Troubling history and diversity: Disciplinary decadence in community psychology

According to Lewis Gordon, one is said to adhere to disciplinary decadence when disciplinary orthodoxy is prioritised over how particular problems are addressed. Under neoliberal capitalism, disciplinary decadence oftentimes reproduces a politics that is based on individual – rather than collective – freedoms (i.e. a liberal politics). This article interrogates two common disciplinarily decadent ways of politicising community psychology (CP), namely: parochial historicization and respect for diversity as liberal tolerance. We contend that in both cases, pseudo-progressive language is used to advance a liberal politics distorts the collective change-making capacities of CP. In an attempt to break from such liberal politics, we consider the progressive potential of an ethic of discomfort in CP. It is through this ethic, we argue, that we can begin to recognize the institutional limitations of CP, while realizing the role that CP is (and is not) able to play in community struggles. We conclude by calling for a CP that signifies a critical approach rather than a set of disciplinarily-bound dictums.

正如刘易斯·戈登（Lewis Gordon）所言，若将学科正统性置于具体问题的解决路径之上，则可被判定为陷入学科颓败（disciplinary decadence）。在新自由主义资本主义语境下，学科颓败往往会再生产出基于个人自由而非集体自由的政治逻辑（即自由派政治）。本文批判性审视了社区心理学（Community Psychology，下文简称CP）领域中两种常见的、带有学科颓败特征的政治化路径：狭隘历史化（parochial historicization），以及以自由派宽容姿态践行的“尊重多样性”原则。我们认为，在这两种路径中，研究者均借助伪进步话语推行自由派政治主张，实则扭曲了CP的集体变革能力。为摆脱此类自由派政治的桎梏，本文探讨了CP中“不适感伦理”（ethic of discomfort）的进步性潜能。我们主张，唯有依托这一伦理，方能认清CP的制度性局限，并明晰CP在社区抗争中所能发挥（以及无法发挥）的实际作用。本文最终呼吁，CP应作为一种批判性研究进路，而非一套受学科框架束缚的教条式准则。