Posted on 02/23/2002 9:02:02 AM PST by prman
Not many people know that what is now called Black History Month actually began as "Negro History Week," established by black educator Carter Godwin Woodson and other scholars in 1926 as way to combat the ignorance and deliberate distortion of black history in this country.
In those days, people of African descent were visibly missing from any scholarship or intellectual discourse that dealt with civilization, and were so dehumanized and their history so distorted, even in educated circles, that "slavery, peonage, segregation and lynching" were considered justifiable conditions.
Initially conceived as a weeklong series of meetings, exhibitions, lectures and symposia organized as the culmination of the scientific study of the African experience, it has in the years since the civil rights revolution expanded to the entire month of February. Many think it should even be a yearlong celebration.
Today, however, the question should be asked if the monthlong observance has outlived its usefulness. Or has it become simply divisive and counterproductive?
Black History Month was designed to be educational and informational in nature – a way to set the record straight about the achievements and contributions of black people in America. In doing so, it dispelled myths and misconceptions about African-Americans and their culture in a way that would promote racial understanding and healing.
In recent years, everyone seems to have jumped on board this monthlong "observance." Universities, magazines and newspapers, museums, concert halls, radio and television programs – virtually all the organs of popular and civic culture have made obeisance to Black History Month in their offerings. One cannot say, then, that not enough attention has been paid to these issues.
The danger is that the month that now celebrates the history of black achievement has not only become just another example of racial tokenism, but, in its worst manifestation, it has turned into a platform for political and ideological propaganda and sheer hucksterism.
Thus colleges and universities lard up their "celebrations" with events that are overtly designed to be politically provocative: lectures about Herrnstein and Murray's controversial 1994 study, "The Bell Curve," and black intelligence; films on female genital mutilation; papers that encourage the use of Black English; non-sequitur discussions on "Race, Gender and Economic Equality"; even student awards for artistic expression that "demonstrates an understanding and appreciation for diversity, equity, social justice and human rights."
Newspapers run multi-part stories that hector readers into feeling guilty about de facto segregation, or report about some incident of local discrimination, or feature puff pieces by marketers that want to cash in by repackaging video and DVD releases of movies and TV shows featuring black artists and subjects.
After having extolled the most prominent and well-known African Americans year after year in their stories, magazines and newspapers are now having to develop articles about black "unknowns," as yet unsung, who are also making contributions to their communities.
As praiseworthy as this idea might seem, it comes perilously close to a manufactured "feel-good" journalism in which everybody gets his or her 15 minutes' turn for fame.
And every February, numerous "studies" appear, usually by unknown and suspect institutions, that serve up astounding headlines like "Few Black Teachers in Nation's Classrooms." Their claims are reported uncritically and unchallenged in the papers as an example of a "lack of diversity" and "the lack of black role models," which need public attention, and that can only be remedied, according to these "experts," by increased education spending by government.
Ironically, the same newspapers that wring their hands about the lack of black role models spend many gallons of printer's ink throughout the year lionizing notables like Snoop Doggy Dog, P. Diddy, Suge Knight and other no-talents in the demimonde pop culture who leech off the disposable income of adolescents.
Regardless of its original good intentions, Black History Month has become in the eyes of many merely a ritualized, "say something nice about African Americans" event that agenda-driven organizations have co-opted for their own purposes, and that media are afraid to let go for fear of appearing not "demographic" enough.
In a society where Martin Luther King Jr. preached the ideals of integration and blindness to color, a month of publicity and propaganda devoted to those of only one hue - by emphasizing the hyphen in "hyphenated American" –seems stubbornly contrary to his inclusive vision.
If it's absolutely necessary for the country to have an annual Black History Month – as predictable as the spring rains – can Hispanic, Lithuanian, Oriental, Italian, Greek and Fill-In-The-Blank History months be far behind?
Barrett Kalellis is a commentator whose columns appear in The Detroit News, NewsMax.com, TownHall.com, National Review Online and other print and online publications.
Nope. Reality has been very, very good to me...
A damned cite easier than being a being a neo-con.
http://www.math.buffalo.edu/mad/madresearch.html
This site good enough for you?
My point is, that the prejudices that abounded in the past are not acceptable today, hopefully because we are more enlightened. Martin Luther King and his successors felt the need for black America to take pride in being black, rather than accept white-America's assessment that they were second-class citizens.
America's history should include any contributions that blacks have made, but this should not be distorted. It has been over fifty years since the civil rights movement, and this was a battle that could not be won over-night. It is both a major to realize how far blacks have advanced during this period, partially because of affirmative action and other programs that helped to level the playing field. But affirmative action and other programs have reached the levelling off point so that now reverse discrimination is a major concern.
I feel the same about black history month. It has become devisive and promotes the descrimination it was supposed to heal.
When all Black- Americans, Latino-Americans, Irish-Americans, etc. etc. and so on, can quit hyphenating their heritage, then maybe we all can be considered as American citizens.
I'm not sure I agree with you. White society has had so much of Jesse Jackson 'in your face' with his racist scams, the foolish arguments about black reparations, the anti-American Farraqhan (sp?), that our level of tolerance is fast over-coming our level of guilt over the prejudices of the past.
Drop the damn hyphen and avow that you are an American, with no special rights attached!! You have to admit that in spite of all the trials and hardships of your ancestors, you are better off now than you would have been in Africa today. And I mean no disrespect, but your standard of living is surely better than it would have been if your ancestors had not been sold into slavery -- by other black Africans.
There is no doubt that your ancestors suffered the loss of freedom, but today's standards should not be applied to the standards that existed two centuries ago, when slavery of all races was acceptable, depending upon the conqueror.
I'm not looking for any special rights or privileges. This country has already had plenty of that for most of its history thanks to slavery and legalized segregation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.