, Native Americans get a foot note in comparison to the amount of material covered by both those of Anglo-Saxon and African descent.
psi29a... "divide and conquer" is still an effective strategy....
no one should compare genocides, holocausts, or atrocities... they're all bad... and they're all on the same side...
psi29a... "divide and conquer" is still an effective strategy....
Yes, it is.
no one should compare genocides, holocausts, or atrocities... they're all bad... and they're all on the same side...
No matter how you spin it, genocide/holocausts trumps slavery. At least slaves born into bondage lived and where eventually emancipated.
However there is a bigger chip on the shoulders of the Native Americans and yet they are not demanding a Native American History week or month. As I pointed out above, we only have 12 months and how many ethnic groups do we have in the US?
It started out well intentioned and has turned into a farce. It should be done away with, and not to put down the black man, but to raise up all ethnic and cultural groups.
Well....I think this can be solved by just not teaching a "month" about anyone. It's all our history and we're all inextricably tied to one another.
I teach a great deal of Howard's Zinn's sections on Native Americans, just as I touch on the labor movements, the quarantine of Chinese in San Francisco during the late 1800s, gay rights....all of it deserves to be told.
That said, a comprehensive African-American history is vitally important as well.
i agree i think it "COULD" be done away with IF a complete history is taught to our younger generations...black, white, native american, etc.
psi, from all i read, some native americans were actually enslaved prior to that of africans... the history you say that we should opt for rather than the current 11+1 history taught me that the native americans did not make good slaves, they died off too quickly from the work, which led them to seek other means, in particular africans... hey send the teacher an email ... not me...
in addition, you say native americans aren't demanding a native american history week/month ... it's because they already have it --> National American Indian Heritage Month, or go here for more details
last point... which is worse the genocide of native americans or the killing of jews, which is worse the killing of jews or the killing and rape of africans in darfur, which is worse the kidnapping, rape, killing, enslavement of people for about 400 years... the answer none... if you personally were a victim, its the same to you...you're dead... if it was your family, they're all the same to you because it still was your family that suffered....
if any is worse...it a genocide that is happening as we type on our computers and discuss which is worse...
again, divide and conquer has been an extremely rewarding strategy throughout history to the present... so I refuse to comment any further regarding any comparisons between any holocaust, enslavement, or genocide between oppressed people of the world... it's ludicrous. i will soon go back to my old ways of refusing comment at all on race debates and discussions because every single one is virtually futile... who among us changes they're whole character makeup by reading a discussion board... very few if any
Thanks newsguru, looks like I got a bit of egg on my face on that one. :P
Although the first "American Indian Day" was declared by the State of New York in 1916, a month long recognition of Native Americans was not achieved until 1990. In that year, President George Bush declared the first National American Indian Heritage Month on August 3. His action was based on legislation presented by Senator Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Congressional Delegate Eni Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa). In each of the four previous years, Congress had enacted legislation designating "American Indian Heritage Week." This consecutive legislation allowed for the establishment of a month-long observance.
Funny thing was that at least in Virginia, we didn't observe it nor did I notice it at all while in the public education system. I still think having a month dedicated to an ethnic group isn't the best way to solve the problem of cultural awareness.
The Dude, strikes the head of the nail exactly.
i will soon go back to my old ways of refusing comment at all on race debates and discussions because every single one is virtually futile... who among us changes they're whole character makeup by reading a discussion board... very few if any
I understand what you mean, and it can be utterly frustrating. I was just giving an example (somewhat flawed now), that cultural awareness need not focus centrally on holocaust, genocide, slavery but on the contributions of the individual to society as a whole.
That being said, sadly yes, racism, sexism, ageism, genocide, and etc are still happening and I don't see it ever going away at least not in Newsvine's lifetime.
i must say psi29a... i'm impressed. most people would not have been as humble when presented such evidence... it speaks volumes... i really like it when people agree with me... :)
and i also agree with your final thoughts...
Hetep and Respect psi29a Your comments presented a good opportunity to raise Cultural Literacy. There may be many indigenous people that feel this way. Newsguru, stepped up to the plate with good links, I book marked them also.
Slavery is sad, but it doesn't hold a light to the mass slaughterings, biological warfare, and oppression done to the indigenous people of the Americas.
Let me add some statistics from World War Zero that you may not be aware of. 100 million innocent African men, women and children killed. 50 Million on Turtle Island (original America), 2000 generations of Black people wiped out in Australia, a similar story in New Zealand.
Every continent the anti-humanists landed on you will find a similar strategy implemented. While each ethnic group's experience in WW0 was unique, the suffering and loss was enormous in all cases.
Don't Give up the ship Newsguru, your interaction with psi29 demonstrates that Cultural Health can gain traction when we talk to and listen to each other.
thanks for the stats aunk (100 million africans) because a lot of people dismiss or trivialize the slave trade as inferior to other similar holocaust ... and it was not greater than others as well... again they all were/are bad...
and you're right, i won't give up... but i've grown to pick and choose my interactions and discussions more carefully and will only have a serious conversation with someone who appears to at least respect the facts and respect other's opinion with intelligent discussion... we don't have to agree on opinions but respect is mandatory...
Just for everyone's edification:
Smallpox (1525, 1558, 1589), typhus (1546), influenza (1558), diphtheria (1614) and measles (1618) pandemics spread throughout the indigenous populations of the North America continent. The number of indigenous peoples killed is estimated at 10 million to 110 million depending on the demographic model used. The large uncertainty in the full extent of these pandemics is due to uncertainty regarding: 1) the pre-European population size; and 2) the percentage of casualties.
1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus (ISBN 1-4000-4006-X), Charles C. Mann, Knopf, 2005.
That is just by the Europeans being there. Cortez and Pizzaro, and the rest not only marched on the great South American civilizations, they brought them to their knees and exterminated them for not accepting God and Ferdinande & Isabella as their sovereign.
Aunk,
100 million innocent African men, women and children killed
Actually, the number is a lot larger than that, if you include secondary effects -- all the wars and famine and disease that have plagued post-colonial Africa and which were largely non-existent prior to the European invasion.
I think it's a little bit racist that we dedicate the shortest month. What's wrong with April?
there's plenty of racism left to go around here in the south... but i think the february connection is little than tragic coincidence... Dr. Carter G. Woodson started the effort initially as "Black History Week" which later morphed into BHM. I never knew that until i read one of his books.
and i agree with most all here that it was meant to be the beginning and "band-aid" with hopes of full integration not only persons into the school, but a people into the history... i think Dr. Woodson would be saddened to know that after many decades this is all there is to show for it...
This is one of the most informative comments I have a read in a long while. Thanks newsguru!
Thanks Sam.
Finally something we can agree on. I really believe that we are still living segregated lives and as long as we continue to make distinctions between black and white, there will continue to be segregation. Children are not racist, adults are. Adults keep perpetuating the idea that blacks are different from whites (same holds true for any race, really) by insisting on black only history months, caucuses, TV channels, etc.
I cannot believe I'm saying this, but I agree with you on this. May such unity continue on throughout our lives!
Children are not racist, adults are. Adults keep perpetuating the idea that blacks are different from whites (same holds true for any race, really) by insisting on black only history months, caucuses, TV channels, etc.
GoodReporter
Great job. I wish I could vote twice.
Dont get me started on the topic of white racism.
At a local school, a student is called "cracka" by a few Hispanic students. The girl snaps back something like "Shut up beaner" or the like, and gets 2 weeks of In school suspension. The Hispanic kids get off with nothing. Fair? I think not.
I agree with you Killfile.
Allow me to play the other side though for a moment... is it possible (in theory), that the one month study length is in proportion to population density? ie: if there are 80% purple people and 20% green people, isn't it plausible to assume that you would study purple people more than green people? Not to say green people aren't important or even as important, but to put them on a pedestal for simply being the minority by numbers isn't fair, and is honestly degrading. Let the green people be known for their history and contributions to society.
Ok, its late, ramble over...
Kai, two points
1) your theory makes sense, especially if that was the basis that we actually used in this country to make that determination... but applying that theory to the current context, African Americans make up approximately 15% of the current American population... leading to a proportionate 15% of the calendar year... about 1.8 months or 54 days rather than the current 28/29 days
2) logically it makes some sense but in reality it is quite inadequate...because we talking about history... not race. we can't just choose our history ... if african americans casually strolled over to this continent on their own terms and then tried to force their historical viewpoint on this country that would be one thing... but that's not exactly what happened...
one CANNOT TRUTHFULLY AND HONESTLY study american history without substantial and significant amount of time spent on how the entire economy of the old world usa was built on the backs of free labor from slaves, nevermind the scientific, cultural, and other contributions. no, that doesn't sound as good or as pretty to some but its the truth. anything else is just a lie. oh yeah omission is a lie too... (just try "omitting" some income from tax return and see where that gets you)...
Hetep and Respect Kai, Let me play your words back to you from the other side.
Allow me to play the other side though for a moment... is it possible (in theory), that the one month study length is in proportion to labor density? ie: if there are 80% purple people contributing to the early labor wealth and 20% green people contributions, isn't it plausible to assume that you would study purple people more than green people? Not to say green people aren't important or even as important, but to put them on a pedestal for simply being the labor minority by numbers isn't fair, and is honestly degrading. Let the green people be known for their history and limited contributions to society.
Ok, its late, ramble over...
How about we tell every American's history all year long.
How about we tell every American's history all year long.
Sounds like a plan to me. Singling out one group over another is just induced segregation.
How about we tell every American's history all year long.
That's a great idea. I would, however, refuse to give any ground regarding the teaching of Black History Month until there was a policy in place in which history was told with full inclusion of the contributions (good and bad) of all the entities and ethnicities that build this country into what it is.
Singling out one group over another is just induced segregation.
White people didn't spend the first 80 years of this country's existence being enslaved by black people. The truth is, there are people who need this month to point out all the contributions blacks (and other minorities) make to society, because they aren't going to go find them themselves.
When our biggest cities stop underfunding schools in primarily black communities while putting up new schools in white neighborhoods, you may have a point. When a black man running for president stops being newsworthy, you may have a point. In the meantime, racism and segregation are alive and well in this country, but it has nothing to do with black history month.
The truth is, there are people who need this month to point out all the contributions blacks (and other minorities) make to society, because they aren't going to go find them themselves.
Well, at least you attempt to not be ethnocentric by adding "(and other minorities)."
But, stop the bulls---. It's "Black History Month", not "Minority History Month," so lame attempts at trying to win cheap favor with the peanut gallery aren't flattering or a cause for some magical solidarity. They're insulting.
if there are 80% purple people and 20% green people, isn't it plausible to assume that you would study purple people more than green people?
By this logic, about 1/3 of world history would be chinese, 1/4 would be african, another 1/4 would be other-asian, and the rest would be western civilization. Not exactly the way it's taught in Europe or the western hemisphere right now.
By this logic, about 1/3 of world history would be chinese, 1/4 would be african, another 1/4 would be other-asian, and the rest would be western civilization.
True in world population, but we're discussing American History.
No, but it illustrates the silliness of the proposition. History isn't a based on a quota system.
Well, at least you attempt to not be ethnocentric by adding "(and other minorities)."
But, stop the bulls---. It's "Black History Month", not "Minority History Month," so lame attempts at trying to win cheap favor with the peanut gallery aren't flattering or a cause for some magical solidarity. They're insulting.
I'll be honest ... I have absolutely no clue as to what the hell you're rambling about.
Hetep and Respect Moon In Blue Water. The wold population population is 6 Billion. However, we may see the demographic brake down somewhat differently.
Africans (Blacks) 2 Billion
Asians 1.5 Billion
Multi-ethnics 1.5 Billion
Europeans (Whites) 1 Billion
Note: that the percentages come out somewhat differently with my math.
but it illustrates the silliness of the proposition. History isn't a based on a quota system.
I think I agree with you Moon
In essence, don't say "(and other minorities)" when you don't mean it. If you do mean it (which can only be from ignorance), I assure you that Black History Month is called "Black History Month," not "Minority History Month," for a pretty obvious reason.
Being a minority doesn't make me an honorary black person for a month.
Being a minority doesn't make me an honorary black person for a month.
Wow.
All *I* was doing was making sure the person my original comment was directed towards realized that simply patting ourselves on the back for a month for being so diverse and open-minded doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of the racism and descrimination in this country and the world - you'll recall (assuming you read it) that the original post I made was to explain that "racism and segregation are alive and well in this country, but it has nothing to do with black history month." Black people are not the only ones to suffer racial descrimination. So I *still* don't know what you're talking about.
Wow.
The Chinese are about 1.5 billion people alone. Indians are another billion. Your statistics don't look like they could possibly be right to me, Aunk. Got a source?
Aunk's figures do seem to be wrong. Africa's population is about 900 Million and there are say another 100 million people of African descent.
Adam, there seems to be more misunderstanding on your end than mine.
Your words:
The truth is, there are people who need this month to point out all the contributions blacks (and other minorities) make to society, because they aren't going to go find them themselves.
This month does nothing to point out all the contributions by "and other minorities." Thus, does anyone need this month to point out something that it doesn't actually point out? No. I don't think you're so sheltered as to think that "black" = "black (and other minorities)." Maybe you are, and I guess Aunk would call that Cultural Poisoning. Thus, I can only think that your parenthetical statement was simply an afterthought intended to sound inclusionary for some self-congratulatory reason. To this, I say: stop the bulls---.
Also, the comment you responded to:
Singling out one group over another is just induced segregation.
was not "simply patting [itself] on the back for a month for being so diverse and open-minded."
It was actually doing the opposite: criticizing the back-patting "open-mindedness" on having a special month.
I think more accurate population figures would be somewhere around:
Asian: 3 billion
African: 1 billion
European: 1 billion
Other: 1 billion
Hetep and Respect Killfile, Good article and thoughtful discussion, Amen!
Black History Month needs to stay for at least another generation; as others have said, we need to have textbooks and classes for the next generation of students that take into account the contributions of every ethnic group that makes up America; this requires a different style of history teaching than we typically do here in the USA.
I'd love to say 'well we'll just get rid of BHM and teach it all year round', but I simply do not have that much faith in that; people only seem to make progressive social change (in terms of acceptance, education and civil rights) when forced - we needed Affirmative Action to get anything close to a critical mass of black collegiates; we needed the national guard to desegregate the schools; history suggests that efforts like Black History Month, forcing generations to acknowledge the contributions of the typically ignored, are necessary.
I just got done listening to a Talk of the Nation segment on Billy Strayhorn, and it occurs to me that, in the arts particulary, having a month of special focus is really a good idea. Of course black history should be fully incorporated as part of the American history narrative, but so is a month in which to specialize. Most comments have focused on Black History Month as it plays out in the public schools. I think its richest impact is community and cultural institutions. That said, if I were a black artist, I would double my fee for the month of February. That, and raise Juneteenth to July 4th status.
Most people I've met who are not from the south don't even know what Juneteenth is, or what the actual date is.
How about some shades of gray for a change, rather than black this and white that. I grew up during the days of "real" segregation and it was not a pleasant time. For an example we had black only bathrooms and white only bathrooms, white only water fountains and black only water fountains. Even laundromats had signs that read "For Whites Only". My ex-sister-in-law was from the NE coast. When she first moved to this area, her washer broke down. She took her clothes to a laundromat and when her husband got home he asked her why all the jeans and dark shirts were hanging on the clothesline. I guess you can imagine how she responded. TRUE STORY...
My problem with Black History Month is that it makes the rest of the class "White History Months."
That's backward. All of the class already was "White History Months," and Black History Month is one of the few things that manages to make a dent in that. Where I agree is that it's sad that black history was not already an organic part of history at large.
Hetep and Respect Dr. Clarke one of the Great African American historians said, Black history month are the the missing pages of world history.
Killfile, I'm entering this party late, admittedly, and in part because I've already posted my short two cents worth on the subject. But I do want to target a few statements you've made in your article.
My problem with Black History Month is that it makes the rest of the class "White History Months."
The simple fact of the matter is that without Black History Month, all twelve months are White History Months.
But pulling all of the accomplishments of Black people out of their historical context just so we can study them in February strikes me as historically dishonest. It seems to me like we're saying "we've marginalized Black people in our curriculum so much that we're going to take February to talk about what Black people did." I wouldn't mind that quite so much except that it seems to be regarded as "good enough" by so many people. "Now that we've dedicated February to the study of Black people we can go back to studying White people."
Perhaps it is not as "historically dishonest as you think, given that you can study European history in a context separate and apart from what was happening elsewhere on the globe, and you can study Greek and Roman history as distinct components. What is historically and intellectually dishonest is the tepid curriculum that encourages students to treat this "history" as Trivial Pursuit, rather than a "Survey of a Civiliization." And that is a fault I have to lay squarely at the feet of historians and text book writers and instructional designers who are ill-equipped -- or so it seems -- to develop and present a cogent, cohesive and compelling tale of the history of a people who contributed (and continue to contribute) to the on-going history of this planet.
While I hold disappointments at the lazy approach most schools take to delivering history in general and Black History in particular, one month well done is far better than the whitewash students would otherwise receive. And more thing,
By all means, let us work to make sure that, after centuries of marginalization and denigration, we appropriately include the numerous accomplishments and contributions of Africans and Black people in our study of history,
history needed to be studied and recorded in its fullest. And that means it is not just a list of the firsts and onlys, but that the White Man's role in this marginalization, denigration, persecution and defamation is fully reported. Because only when you tell the whole of the story is the story really told.
And finally to Nicholas Battaglia: You, sir, demonstrate not only the shortcomings of a poorly executed study of Black History, but to my eyes, education in general.
I remember in school learning about George Washington Carver and his @!$%#ing peanut bull@!$%# for a straight week and just being dumbfounded that my education was being wasted on something so dumb just to prove to my young developing mind that black people were just as smart as white people by golly!Wonderful, I didn't need my education kneecapped to figure that out, nor did I need PC garbage rammed down my goddamn throat.
Your parents must be beaming!
Bravo, RI.
Hetep and Respect Rational, Amen! I had similar thoughts when I read Nicholas. It is interesting to note that if the "education" is poor in one area, it will show up in another. If his teacher took a month to teach him about peanuts He was not learning much the other 11 months either.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |