ABSTRACT
This article is an attempt to emphasize the sociopolitical nature of racism and argue against mainstream psychology’s tendency to reduce it to individual, interiorized cognitive patterns located in the unique individual. That theoretical conflict, typified by the difference between how Gordon Allport (1954) and W.E.B. DuBois (1903) conceived of prejudice, holds important implications for psychology today. I applied the conflict to a clinical vignette Altman described in order to suggest that psychologists would do well to think in a more contextual manner about issues that appear in the social realm. Some uses of the postmodern concept of the rational-irrational binary seem to argue that racism is a natural, universal feature of human life. That would be a serious mistake, because it draws attention away from the structural, political causes of American racism, which then make racism that much more powerful. A hermeneutic approach to racism focuses on the moral understandings and power relations that frame and control U.S. society. White guilt, it is suggested, is a product of the individualistic approach to racism, which when adopted by the analyst, causes paralysis and confusion, thereby subverting clinical treatment. Political activity such as anti-racist action makes theoretical sense and frees the analyst to be more honest in treatments with patients of color.
