Deglobalization and the political psychology of white supremacy

After explaining the meaning of mentality, sources of globalization are discussed. Globalization, and antiglobalizing and deglobalizing mentalities, are understood as grounded in the historical, material, and concrete discursive and practical experiences of individuals. Globalization is divided into political-economic, cosmopolitan, and internationalist streams corresponding to historical trends developed into the 20th and 21st centuries, illustrating how contradictory projects of globalization set the stage for conflicting mentalities. Both antiglobalizing and deglobalizing forms of subjectivity are understood idealtypically as mentalities that resist neoliberal globalization. While antiglobalizing mentalities challenge the political-economic practices of globalization, deglobalizing mentalities reject cosmopolitan and internationalist projects, and are based on attribution mistakes, which can develop into nationalist, supremacist, and fascist subjectivities. Given the extent of global problems, the case for an internationalist form of subjectivity is made. The relevance of these reflections for psychology is addressed.

Section: Antiglobalizing and Deglobalizing Subjectivitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

In the aftermath of globalization: Antiglobalizing and deglobalizing forms of subjectivity

Teo

2023

“…Many people, Fromm (1942) argues, seek to escape this kind of freedom through fascistic commitments that place blame for the problems of a vociferous capitalism on a disenfranchised Other, usually with the aid of racist and/or xenophobic discourse. The strong-handed fascist leader thus promises to bring stability to an increasingly unstable liberal democratic capitalist order (see Kinnvall & Kisić Merino, 2023). It should be noted, and not parenthetically, that fascist leaders the world over tend to be elected through the democratic channels that are legitimised and made possible by capitalism, usually with the assistance of a shamelessly corporatised media (Chomsky, 2011;Hardt & Negri, 2004).…”

Section: Capitalism Democracy Psychologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Brown (2019) notes, it is through this sort of traditional morality that capitalist democracy offers itself as a stable social order opposed to the "chaos" that a truly democratic society would allow. Traditional morality of this kind indicates where radical democracy is least practiced, and thus where it is most needed, which is to say, the point at which democracy must be struggled for and taken back by the demos (see Kinnvall & Kisić Merino, 2023).…”

Section: Everyday Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychology and the question of radical democracy

Malherbe

2023

Throughout its history, capitalism has undertaken its extractive, imperial, and expropriative operations under the sign of democracy. Psychology has played a part in the ideological consolidation of capitalist democracy, adapting people to this system while also legitimising it. However, what of radical democracy as an always-contested grassroots organisational form that stands in opposition to both capitalism and the capitalist co-optation of democracy? Radical democracy of this sort remains a psychologically fraught function of anticapitalist resistance, one that has the potential to produce fracturing among comrades building such democracy. In this article, I consider how critical psychologists can work with those undertaking the difficult work of building radical democracy into political and quotidian life. I consider what critical psychology praxis could mean for those practicing radical democracy and how critical psychology might reconstitute itself through radically democratic formations.

Introduction: Theorizing the psychology of deglobalization

Gao

Teo

2023

The unprecedented pace and scope of globalization over the past half century have had major impacts on the field of psychology. We observe that since the 2008 financial crisis, there have been increased academic and political concerns with “deglobalization,” which is often associated with terrorism, xenophobia, authoritarianism, Brexit, the US–China trade war, the Russian war on Ukraine, and the COVID-19 pandemic. We argue that the phenomenon of deglobalization is historically uncertain but intellectually and politically significant enough to warrant analysis. Thus, in this special issue, we begin to theorize the psychology of deglobalization by addressing several foundational issues: the major manifestations of deglobalization in relation to psychosocial life, the dialectical relations between globalization and deglobalization, and possible ways to respond to the challenges of deglobalization. In the meantime, we flesh out these theoretical perspectives using the cases of nationalism, neoliberalism, White supremacy, far-right politics, dehumanization, isolationism, and trade conflicts.