Unsurprisingly, my comments
on Black History Month generated some vitriol among a few other bloggers, specifically Michael Croft of Ones and Zeroes
, who accuses
me of creating a straw man for the purposes of my argument, and Amy Hemphill of HVAC
, who feels
Black History Month serves a valuable purpose in teaching people who never learned any black history. Conversely, Craig Biggerstaff at Page Fault Interrupt recommends
black history be integrated into normal curriculums but not pressed as a separate history to encourage separatism.
Based on some of the commentary, I believe I didn't do as good a job as I might in explaining my argument, so I'm going to try to lay out my thoughts more clearly. Black History Month, of itself, is not the problem as I see it. Black History Month is a symptom of a larger problem, of various interest groups attempting to divide Americans along ethnic or other lines. As Craig and Amy both note, Black History Month is often taught as a black thing that non-blacks should simply stay away from, as it's not meant for them, as are many other ethnic celebrations. This is a significant problem.
Special interest groups attempt to pigeonhole people based on their ethnic background. Although anyone meeting any two people of similar ethnicity will immediately note myriad differences between them, a limited number of ethnic special interest groups claim to speak with one voice for their particular group. As a simple example, the NAACP no doubt did speak for the vast majority of blacks when fighting Jim Crow laws and the Civil Rights Act. Now they argue against the use of vouchers in schools, although there is no consensus in the black community in favor of this position. Yet it still claims to speak for all black people in America, a ludicrous claim that doesn't stand up to even basic questioning. Other ethnic special interest groups fall into the same trap. Most people in America have the same basic needs, and their political positions span the length and breadth of the spectrum. Any group claiming to represent all members of a particular ethnicity is incorrect at best, lying at worst, and their attempts to pigeonhole all their members into a certain position leads to ostracism of those daring to take positions outside those laid down from on high.
I discussed the use of historical figures previously, but I'll touch on it again briefly. It is the belief of many special interest groups that, for example, a Hispanic child cannot look up to Abraham Lincoln or Sojourner Truth, because they weren't Hispanic. While I do agree it's easier to look up to figures whom we resemble, the argument we can only look up to those people ethinically similar to us is incorrect. I've already noted my own respect for a number of people I consider personal heroes from American history that run the gamut of ethnicity and sex. I suspect that the average American's list would not be very different. How many whites are there who don't admire and respect Martin Luther King for his many accomplishments? On a simple note, how many children of all colors want to be like Mike? The claim that heroes must be carefully color matched does not stand up to scrutiny.
Worst of all, ethnic history celebrations tend to marginalize the contributions of nonwhites and patronize the group who is supposedly being honored. First, these celebrations frequently elevate minor figures to positions of prominence that people instinctively recognize are bogus. It is important to recognize Harriet Tubman's significance in helping to rescue hundreds of slaves from slavery. It is ludicrous to suggest that she somehow is a more important historical figure than Abraham Lincoln. Attempting to elevate various ethnic figures to historical prominence above what they would logically merit tends to take away from their real accomplishments. And as Craig noted, these search often allow hokum like the suggestions the ancient Egyptians were black to seep into the discourse uncriticized, diminishing the argument.
None of this is caused by Black History Month. These problems come from the many interest groups who are more interested in scoring political points than doing what is right. Although Black History Month may well serve as valuable remedial history for those who were taught a whitewashed version of history in school, it and other ethnic celebrations are used to do as much harm as good. I believe all of us would be better off not trying to ensure we celebrate this and that group's accomplishments, but instead ensure that our history properly accounts for the contributions of everyone, regardless of their ethnic background.