Rethinking colonial legacy: the U.S. commemorative calendar amidst «contested memories» 2019-2025 (on the example of the confrontation around the observance of Columbus Day)

Abstract

The article is devoted to the study of the U.S. commemorative calendar and the current legislative status of specific federal holidays (Columbus Day) under the conditions of the «conflict of memories». The purpose of the article is to analyze the U.S. commemorative calendar and the current status of federal holidays at the state level, using the observance of Columbus Day as an example within the context of rethinking the American colonial legacy. The methodological basis of the research is grounded in an interdisciplinary approach that combines the tools of historical science, memory studies, and jurisprudence. Comparative analysis, as well as methods of classification and typologization, have been applied. The source base consists of: 1) legal and official documents (1.1. Presidential Proclamations – B. Harrison, J. Biden; 1.2. House of Representatives and Senate bills – H.R.1189, S.2970); 2) statistical materials (U.S. Census Bureau data); 3) analytical reports and research center materials (Pew Research Center reports); 4) periodical press materials, including national (The New York Times, The Washington Post) and regional publications (Los Angeles Times). Scientific novelty: the author analyzes the current state of the U.S. commemorative calendar in the context of socio-political changes; for the first time, an attempt is made to systematize the legislative revision of Columbus Day’s status at the state level. Conclusions. The study examines the decentralization of the U.S. memorial calendar and the transformation of the content and status of «controversial» U.S. federal holidays, using Columbus Day as an example under the conditions of the «conflict of memories» (2019–2025). It is determined that under the influence of the «1619 Project»and the 2020 protests, the map of Columbus Day observance has acquired a distinct regional differentiation. The author proposes a classification of states based on the legal and legislative status of the holiday: traditional (12), transformational (12), hybrid (21), and neutral (6). A parity is established between traditionalists and reformers, as well as the dominance of a «compromise» model (parallel commemoration of indigenous peoples without the abolition of Italian-American heritage). Particular attention is paid to the differences between the stable institutionalization of holidays through legislative statutes and the temporary status granted via gubernatorial proclamations. The results obtained can be used in the course of further research into «controversial» dates within the U.S. memorial calendar and in the context of the legal and legislative status of said holidays as exemplified by specific states.