See? you fell for it. The very notion that there are “black contributions to history, science, the arts etc” is a racist concept. If the contributions are important BECAUSE they are black then demands that one celebrate “white contributions to history, science, the arts etc” because they are white. In other words, “contributions” become important because they were made by a particular race, not because they are important in and of themselves. And that is as Archie Bunker would say, “Ipso fatso,” the very definition of racism.
Black contributions were often not included in the teachings of American history at one point in this country, hence the need for “Black History Month”. If public education continues to include the history of all of its contributors it becomes less and less necessary to highlight one particular month. I ( as in me) never implied that any one groups history was more important than another’s. I don’t see what is so hard to understand about that.
“then demands that one celebrate white contributions to history”
One major difference. Whites were allowed. It’s easy to make a contribution when you are allowed to make a contribution. I remember working for a Fortune 100 company out of Chicago and they wanted us to lose our Southern accents. Quote “People won’t take you seriously if you talk like a hick. It’s just the way it is”. How can you argue with the way it is?
How many decades did people hear “Them black hands were made for holding a handle, not a pen. It’s just the way it is”?
It’s what they overcame that made their contribution so significant.