No abstract

One of the most controversial figures in Black intellectual history is psychologist Kenneth B. Clark. Prominently identified as the main proponent of the idea that racial segregation led to psychological damage in Black children, Clark's work heavily influenced the U.S. Supreme Court in its 1954Brown v. Board of Education school desegregation decision. Almost immediately afterwards, his research methods and conclusions were challenged as incomplete and biased. Scholars now argue that Clark and other racial liberals became solely wedded to the idea of racial psychological damage in order to secure victory in Brown. Yet a closer analysis of his thought reveals a more complex picture. During the early 1940s, he developed a new psychological concept which he called the “zoot effect.” He defined the zoot effect as the attempt by a person to gain psychological security in a society which mandated that individual's inferiority. The zoot effect or zoot personality reflected the larger society's pathology, which manifested itself internally in individuals. This concept was heavily shaped by ideas about race, class, and in particular the work of Alfred Adler, which he first learned as a student at Howard University. Using archival and secondary sources, I argue for a reconceptualization of Clark within the broader context of his social thought, suggesting that the zoot-effect concept grounded his research on Black children and set the stage for his later views on desegregation, civil rights, and American society.

No abstract

For many years, the historical experience of slavery has occupied a unique niche in the minds of Americans. For some, the presence of enslaved Africans, while unfortunate, did not necessarily mean that American democracy was flawed (after all, they argued, American slavery was not all that bad). Others were repulsed by the institution and labeled the United States Constitution an immoral document for protecting the horrors of slavery. Regardless of their view, many Americans turned to the words and experiences of slaves themselves to support their arguments. Comments

When I was a high school student in Maryland during the 1980s, I remember my social studies teacher's lecture on the aftermath of the United States Civil War. According to her, blacks were actually worse off following the end of slavery because they had few resources to draw on and their former white masters were only concerned about them as a threat and a social irritant. Because blacks were no longer enslaved, they wandered aimlessly over the southern landscape and committed petty crimes in order to survive. I do not remember any mention by her of the black legislators, businessmen, ministers, and teachers who attempted to build a new life for themselves and the region. My teacher's portrayal of the South during Reconstruction as a chaotic place filled with formerly enslaved blacks rambling about clearly implied the need for law and order. Khalil Gibran Muhammad's bold new study of the links between race and criminalization helps to explain why high school teachers like mine believed that blacks (and the country as a whole) were much better off having slavery.