Photo credit: kris

By: Lucia Sarmiento Verano

Many readers will be familiar with the concept of Racial Capitalism that links White Supremacy and the Capitalist system through the advent of colonialism and trans-Atlantic slavery. I wanted to offer a similar (but not quite the same) perspective building on Latin American philosophy. Links made between Whiteness and a capitalist way of life may help us understand how hierarchies, dehumanisation and exploitation may be present around the globe and in every field. The therapeutic professions are, of course, not exempt from this.

I will start by explaining how Whiteness, capitalism and discrimination are related. After this, exploring the Whiteness of therapy will allow us to establish links between capitalism and therapy, grounded in the mindset and systems that structure our profession.

Whiteness and capitalism

In his text Modernity and Whiteness (2019), Ecuadorian-Mexican philosopher Bolivar Echeverria made solid links between the capitalist ethos, way of life and Whiteness. He first separates the concepts of whiteness (“blancura”, whiteness of skin) and cultural whiteness (“blanquitud”). Cultural whiteness refers to a way of life, culture and mindset. It is related to certain outlooks on life, such as:

• dedication to productivity and efficacy
• self-restraint
• a certain set of moral values (including views on the family, gender and sexuality)
• certain tastes and manners

I will differentiate between whiteness and Whiteness with a capital W (as cultural whiteness), as other authors have also done, for clarity.

Echeverria builds on the work of Max Weber, who links the capitalist ethos and religion, in particular Protestantism, to trace how historically (during the advent of the colonial era), the same capitalist ethos and way of life became intrinsically linked to European populations, especially the Northern Europeans groups and phenotype.

This distinction is helpful to understand two types of racism that mark our societies to this day. The first is what he calls ethnic racism, based on skin colour, phenotype, and belonging to ethnic groups. It has been layered with a “modern” (as in born in the era we call modernity) cultural-civilisational racism, based on cultural Whiteness and the life ethos it demands from people. People or groups can be included or excluded based on these two interlinked hierarchies. It also means that non-white people can embrace, internalise and express cultural Whiteness and the capitalist ethos, and discriminate against those who don’t, to protect their inclusion in the system.

He makes this distinction to explain how non-white populations in formerly colonised countries could integrate the global economic system. The formation of new nation-states after political independence was built on systems that mimic European states. Thus, they required this hierarchy to be established and/or reproduced based on cultural whiteness and not only on ethnic whiteness. There was a need for local elites to uphold global hierarchies. This is how modern cultural-civilisational racism slowly became the prevalent form of racism around the globe.

However, Echeverria also points to an important caveat: in moments of crisis, when states are in need of restructuration, ethnic racism based on ethnic whiteness is always at risk of coming to the forefront again. He analyses the case of Nazi Germany as an example.

Therapy and Whiteness

It is important to be aware of the genealogy of thought, theories and practices in our field. We all know that most of the theories on which our trainings are based today are were made by white middle-class men, often professionals in the mental health field, working with white middle-class patients/clients (Katz, 1985).

But let’s think beyond that and consider the historical connections. The inception of what we call talking therapy today was psychoanalysis, popularised by Freud’s theories of the mind and his practices dedicated to alleviate distress and neurosis. Freud and other theorists who reflected on being human were people of their time. And it is worth asking ourselves, which time?

The time of the advent of modernity, industrialisation, capitalism and colonialist expansion. The whole of European society was being shaped by a violent and intimate encounter with an Other which was placed in a position of inferiority, backwardness and primitivity for its exploitation and at times, extermination. As a result, European society, its philosophy and perspective, and European subjectivity also changed. Ideas of what it means to be human and how our inner process is structured directly come from these violent dynamics. Marked by comparison and exclusion of the Other, the formation and definition of the European Self developed, as well as the concepts of the unconscious, drives, repression and a general developmentalist view of the human which mirrors evolutionism.

To this day, the legacy of Whiteness can be seen in the theories of the mind, for example in what is considered mental good health or mental ill health, appropriate healthy expression of emotions and thoughts, a certain relationship to the body, boundaries with others and the external world, perception of time, etc. Most of these assumptions remain unchallenged in our trainings and in our practices, making therapy unhelpful and at times harmful to people who do not fully internalise and express cultural Whiteness: people of colour, people from different cultures, neurodivergent people, disabled people etc.

There are, of course, historical examples of this profession explicitly working at reinforcing and upholding capitalism and white supremacy. The participation of psychology as a field in race science is just one of them. Descriptions of the global majority as having underdeveloped psyches, the creation of diagnosis like drapetomania, the Puerto Rican Syndrome, etc. Let’s also remember how the links between racism and in particular anti-blackness, and ableism are so clearly visible in psychology.

Knowing this we can safely say that the therapeutic professions are currently providing limited quality care for the global majority at best, and at worst, they are causing active harm via re-colonisation and re-traumatisation.

Capitalism and Therapy

I thus find it necessary, since we’ve made the links between Whiteness and capitalism, and between therapy and Whiteness, to reflect on the ways in which a capitalist ethos is reproduced in the therapeutic profession, both in an out of the therapeutic relationship. The following are just the beginning of reflections on this subject. In these reflections cultural Whiteness and capitalist mindset overlap.

I will present it as a list of key elements that we can find in our profession in relation to the list of elements that constitute Whiteness presented above, more specifically the first point on dedication to productivity and efficacy. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list by any means, but I do see all of the following elements as completely interdependent and interlinked, all belonging to a colonial, capitalist and White perspective.

– rationality (manualised skills, theorising everything): I see this acutely, and this is true for any modality, is the tendency to theorise every phenomenon in such a way that it fits logically within the modality’s framework and practices and in a way that is readily understandable for Western professionals and their own perspectives. The latest pull toward evidencing, and “evidence-based” therapies is also a sign of this (further examining of the ways those studies have been made are needed as well as their underlying assumptions, research populations and interpretations of data).

– hierarchies: the existence of hierarchies in the mental health field firmly mirrors the hierarchies needed to sustain a capitalist and colonial society. Whether they are economic/financial, or intellectual/academic, both are present within our profession. The delimitation certain people and institutions try to make between counsellors and psychotherapists is one of them, as is the differentiation between therapists, psychologists and psychiatrists and their position and authority within the system (and society). I speak here of hierarchies and not just differences because each of these professions has a difference set of practices, theories and responsibilities. However, the key element to consider is that these differences are not only considered just as such, but placed in a scale of more or less prestige, respect, access to opportunity and resources, and status. We clearly see within the evidence-based movement in psychotherapy the aspirations to reach towards a higher level in this hierarchy, places occupied by psychology and the medical profession. The obsession with status propels our profession deeper into Whiteness and capitalism in its ethos and its practices, forever legitimising the harm it does.

– efficient use of resources/dedication to productivity: we see this tendency in the advent of therapeutic modalities using manualised skills that are “evidence-based”, and promise a quick and efficient reduction in symptoms without attempting to examine the source of the problem or what actually lies beyond these symptoms.

– extractivism (& mystification): the way in which knowledge is produced in this profession leaves much to be desired. Starting by famous examples such as the pyramid of needs, Maslow’s great work, having been stollen from the Blackfoot cosmology and wisdom without a single word of acknowledgment; to the dubious ways in which contemporary theorists use their client work to create material, theories and even entertainment in their courses, and books. For example, the clear lack of respect Yalom shows his patients, who have given him the material to construct his theories, is astounding. It is easy to find issues when closely observing who is in positions to produce theory, disseminate it, and who is (or is not) credited for that work.

– meritocracy and denial of structural inequalities: no consideration for the social context in our theories and practices. In many cases, there’s an overinflation of what is seen as personal agency and empowerment.

Moreover, the elements of self-restraint, moral values and manners are also to be found in our profession, especially in:

• what is seen as psychologically and emotionally healthy
• ideas around ideal therapy outcomes
• the pathologisation of certain modes of expression and experiences
• relational boundaries
• time management

I have talked more in depth about these points on other pieces and will surely do that again. For now, let’s leave these reflections in process.

Concluding thoughts

Of course, something I haven’t mentioned here is the importance of considering how Whiteness as a Capitalist Ethos impact on clients’ mental health and on the work. Racialisation and capitalism being so intertwined means that the oppressive demands placed on many of our clients to think, be, behave, a certain way in order to be accepted and to have access to opportunities are part of the daily violence they face. This is particularly true for people of colour, people from different cultures, and neurodivergent people, whose “inclusion” remains conditional to their constant internalisation and expression of a White capitalist way of life. This pressure along with the self-alienation if might cause are sources of long-term distress. There will be space to delve more in depth into this topic later on.

I don’t want to make this piece longer than it needs to be. We could analyse the field and the way people work within it from this perspective to exhaustion, but there is no real point to doing that. There is a point, however, in gaining awareness of these links, the ethos our profession usually embodies, in order to challenge it out there, in ourselves and in our client work. I hope this short piece has helped you do that by supporting reflections which directly link the therapeutic professions to systems of capitalism, white supremacy and colonialism.

---

References

Echevarria B. (2019) Modernity and “Whiteness”. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Katz J. (1985) The sociopolitical nature of counseling. The Counseling Psychologist. 13, 615-624.

---