I recently watched a video criticizing a propaganda video make by MTV about "Black History Month". (The MTV video in question implies that without black people we wouldn't have today things like cellphones, video game consoles or pacemakers, which makes absolutely no sense. But that's not here nor there.)
That made me think that personally I vehemently oppose, on principle, any "Black History Month". I oppose it exactly as much as I would oppose a "White History Month", or a "Latino History Month", or anything of the sorts.
Why? Because I'm an individualist, not a collectivist. And I'm an individualist because I believe in equality and fundamental human rights. I consider that anybody who both adheres to collectivist ideas and claims to uphold equality and human rights to have completely contradictory views, because they are incompatible things.
As an individualist, I believe that every person should be judged as an individual completely regardless of inconsequential things like gender, race or sexual orientation. Every individual person should have the same rights, privileges and responsibilities as every other person. Every individual person should be judged based on personal merit and the content of their character, not based on their chromosomes or skin pigmentation. Nobody is deserving of special treatment, nor discrimination, based on those things.
A person may belong to a gender or race in the biological and scientific sense, but not in the sociopolitical sense. In the sociopolitical sense every person belongs to the society as a whole, and should be treated equally to everybody else.
The only situation where I accept the need for special treatment and special privileges is when there are good justified medical reasons for them (such as a physical disability), to try to help these individuals to live as well as is practically possible, and to help them with their medical condition.
Collectivists, however, divide people into sub-groups based on things like gender, race and sexual orientation, and treat people differently based on which sub-group they belong to. They will assign rights, privileges, credit, responsibilities and shame on people based on the group they belong to. They will give special treatment to some groups, and sometimes even discriminate against others. When they judge an individual person, they will take into account which group that person belongs to, and let that affect their judgment significantly. The group division may become even more important than personal merit, achievements and content of character.
This is pretty much the definition of sexism and racism. And it's the reason why I vehemently oppose it on principle, and why I think it's blatantly against equality and fundamental human rights.
"Black History Month" is a deeply collectivist idea. Rather than looking at the achievements of individual people, they instead look at what artificial group those people belong, and give credit to the entire group for things that some individuals have achieved. They do not say "person X invented thing Y". Instead, they say "black people invented thing Y".
Ironically, they are diminishing the significance of that personal achievement by that person. They are attributing credit for it to an entire group, most of who had absolutely nothing to do with the achievement (and might not have even been born when the achievement was made.)
I am white. Isaac Newton was white. How much credit and recognition do I deserve for what Newton achieved? How much credit and recognition do white people in general deserve for what Newton achieved? Nothing. Nada. Nil.
Newton was a genius. He was a person. All credit for his achievements go to him, and any person who directly contributed to what he achieved. Nobody else. His skin pigmentation and chromosomes play absolutely no role in this.
Some people whose skin pigmentation just happened to be darker than a certain shade also have achieved great things. How much credit do black people in general deserve for their achievements? Nothing. Nada. Nil. The credit for those achievements go to those individual people, and anybody who directly contributed to their knowledge and work. Nobody else.
This is why I vehemently and on principle oppose "Black History Month", and find it racist and abhorrent. It is absolutely no different from, for example, a "White History Month". I oppose these because I'm not a racist and I believe in equality and fundamental human rights. I oppose these because I'm an individualist, not a collectivist.