Against black history month

February is Black History Month, as everyone with school-age children must know. Charles Cooke at NRO makes a strong case against having such a month.

I concur. In my view, Black History Month operates to warp students’ understanding of American History and to assist those who wish to demonize America. I also believe these effects are intended by many of those who have foisted the present incarnation of this event on Americam students.

Understand that students typically don’t study American History until around the Fifth Grade (that, at least, is how it was when my daughters were in grade school). Thus, their only exposure to American History before that time is, annually, through Black History Month.

This means that, for 3 to 5 years, students learn about slavery and the atrocious first 100 years after slavery, without learning anything positive about America other than (if they are lucky) that the situation has improved. The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the victory over the Nazis, etc. must all wait. Unfortunately, the Fourth of July falls in the summer.

Slavery is an extremely important fact in American History, and it should never be sugar-coated. But if slavery and its aftermath are our central, overriding facts, then it’s doubtful that America is worthy of the regard in which generations of patriotic Americans have held it. A less patriotic citizenry may be called for, which I strongly suspect is how many educators feel.

I don’t believe that slavery and its aftermath are the central facts of American history. Black History Month treats them as if they were. Therefore, I’m against Black History Month.

Responses