By H.K. Burke, ContributorAS BLACK History Month comes around each year, I keep wondering what black people, and in particular Jamaicans, expect to get out of it.
If it is economic gain from reparations we might as well forget it; if the British government did nothing for us when slavery was abolished or when Jamaica was becoming independent the chances of their making good now are almost nil.
If it is a question of morality are we to expect Egypt to compensate Israel for the enslavement of the Hebrews in biblical times; the Italians to compensate Britain for the enslavement of the early Britons by Julius Caesar when he conquered Britain, or Spain for the conquest of Mexico and Peru? History marches on and only an idiot could expect today's standards to be applied retroactively and on behalf of people long since dead.
If poor black people are to receive hand-outs from First World nations it will not be on this basis. Tony Blair, the UK Prime Minister, has just made a call for wealthy nations to help the poor suffering people of Africa not because he feels that the UK owes them anything, but on humanitarian grounds. In my view, it should have been done long ago and not because they are black.
All impoverished countries need help and should be getting it from the United Nations based on contributions from its member states and in accordance with needs. As Blair recognises, it is also in the self-interest of prosperous countries so to do. We all hope that substantial help will also come our way but let us forget about past wrongs which were all part of the game in their day. Blacks were not unique in this respect.
A reason often given for the emphasis on black history is a search for an identity. I have never understood what this means. I have never been in doubt about my own and wonder why anyone should be about theirs. I am a human being, descended from the monkeys, born in Jamaica, of male sex and mixed racial and cultural background; a mixture of English, Irish and French whites, Portuguese or Spanish Jew, Jamaican black and heaven knows or cares what else. A real mongrel, but a proud citizen of the world, I was reared and educated mainly in English culture and have picked up some patois [mainly the expletives which for their expressiveness I think deserve to be included in the Oxford dictionary] but see this as a corruption of English.
This is one of the chief handicaps of the Jamaican people and should, if possible, be eradicated or at least superseded by English by means of education, and preserved only as a linguistic curiosity. [Bravo to Chester Burgess and his article of Feb. 5, 2002]
What identity are Jamaicans looking for? Is it the African connection? If so I think we should think again. Africa is still the 'dark continent' in some respects not much better than when the Europeans carved it up, and I am not referring to race. Some persons look to ancient Egypt as the birthplace of civilisation. This is pure fabrication. The Sumerians were prior in date and in any case the Egyptians were not black as some people like to claim. They are depicted by themselves as copper coloured for men and a lighter shade for women. In their art their features were not Negroid and when Negroes are shown they are conspicuously different.
The true Negro belt of Africa is south of Sahara. Currently it is for the most part poverty-stricken, tribalistic, politically dominated by European educated native leaders and racked by tribalism and ethnic cleansing, while being decimated by HIV/AIDS which originated there. Hence Blair's call.
Is this what the Jamaican black wants to identify with? I doubt it.
Then there is the matter of our history and culture. For the most part Jamaica did not have to fight for its social, political and cultural freedom. Slavery was abolished by Queen Victoria, not Sam Sharpe, and the other rebels who by dint of a change in our political fortunes have now become national heroes, although they did play an important part.
Independence came easily when the British no longer found sugar profitable, had enough of empire and Jamaica had become a burden. Some WI writers have in the interest of encouraging people in their current social and economic plight tended, in my opinion, to exaggerate the role of the native freedom fighters but I do not think this should be done. Far from dispelling racism the very term Black History incites it and arouses unnecessary resentment. After all what other race has a special history?
When the British were here they brought their civilised West European culture with them and established a number of fine institutions, some of which have survived. To some extent some have been bastardised while we have turned our backs on others in some cases merely because they came from the colonial masters. We also created many of our own.
They also gave us cricket but we are not above challenging the umpire; and football, but instead of remaining a recreational game it has become the main occupation and goal of an under-educated and unemployed youth. This, of course, is not their fault but a direct consequence of the poverty of our economy. Because reggae music captivated the interest of the world, a ganja-smoking, barbarous, sometimes indecent dance hall culture has grown up to outdo it which, I am sorry to say, has captured a section of this newspaper, radio and TV time to the further detriment of the morals of the population to which it mainly caters. Is this part of what Black History Month is trying to celebrate in its cultural aspect?
History is a record of the past and should not be prostituted to bolster nationalistic or racial causes. Considering the facts of our past we should leave these to academics who have no axe to grind [or should not] and turn our attention to the future. There is a lot that needs to be done and it cannot help to carry the burden of an ugly past with us. This can only paralyse our will to do better in the future, leaving us in the doldrums in a highly competitive world.
