Black History Month originated as Negro History Week in 1926. Carter G. Woodson, a Black scholar who earned his doctorate at Harvard, started the tradition. He placed it on the second week of February to coincide with the birthdays of Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass, both of whom Black communities already celebrated. Woodson wanted to take the celebration of these men and extend it out to all Black men and women who deserved recognition for their contributions to society.  
The Civil Rights Movement pushed universities to extend the one-week celebration, and in 1976 President Gerald R. Ford officially recognized February as Black History Month.
Today, February is a chance for K-12 schools to break out of their standard curriculum and introduce prominent Black figures throughout American history. Stores like Macy’s take the opportunity to highlight their diversity with a sale, and sites like Positive Promotions sell “inspirational” keychains, planners, pencils, bookmarks and other trinkets.
The University of Oregon celebrated this year with an annual Black History Month banquet, an art exhibit, lectures from Ta-Nehisi Coates and Barbara R. Arnwine, a special Ducks After Dark movie viewing, an unveiling of an historical marker for the home site of Wiley Griffon — one of Eugene’s first African-American residents — and an annual capstone event with the 2017 theme “Voices: Black in Oregon.”
But some question the validity of this one-month effort to celebrate Black culture. Woodson created Negro History Week because the education system ignored all Black accomplishments throughout America’s history. He wanted society to acknowledge the contributions of Black Americans; he looked forward to a day when the week would no longer be necessary and Black history would be fully integrated into the teaching of American history.
John Hope Franklin, a prominent Black American historian and a Woodson contemporary, was very skeptical of Black History Month.
“The expansion of the ‘week’ into a ‘month’ does not necessarily mean that we are moving toward the Woodson ideal,” Franklin said. “The commercialization of the ‘month’ provides hucksters with a longer period in which to sell their trinkets and souvenirs, corporations a greater opportunity to display their special brand of ‘civic awareness’ and lecturers the golden chance to show off their knowledge of Black history.”
Gerald Horne, another Black historian, shares Franklin’s criticism of the month. According to Horne, “A Black History Month that is useful should provide us with guidance as to how we reached the point where we are today and, quite simply, should not just be an antiquarian history for history’s sake.”
Unfortunately, Black History Month rarely goes beyond celebrating the already famous efforts of activists like Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks, commercialized sales and dedications to a town’s first Black resident. These celebrations are more about capitalizing on a past struggle and current culture than highlighting recent underground achievements, discussing the modern struggle and pushing white America’s comfort zone into broadening our education standards year-round.
Morgan Freeman brought the debate against Black History Month to public attention in a 2005 interview with 60 Minutes, when he said “I don’t want a Black History Month. Black history is American history.” Freeman pointed out that there is no white history month.

One month is not enough to teach the impact the Black community has had in America. When teachers segregate Black history from American history and then squeeze it all into a single month, students receive an overly simplified version of a few highlight moments. Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. did more than give a speech about a dream, and he is just one of many Black men and women who have helped shape this country. We must shed this useless segregation in our education and teach the truth: Black history is American history.
But historians might not entirely agree with Freeman on abolishing Black History Month right away. As Franklin said, “Black History Month serves a useful purpose for there can be no doubt that we have not yet reached the point where there is widespread knowledge that, as Dr. Woodson liked to phrase it ‘the Negro played a not inconsiderable role in the making of America.’”
So instead of dismissing February, we should take Woodson’s original intention to heart. One month highlighting Black history cannot be the end goal. America must work towards resisting the capitalism of culture. We cannot let universities hire lecturers only one month out of twelve, or watch racially focused films during February alone. March 1 should not be an end to the celebration of a year-long culture, or the end to education of events spanning hundreds of years.
In a truly equal society, there is no segregation between “Black” and “white” history, and one should never take a backseat to the other.