Notting Hill carnival, 2019

Source: Bigstock

As February ends, so too does Black History Month (BHM)—although, as is often noted, this “month” now appears to last all year long. At least in the U.S., you have some genuinely historically significant black people in your history worth remembering: Martin Luther King, Frederick Douglass, Al Jolson.

Here in the U.K., the whole unwanted export makes far less sense, being a bit of a mystery. As there were no more than a few thousand non-whites inhabiting Britain until the 1960s, blacks have produced zero figures of true national importance. And yet, still we absolutely must have a Black History Month…but how? Simple. By peddling outright lies.

BHM Britain was launched in 1987 by activist Akyaaba Addai-Sebo, who was actually Ghanaian. Nonetheless, in 1984 Addai-Sebo fled political persecution back home and gained shelter in Britain, a safe and welcoming country toward which he quickly showed his gratitude by condemning it as “a touchstone for colonialism, imperialism and racism.” A shame it wasn’t. Then he might have been turned back at the border immediately.

Finding work at the notorious “Loony Left” Greater London Council, in 1986 Addai-Sebo held a program of “educational” lectures on black history in the Royal Albert Hall. Here, captive schoolkids were treated to months of not-at-all partisan rants from Nelson Mandela’s then wife Winnie; anti-Semitic lunatic Yosef Ben-Jochannan, who preferred a policy of “one [white] settler, one bullet” over “one person, one vote” in any future South African elections; and the insane American “psychologist” Frances Cress-Welsing, who thought white people were genetically inferior albino mutants, mentally programmed to be secretly terrified of black men’s gigantic penises.

Ain’t No Black in the Union Jack
On 1 October 1987, BHM Britain was launched with a speech by Malauna Karenga, the violent black U.S. radical and inventor of the fake “Black Xmas” pseudo-festival of Kwanzaa, together with additional help from Sally Mugabe, first wife of killer Zimbabwean dictator Robert “Comrade Bob” Mugabe. Together, they determined to “do everything in their power to ensure that black children did not lose the fact of the genius of their African-ness.”

As for why October was chosen for BHM Britain rather than February as with BHM U.S., it was because this was harvest season in much of Africa, thus celebrating an ancient “time in history when Africa, Egypt and Ethiopia…were the cradle and breadbasket of civilization.” Ethiopia certainly wasn’t the continent’s “breadbasket” in 1987, thanks to the deliberate misrule of the black Marxist dictator Mengistu Haile Mariam, but Zimbabwe still was—at least until Sally Mugabe’s husband stole all the successful farms from their white owners and handed them out to random black cronies with no idea how to run them, triggering mass famine. Apparently, October was “also a period of tolerance and reconciliation in Africa, when the chiefs would gather to settle all differences,” as with the Hutus and Tutsis soon to be seen harvesting one another’s heads using machetes in Rwanda.

But this wasn’t enough. Black people now lived in Britain as well as Africa, as the presence of Addai-Sebo in London sadly proved. Where was their history?

Compiling a Blacklist
In 2002, the BBC organized a public vote to see who were the 100 Greatest Britons, as their subsequent tie-in TV series was called. Won by Sir Winston Churchill, the poll was generally deemed a big success. The only non-white individual to appear, however, was Zanzibar-born Queen frontman Freddie Mercury, leading to predictable wails the list was “racist.”

In 2003 an alternative 100 Great Black Britons ballot was organized, intended to demonstrate blacks had “been here for a thousand years” so had “influenced and shaped Britain” just as much as whitey had. The results suggested otherwise. Prominent on the original BBC poll were immortal souls like Shakespeare, Newton, Darwin, Nelson, and Alfred the Great, a man so indisputably Great it was his actual surname.

The black alternative poll, however, featured such less-than titanic figures as the ephemeral R&B artists Ms. Dynamite and Jazzie B, avuncular newsreader Trevor McDonald, kids’-TV presenter Floella Benjamin, bald crooner Errol Brown from Hot Chocolate, terminally unfunny comedian Lenny Henry, self-confessed “burglar,” “car thief,” and “woman-beater” (and truly dire poet) Benjamin Zephaniah, and former Manchester United midfielder Paul Ince. The vast majority of names on the list were either born or became famous from the 1950s onward—probably because there were virtually no black people in Britain prior to this date.

The White Queen
Hilariously, No. 5 on the blacklist was the 14th-century Queen of England Philippa of Hainault, wife of Edward III and an indisputably significant historical figure—but a white one. Her son Edward was known as “The Black Prince,” but this does not mean either he or his mother was black; the sobriquet probably refers to his black shield or armor. Fantasists are desperate to prove Meghan Markle was not Britain’s first non-white royal, though.

King Charles II, on the run during the English Civil War, was described on “WANTED” posters as “a tall, black man, more than two yards high.” Black men appearing on “WANTED” posters is hardly unknown, but in the 1600s this just meant Charles had black hair or eyes; “black man” in this context means the same as “blond man” might today. In other words, as there were basically no black men in England back then, the term “black man” didn’t even yet mean “black man”!

Viewers of supposedly “color-blind” Netflix shitfest Bridgerton, meanwhile, may labor under the misapprehension that Queen Charlotte, 18th-century German-born wife of George III, was black, which is an actual fringe revisionist theory. If so, this would mean all Charlotte’s royal descendants, from Queen Victoria to today’s King Charles III, were actually black, thus pushing Jazzie B and Paul Ince a bit further down the 100 Great Black Britons list.

The thing is, the main “evidence” Queen Charlotte was really Queen Meghan I is that she was persistently described by contemporaries as being “ugly” with “a true mulatto face,” and does indeed look distinctly simian in her painted portraits. The idea that a woman looking hideously apelike automatically equates to her being black seems a bit, um, racist, however; plus, there is the fact that, in all these portraits, Queen Kong’s pallid skin is blatantly white. Yet, it is suggested, maybe this was just the evil racist monarchy’s attempts to cover her race up. Hence, the existence of numerous paintings of a white woman looking white now somehow magically become evidence of her actually being black.

Black to the Future
Tiny numbers of blacks have genuinely lived in Britain from Roman times, when African legionnaires came over as part of a colonial occupying force—but, by this twisted logic, India and South Africa have always been white countries too. A much-hyped 2017 book, Black Tudors by Miranda Kaufmann, featured detailed biographies of an amazing ten such swarthy individuals, taken from the few hundred or so blacks who lived in England and Wales back then…from a total population of around 4 million whites by the end of the Tudor Era in 1603.

Hilariously, one of those hagiographically memorialized by Kaufmann is a 1620s black London prostitute, Anne Cobbie, who appeared able to charge clients four times extra on account of her soft and unusual skin—hence only proving the rarity of such people’s presence in the city at the time (she probably wasn’t even truly black but brown, being a North African “tawny Moor”).

It is obviously vital British schoolkids learn all about the fascinating tradition of Arab prostitutes handing out overpriced blowjobs in the Greater London area, but what if some of the brighter ones object that such “tawny Moors” were highly atypical British citizens of the time? Well, the media can always step in to intellectually groom them long before they even step inside a classroom. In 2016, Steven Moffat, then Chief Race Commissar of BBC sci-fi kids’ drama Doctor Who, explained why the titular time-traveler always seemed to be zooming back to vibrantly diverse versions of Victorian and Regency England that were strangely full of blacks, Muslims, and Pakistanis:

Sometimes the nature of a particular show—historical dramas, for instance—makes diversity more of a challenge, but Doctor Who has absolutely nowhere to hide on this. Young people watching have to know that they have a place in the future [unless they’re white]. That really matters. You have to care profoundly what children’s shows in particular say about where you’re going to be [demographically]. And we’ve kind of got to tell a lie: we’ll go back into history and there will be black people where, historically, there wouldn’t have been…. We’ll say, “To hell with it, this is the imaginary, better version of the world. By believing in it, we’ll summon it forth.”

In other words, “We’ll systematically mislead children.” And so will the leaders of BHM Britain. And so will their teachers. And so will their politicians. And then, eventually, one fine day, it will turn out even Churchill was a Jamaican too, thus finally explaining why he was called “Winston.”

One particular nonentity on the 100 Great Black Britons poll was current Labour Party MP David Lammy, a man so historically retarded that when asked which English monarch came after Henry the Eighth on a TV quiz show once answered, “Henry the Seventh.” In the current climate, he might be Britain’s next Education Secretary.