Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

WireTap

Who Needs Black History Month?

By Paul Halley, Pop and Politics. Posted February 2, 2006.


We all do, because every month still remains white history month in this country.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Paul Halley

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

During an interview with Mike Wallace on "60 Minutes" last month, Academy Award winning actor Morgan Freeman called Black History month "ridiculous," igniting a firestorm of debate about its observance. Freeman told a visibly shocked Wallace, "I don't want a Black History month. Black History is American History. There's no white history month."

Since Freeman's statements became public, I have read numerous editorials written by black intellectuals calling for the end of the celebration of black history month. The premise is that Black History month is no longer necessary, and that a 28 day observance both confines and trivializes the historic contributions of African-Americans in this country.

Prior to even thinking about what Freeman was saying, I had to first get over my continued outrage at white people asking black actors, athletes, and entertainers what they think about issues that are outside of their areas of expertise. Publicizing the opinions of Morgan Freeman doesn't make him a spokesman for the black race. I don't see anyone seeking out Robert DeNiro for opinions about Iraq, but that's a whole different discussion.

But in response to Freeman's comments, all I can say is, "Please."

Celebrating Black History Month no more confines the history of African-Americans than the one day MLK holiday confines the achievements of Dr. Martin Luther King. Or that St. Patrick's Day confines the history of Irish-Americans to March 17th. Want to know how to trivialize African-American history? Eliminate Black History Month.

Mr. Freeman and others maintain that in place of Black History Month, black history should be incorporated into the mainstream history of America. Their thought process is that black history can be celebrated every day by its proper inclusion in American history. Mr. Freeman went so far as to ask Mike Wallace, "Which month is white history month?" The answer unfortunately, is that every month remains white history month in this country, and it is precisely for this reason that Black History month remains relevant and necessary.

Sylvia Cyrus-Albritton, director of the Association for the Study of African American Life and History, (which originated the observance of what is now Black History Month), points out that the country still has a long way to go in making its history inclusive. As she told the Baltimore Sun in December:

"We have a mission to research, promote, preserve and disseminate information about the contributions of African-Americans in history and their diaspora," she said. "When that mission is complete, maybe celebrations like Black History Month can take a different slant. American history books -- and the way it is taught -- still [do] not include the full contribution of African-Americans or other minorities for that matter.

"Dr. Woodson hoped that one day there would no longer be a need for Black History Month because it would be incorporated into American history all year round. So the goal Morgan Freeman speaks of is our goal as well."

In some ways, I can understand where Freeman is coming from. Ideally, we wouldn't have to have a special month because American history would be inclusive of all history. Freeman, however, also seems to be advocating that we shouldn't even speak of our differences. Instead, we should just pretend that not only is everyone equal, but that we are the same.

When Mike Wallace asked Freeman how we can get rid of racism, he replied:

"Stop talking about it. I'm going to stop calling you a white man. And I'm going to ask you to stop calling me a black man. I know you as Mike Wallace. You know me as Morgan Freeman. You wouldn't say, 'Well, I know this white guy named Mike Wallace.' You know what I'm sayin?"

I don't know about you, but I simply cannot agree with Freeman. We will not solve racial issues in this country by putting our collective heads in the sand and hoping they will go away. We can't run from our own racial past and delude ourselves that everything is ok in America. Our society still remains segregated in many ways, from where we live and where we worship, to who survives a hurricane. We like to think that we are a society beyond racism, but reality doesn't bear that out.

Race is America's great taboo, and the fact is that there are differences -- cultural and physical -- between people of different races. We need to acknowledge those differences. Pretending like they don't exist is ignoring the elephant in the room. Mike Wallace is a white guy. Morgan Freeman is a black guy. Why ignore the facts?

It's been said that history is written by the victors. Until American history becomes more inclusive of the contributions of all its citizens, Black History Month remains one of the few tangible ways that we can keep our nation's history accurate.

Who needs Black History Month? We all do.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Paul Hailey is a freelance writer and newspaper editor based in Dallas,Texas.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from WireTap! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Differences that Make No Difference
Posted by: artie on Feb 2, 2006 3:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think Mr Halley miscontrues Mr Freemen's remarks. Surely, Mr Freemen is not advocating that we pretend or simply ignorr human difference. Rather, Mr Freemen's remarks express the historical truth that those born and reared in the US - despite physical differences - must all be recognized as 'Black', in the nomenclature of those who conceptually move in the so-called mythical categoreis of 'White,' 'Red,' 'Black', and 'Yellow' - categories whose well-springs are in Hippocrates and Galen's humor theory. The substance of our concepts of freedom, equality, civil rights, privacy of spousal relationships, music , love, literature, etc., are all rooted in Black history, ad in so far as these concepts constitute our understanding of Life and of who we are as a people, we are all Black. Any American with any degree of self-awareness of herself/himself as an American must acknowledge that she/he is Black. American history IS Black history! Mr Freemen's remarks simply beseech us to understand ourselves as Americans. According to this understanding, being 'Black' is literally as un-remark-able a trait as being 'White.' Are there physical differences between us? Damn straight, there are. America needs to trans-valuate these differences and see them as Mr Freemen does: differences that make no difference!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Differences that Make No Difference Posted by: stormchilde1975
...dreaming...
Posted by: sleeve on Feb 4, 2006 9:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While such sentiments of reverence and appreciation for those historical figures of color and great deed are well-meaning, I find them to be misplaced. To be sure, those cultural giants (George Washington Carver, Dr. Martin L. King, Jr., et. al) and their accomplishments are significant, but the prevailing attitudes toward observance of them these days seems as disengenuous as the current government's disregard (and disrespect) of blacks.

After accompanying our country's descent into, and expediting its emergence from, a civil war and thus redeeming his Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln was embarrassed to find that blacks would all but prostrate themselves in his presence. No man, regardless of position or achievement, deserves another's worship, he would often declare, and it was some time before he understood that this reaction was the ultimate expression of respect coming from a people so culturally oppressed that it really knew of no better way to express it.

It leads one to wonder why, with all the holidays and monuments (and his face on our money, for god's sake), there is more importance placed on Martin Luther King's birthday than the delivery of the Gettysburgh Address. No, there's no need to wonder: it's precisely because Lincoln was white that the bowing and ingratiating has evolved into a near-complete disregard for him and his feats.

These days, black leaders seem preoccupied with which organization gets the city permits to march in observance of King, exhalting the virtues of his widow at her passing, and now, apparently, debating the need for a month's worth of observance of "Black History," all issues of questionable relevance to today's cirises of government and international "community."

Personally, with tongue in cheek, I could resent the lack of a "Genocide of The American Indian Tribes" month, or at least a "Wounded Knee-" or "Sitting Bull Day." For a black person to debate the cruelties and inequities of white tyranny in light of this history can seem amusingly contrite.

Take your day off, observe the good Doctor, and keep those ideals that he promoted close to the heart. But in all the noise of reverence and glorification of that legacy, never forget that Lincoln did more for civil rights in the waking world than King ever dreamt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ...dreaming... Posted by: dlf
Until we truly have multicultural teaching...
Posted by: MargieW on Feb 4, 2006 10:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a teacher who recently took her certification courses, including one on multicultural teaching, I definitely learned that setting aside one day or one month to focus on a particular culture's achievements is not true multicultural teaching, True, it is better than not having those particular times of focus...and we need them until textbook publishers, schools, and teachers finally learn how to truly include all cultures everyday in the study of American history, whre they belong.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

racism starts with races
Posted by: jjolese on Feb 4, 2006 11:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The idea of racism begins with "common sense" notion that there are indeed races at all, like Artie succinctly stated above. There are no "races" of humans and we need to start acting like it. We all know that referring to someone as black or white means identifying someone using an irrelevant characteristic, like introducing Danny DeVito as "short and fat man Danny DeVito". We make a characteristic relevant by constantly acknowledging and reinforcing it. This author's reasoning is self serving and uses its own logic to reinforce its argument. According to him we must acknowledge the differences because they exist. Problem is, they exist because we continually acknowledge them. Breaking the cycle means working to become color blind and alert to the scientific reality that skin color, although a strikingly obvious characteristic of a person's geographical descent, is no different than height, weight, hair color, or eye color. After that, the "racial" cultural differences, much like cultural differences between New Yorkers and Californians will hopefully just become another aspect of the American melting pot. Using band-aid solutions and feel-good notions like Black History month only reinforces the idea that there are indeed two American histories.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Black history month misses the facts about other races
Posted by: maxpayne on Feb 4, 2006 1:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look, I sympathize with blacks and other races including our own caucasian that have suffered from racism. However, if you're going to have a "Black history month", why not create a history month as well. Since it obviously isn't happening, "black history month" will look racist to other races outside the black community at large. Sorry, but I have equal sympathy for all races.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Need a Native American History Month
Posted by: dgpdx on Feb 4, 2006 2:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why don't we have one of these? Let's get back to our country's real roots.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Morgan Freeman is right, so don't dismiss him.
Posted by: NoPCZone on Feb 4, 2006 8:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Morgan Freeman is a product of the Mississippi Delta, the place the intelligentsia view as backwards and irrevocably caught up in racial politics. A place full of poor blacks, whites or their descendants. Poor, uneducated and overly religious. A place totally misunderstood by those in the rest of our country. A place that despite it's reputation for backwardness has produced more of our nation's culture than any other.

Mr Freeman has not abandoned his roots and comes home to a place in Mississippi that I know of. A good friend of mine used to live just up the road from it and called him neighbor. Mr Freeman knows of what he speaks.

Unlike many who have left the Delta, he has kept a touchstone in the very heart of our nation's racial politics. He knows the people, places, issues and lives of the Delta in the flesh--back and white, rich and poor, city and country. The limousine liberals would be well advised to listen to him.

Like Mr. Freeman I am tired of hyphenated Americans-- of every stripe. The history of every people, culture and ethnic group that has come here is a part of American history-- OUR HISTORY. All of ours. Like Martin Luther King, I long for the day that people are judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. I think Mr Freeman is in that group as well.

It is well and good for people to be proud of their lineage, but their lineage as Americans transcends race, ethnicity, culture, color, religion, region and all of the rest that sometimes divides us. By the way there are no red or blue states-- just the United States. Like siblings we squabble until the tough times come and then we are truly one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Colour Purple
Posted by: Holland on Feb 4, 2006 10:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I vote for more of the "colour purple", as the tragic, heroic tale of humanity has not nearly been updated, the ongoing plight of Katrina's countless survivors almost totally obscured by the news media's apparent unwillingness to honestly and compassionately chronicle the aftermath of America's greatest disaster since history began.

I'm sure that they [esp. C.N.N.] deem it opportune and safe to report on futile matters (in comparison), recoiling from possible controversy, the reality often being painful and shameful, thus abandoning essential standards of independent, ethical journalism that one would expect the news media to maintain, certainly when they're as influential as C.N.N., which the whole world watches.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

true Gemini
Posted by: archangel8 on Feb 19, 2006 6:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
IF YOU WOULD REALLY ,TRULY UNDERSTOOD WHERE MORGAN FREEMAN WAS COMING FROM ABOUT THIS ,HE'S SIMPLY TELLING YOU STRAIGHT UP THAT THE TERM "BLACK" IS NOT THE TITLE OF THE INDIGENIOUS PEOPLE HERE IN THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES.AS FAR AS BHM THAT A EUROCENTRIC PLOY TO KEEP US AS A PEOPLE FROM OUR TRUE HISTORY AS MUCH AS THE TITLES" NEGRO,BLACK,COLORED (NBC),OR AFRICAN -AMERICAN". WHEN PEOPLE SAW THE INTERVIEW LIKE I DID ON 60 MINUTES I COMPLETELY UNDERSTOOD WHAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT. IT DOESN'T TAKE A ROCKET SCIENTIST TO FIGURE THAT OUT.

MY PEOPLE NEED TO SEE THROUGH THE ILLUSION AND WAKE UP WHAT FREEMAN IS TRYING TO TELL YOU. FOR ONE OUR TRUE NATIONALITY IS MOORISH-AMERICAN/MOORS. WE WERE HERE BEFORE THE EUROPEANS AND ARE STILL HERE. THEY CAME FROM US ,AS OUR LOWER SELF ,B UT I NOT ABOUT TO GET INTO A RELIGIOUS THING IN CASE SOME OF YOU MAY THINK . GET STANLEY LANE POOLE'S BOOK: THE GOLDEN AGE OFTHE MOORS;THE MOORS AFTER SPAIN & THEY CAME BEFORE COLUMBUS BY DR. IVAN VAN SERTIMA.

MY BROTHERS AND SISTAS WE ARE MAKING HISTORY EVERYDAY BUT IT WILL COME TO FRUITION IF YOU HAVE TRUE KNOWLEDGE OF SELF

I.S.L.A.M/ PEACE

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]