Группа авторов

Antiracist Counseling in Schools and Communities


Скачать книгу

describe the essential and constitutive elements of anti-Blackness in our society. In this chapter, we submit our thesis, which is unlike intrapsychic theories of helping (e.g., cognitive behavioral approaches) or theories of cultural difference (e.g., multiculturalism) or pragmatic reform to foster assimilation (e.g., social justice). We propose a decolonial analytical framework that more effectively brings into relief the Manichean dialectic (meaning dichotomous and routinely and ritualistically antagonistic) that produces social death that includes gratuitous violence (Patterson, 1982; Vargas, 2010).

      1 Gratuitous violence—Black people are vulnerable to wanton physical violence, violence that is not contingent on the commission of a crime or an unwillingness by Black people to conform or acquiesce to the dictates of a particular hegemonic social framework (e.g., going on a run, shopping at the grocery store).

      2 Natal alienation—Black people’s familial arrangements are habitually disregarded, and Black interior social life is always subject to overbearing surveillance and the intentionally intrusive encroachments of the state (e.g., murderous no-knock warrants, the prison industrial complex).

      3 General dishonor—Black people are routinely subjected to blatant and egregious disregard and disrespect without the slightest consideration or hesitation, evidenced in, for instance, a general refusal to accept and respect Black people’s traditions (e.g., names, color, forms of Black cultural production).

      Our utilization and reliance on Patterson’s (1982) work, invoked here and throughout this chapter, represents an intentional desire to bring a foundational antagonism—social death—into sharper relief. In other words, Patterson’s conception provides an unfiltered analytic lens through which we better understand the forms of violence (e.g., gratuitous violence, natal alienation, general dishonor) that saturate the Black body as a consequence of European expansion and imperialism, a project called modernity. Furthermore, we submit that modernity and the legacies of modernity are inextricably tethered to a humanistic logic of white supremacy that proliferated during a time commonly referred to as the period of European enlightenment.

      Although counselor educators have emphasized the criticality of understanding how the period of European enlightenment informs contemporary counseling epistemologies and dominant orientations toward the therapeutic encounter (e.g., the client-counselor dyad) and revered research practices (e.g., researcher objectivity), this emphasis often ignores or evades an engagement, whatsoever, with the myriad forms of violence enacted on the Black body in this process. For instance, although Hansen (2006) went to great lengths to illuminate the epistemologies that characterized modernity and European enlightenment before contrasting these epistemologies with those associated with later scientific paradigms, like postmodernity, Hansen ignored how dominant theorists and knowledge claims associated with modernity and European enlightenment were transfixed on the Black subject. Unfortunately, Hansen’s characterization almost completely occludes any theorization of the utility and fungibility of the Black body in the formation of a world-altering system of knowledge claims that made the modern colonial world we occupy come into formation (Ani, 1994; Castro-Gómez & Martin, 2002; Horne, 2020; Morrison, 2017).

      inattention to the complicit influences of colonial and imperial projects on the practices and technologies of dehumanization, taxonomization, and the establishment of human hierarchies to rationalize violence through the implementation of racial and eugenic rationale … but also the historical, political, and social practices that were developed to achieve oppression and exploitation. (Joseph, 2015, p. 1021)

      In other words, we intend to make a clear distinction between theoretical and pragmatic frameworks of helping (e.g., multicultural counseling, social justice counseling) that suggest Black suffering can be ameliorated or even decelerated through discourses of respect for cultural differences or progressive ideologies of social inclusion. With this as our point of departure, we propose a decolonial theory of counseling that refuses to shy away from the structural nature of social death. Our candor and forthright engagement with social death and decolonial theory represents our desire to abandon Eurocentric scientific paradigms and psychological theories that suggest that adjustment and assimilation to an inherently unjust society, a society that habitually denies people of color access, constitutes psychological health and wellness (King, 1968). By intentionally naming historical events (e.g., the rise of European enlightenment, the formation of the new world) and emphasizing how these events reverberate through and restructure our contemporary colonial context (e.g., the hypersegregation and overpolicing of Black communities), we take up a position, as counselor educators, grounded in an undying and unapologetic love for Black people. This position requires and necessitates radical love and honesty and the eschewing of analytical and theoretical perspectives that obscure and mythicize the terror Black people live through (Washington & Henfield, 2019). We assert that a decolonial theory of counseling (Bulhan, 1990; Fanon, 1963, 2008) must engage concepts like social death, meaning a cancerous colonial context in which Black people are treated as nonbeings and perpetually subjected to gratuitous violence (Patterson, 2018).

      In the 1960s, the proliferation of decolonial, postcolonial, and critical cultural theories across academic discourses and within the general public coincided with prolonged revolutionary struggles for human rights, human dignity, and racial justice (Stanfield, 1985). These struggles for human dignity and racial justice were inspired by streams of radical consciousness that critiqued European colonialism and imperialism, in particular the profound impact European colonialism, neocolonialism, and neo-imperialism have on the material conditions of people of color throughout the world (Fanon, 1963; Morrison, 2017). As part of their work, many decolonial, postcolonial, and critical cultural theories have “fought against the traditional concept of difference” (Guthrie, 2004, p. xiii) by examining the role European enlightenment—a seismic shift in the arc of epistemological and methodological paradigms—played