Black Identity Politics and Psychiatry

Abstract

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article On Mental Health, People, and PlacesFull AccessBlack Identity Politics and PsychiatryEzra E. H. Griffith, M.D.Ezra E. H. GriffithSearch for more papers by this author, M.D.Published Online:30 Jul 2020https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.pn.2020.8a19The sequestration caused by the present pandemic has produced for me at least one beneficent outcome: The time to reread and ponder articles published some time ago. I returned recently to a piece by Harvard Professor Orlando Patterson titled “Being and Blackness” and published in The New York Times Book Review (January 8, 2006). In it, Patterson comments on two books. However, my interest here centers only on Tommie Shelby’s We Who Are Dark: The Philosophical Foundations of Black Solidarity (Harvard University Press, 2007).Patterson makes clear from the start that Shelby dismisses “the notion of an inherent or essential black identity, the idea that one shares some deep-seated common bond or kinship with all black people by virtue of being black.”Shelby disposes, too, of the idea that “being black means one is, or ought to be, culturally black.” In contrast, Patterson states that Shelby promotes a form of pragmatic nationalism that advocates Black* solidarity, despite the racial composition of the political organization in which Blacks and whites may be operating. Patterson claims that Shelby’s Black solidarity is characterized by “special concern, loyalty, and trust” that is distinct from notions of a color-blind liberal reform effort. This Black solidarity is related to Blacks’ history of slavery and race-based discrimination.I had to be attentive in reading this analysis, as Patterson notes that Black solidarity in this form may not be the solution in every context. For example, Blacks must understand that the socioeconomic challenge they will confront in the United States may not always be linked to their blackness. Still, Shelby seems to grant that Blacks legitimately have “shared political interests” related to their “racial subordination and their collective resolve to triumph over it.”I confess there is a certain laziness in making excursions into philosophical territory through the eyes of another scholar. However, in this case I felt the trip worthwhile, as it provided a different view of the current context surrounding the struggle over Blacks’ rights and privileges in modern America. Tommie Shelby’s work also clarified for me the new eruptions of Black-white discord within APA. Yes, Black members of APA are palpably upset about their perceived treatment within the Association, and the present national climate reinforces their irritation.There is little point in fanning the flames of discord here in a brief commentary. Still, I have talked with APA members on different sides of the debate and have reached the conclusion that the organization’s leadership has more work to do in structuring the discourse. Some of this further effort will require clearer avoidance of rigid boundaries and arguments that emphasize power and legalistic positions. I acknowledge the important step taken by our president, Dr. Jeffrey Geller, in establishing the Task Force to Address Structural Racism Throughout Psychiatry. I have hopes for its advancement of conversations among our diverse constituencies and emphasis on mutual and attentive listening.This is 2020, not 1969. Blacks want seats at the influential tables of APA, and whites must understand that Blacks are tired of repeated begging. Such behavior is below the new standard of dignity for minority group members. Blacks must in turn appreciate that they are not the only nondominant group in the organization or the broader society. Thus, making what Shelby calls “chauvinistic claims” about Black people’s heritage and privileges is often problematic when pursuing political action.There is also no denying APA’s economic and political reach in the marketplace. These bilateral acknowledgements affirm that Blacks and whites are inextricably intertwined in this organization. There is no going back on this point, and all APA constituencies must recognize this reality. I am confident that Jeffrey Geller wants to build community in the organization. I expect he appreciates that every action toward this end must result in mutual preservation of the other’s dignity. However, in closing, I return to Orlando Patterson’s reference to being and Blackness. The entire constellation of APA’s leadership will benefit from conversations, guided by colleagues with experience in the trauma of racism, about those of us who are dark. ■*Editor’s note: Psychiatric News follows the Associated Press Stylebook, which calls for the capitalization of “Black” and “Blacks.”“Being and Blackness” can be accessed here.Ezra E. H. Griffith, M.D., is professor emeritus of psychiatry and African American Studies at Yale University. ISSUES NewArchived