February
1 began Black History Month, a national annual observance since 1926,
honoring and celebrating the achievements of African Americans.
To
commemorate its start President Trump hosted a “listening
session” at the White House that left listeners scratching
their heads wondering if he knew Frederick Douglass, a former slave,
and abolitionist, died in 1895, and 2018 will be the bicentennial of
his birth.
“Frederick
Douglass is an example of somebody who has done an amazing job and is
being recognized more and more, I notice.”
Expecting
White House press secretary Sean Spicer to clarify what Trump meant
regarding his comment on Douglass Spicer, however, made it clear he,
too, doesn’t quite know if Douglass is dead.
“I
think he wants to highlight the contributions he has made. And I
think through a lot of the actions and statements he’s going to
make, I think that the contributions of Frederick Douglass will
become more and more.”
The
remarks from both Trump and Spicer could have been an episode of
“Drunk History,” a TV comedy series where an inebriated
narrator fumbles recounting historical events, which would illustrate
why we need Black History Month.
And,
if Dr. Carter Woodson, the Father of Black History, were alive today
he would’ve been troubled by their remarks. However, it’s
not just African Americans troubled by Trump’s lack of
knowledge; it’s across various racial and ethnic groups.
“He’s
embarrassing!,” Scott Kearnan, who’s white, and the
Boston Herald’s Food Editor stated. “It’s generally
revealing of his lack of interest in the history of this country and
civil right struggles in particular.”
Sue
O’Connell, publisher and editor of South End News and Bay
Windows, and host of NECN’s “The Take with Sue
O’Connell,” who is white, brought to my attention that
Trump is not alone in not knowing basic black history. She reminded
me when Libertarian presidential candidate Gary John was being
shepherded to a room at a convention center named after Harriet
Tubman, and he asked the aide “Who’s Harriet
Tubman?”
“These
two men, Trump and Johnson, regardless of their opposing political
views had no idea who Harriett Tubman was. Trump enthusiastically is
learning about Frederick Douglass for the first time.”
Since
its inception Black History, however, has been the subject of
criticism from African American as well as from other races and
ethnicities. Many African Americans are insulted that the shortest
month in the calendar year is solely focused on the histories and
achievements of a people who have been dragged to these shores since
1619.
When
Obama was first elected Millennials, in particular -African-
Americans, people of color as well as whites - whose ballots help
elect the country’s first African-American president revealed
celebrating Black History Month seemed outdated to them. Many of them
viewed the celebration as a relic tethered to an old defunct paradigm
of the civil rights era and a hindrance to all people moving
forward.
Obama’s
candidacy was thought to have marshaled in America’s dream of a
“post-racial” era where race had finally become a
"non-issue." And Obama’s election encapsulated for
them both the physical and symbolic representation of Martin Luther
Kings' vision uttered in his historic " I Have a Dream"
speech during the 1963 March on Washington.
“King
said don’t judge by the color of our skin, but instead the
content of our character,” Josh Dawson, 26 of New Hampshire
told me.
In
proving how "post-racial" Obama was as a presidential
candidate, Michael Crowley of "The New Republic” wrote in
his article "Post-racial" that it wasn't only liberals who
had no problem with Obama's race but conservatives had no problem
also, even the infamous ex-Klansman David Duke.
"Even
white Supremacists don't hate Obama," Crowley writes about Duke.
"[Duke] seems almost nonchalant about Obama, don't see much
difference in Barack Obama than Hillary Clinton--or, for that matter,
John McCain."
For
years, the celebration of Black History Month, especially among white
conservatives, has always brought up the ire around "identity
politics" and "special rights."
'If
we're gonna have Black History Month, why not White History Month?
Italian History Month?” Dawson also questioned.
With
the alt-right movement afoot and Trump removing white supremacist
groups- Ku Klux Klan, Identitarians, Identity Christianity,
Neo-Nazis, and Neo- Confederates, to name a few - from the Countering
Violent Extremism program to profile Muslims these groups as well as
many white Trumpian conservatives are now more emboldened than ever
to not only contest the celebration of Black History Month but to
also insist now on a white history month.
This
push back against Black History Month by whites has been going on for
decades, and shown how some court decisions bolster the resistance.
During
the George W. Bush years we saw the waning interest in "identity
politics," creating both political and systematic disempowerment
of marginalized groups, like people of color, women, LGBTQ people,
and a disinterest in these histories and struggles. We also saw the
gradual dismantling of affirmative action policies, like in 2003 when
the Supreme Court split the difference on affirmative action,
allowing the Bakke case on “reverse discrimination” to
stand.
The
creation of Black History Month was never intended by Woodson to be
divisive but rather to educate all Americans of African Americans
contributions to the U. S. In so doing, it aims to engage and invite
informed “listening sessions” on the histories all
minorities as integral to American History.
|