Intersectionality and Fascism

IF 3.5 1区 社会学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Patrick R. Grzanka
{"title":"Intersectionality and Fascism","authors":"Patrick R. Grzanka","doi":"10.1111/josi.70050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Five years before the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark <i>Dobbs</i> decision, reproductive justice scholar-activist Loretta Ross used the term “Americanized fascism” to describe right-wing social movements that promote totalitarianism, the systematic erosion of civil rights, and the consolidation of a patriarchal White ethno-state. Her warning about the mainstreaming of White supremacy and aligned political projects seems obvious in retrospect now that abortion is illegal or severely restricted in most U.S. states, teaching and scholarship about anti-Blackness and racism is regularly banned or policed, and a barrage of legislation has emboldened discrimination against LGBTQ+ people, and especially transgender individuals, across registers of social and civic life. Yet much public or “mainstream” discourse and even activism about the rise of fascism fails to account for the coalitions of violence that have profoundly undermined civil rights in the United States. In this essay, I explore how single-axis logics that obscure the intersectional dimensions of fascism remain dominant in American institutions, including psychology. Despite persistent handwringing about how best to use intersectionality responsibly in psychological science, fixation on the methodological challenge of intersectionality averts attention from a far more intimidating question about how psychologists will respond to Americanized fascism today and in a deeply precarious future. If psychological science is to contribute meaningfully to social transformation and social justice, we must confront our chronic unwillingness to use tools we have readily available to disarm fascism and its techniques of structural violence.</p>","PeriodicalId":17008,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social Issues","volume":"82 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/josi.70050","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social Issues","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/josi.70050","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Five years before the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Dobbs decision, reproductive justice scholar-activist Loretta Ross used the term “Americanized fascism” to describe right-wing social movements that promote totalitarianism, the systematic erosion of civil rights, and the consolidation of a patriarchal White ethno-state. Her warning about the mainstreaming of White supremacy and aligned political projects seems obvious in retrospect now that abortion is illegal or severely restricted in most U.S. states, teaching and scholarship about anti-Blackness and racism is regularly banned or policed, and a barrage of legislation has emboldened discrimination against LGBTQ+ people, and especially transgender individuals, across registers of social and civic life. Yet much public or “mainstream” discourse and even activism about the rise of fascism fails to account for the coalitions of violence that have profoundly undermined civil rights in the United States. In this essay, I explore how single-axis logics that obscure the intersectional dimensions of fascism remain dominant in American institutions, including psychology. Despite persistent handwringing about how best to use intersectionality responsibly in psychological science, fixation on the methodological challenge of intersectionality averts attention from a far more intimidating question about how psychologists will respond to Americanized fascism today and in a deeply precarious future. If psychological science is to contribute meaningfully to social transformation and social justice, we must confront our chronic unwillingness to use tools we have readily available to disarm fascism and its techniques of structural violence.

交叉性和法西斯主义
在美国最高法院具有里程碑意义的多布斯案判决的五年前,生殖司法学者、活动家洛丽塔·罗斯(Loretta Ross)使用“美国化法西斯主义”一词来描述右翼社会运动,这些运动促进了极权主义,系统地侵蚀了公民权利,巩固了父权制的白人民族国家。现在回想起来,她对白人至上主义主流化和结盟政治项目的警告似乎很明显,因为堕胎在美国大多数州都是非法的或受到严格限制的,关于反黑人和种族主义的教学和学术研究经常被禁止或受到监管,而一连串的立法助长了对LGBTQ+人群,尤其是跨性别者的歧视,在社会和公民生活中都是如此。然而,许多关于法西斯主义兴起的公共或“主流”话语,甚至是激进主义,都未能解释严重损害美国公民权利的暴力联盟。在这篇文章中,我探讨了单轴逻辑如何掩盖法西斯主义的交叉维度,在包括心理学在内的美国机构中仍然占主导地位。尽管对如何在心理科学中最有效地负责任地使用交叉性一直感到绝望,但对交叉性的方法论挑战的执着,使人们忽视了一个更令人生畏的问题:心理学家将如何应对今天和一个非常不稳定的未来的美国化法西斯主义。如果心理科学要对社会转型和社会正义做出有意义的贡献,我们必须正视我们长期以来不愿意使用我们现成的工具来解除法西斯主义及其结构性暴力技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
73
期刊介绍: Published for The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues (SPSSI), the Journal of Social Issues (JSI) brings behavioral and social science theory, empirical evidence, and practice to bear on human and social problems. Each issue of the journal focuses on a single topic - recent issues, for example, have addressed poverty, housing and health; privacy as a social and psychological concern; youth and violence; and the impact of social class on education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书