black studies in historical perspective

JOUKNAL OF SOCIAL ISSUES VOLUME 29, NUMBER I , 1975

Black Studies in Historical Perspective

Ronald Bailey

Afro-American Studies Stanford University

This paper presents an overview of the major intellectual forces affect- ing black scholars in the past and an outline of what will occur in the future. The role of the white researcher is discussed in relationship to the concept of scientific objectivity, with an illustration of how the very concepts employed by researchers (“integration” versus “liberation”) channel their energies in one direction as opposed to another. Discussion of black behavior is grounded in a consideration of African behavior. Black Americans are viewed as fundamentally African, not European; the difference between these two provides the legitimate epistemological foundation for a distinctive Black Studies.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the development of sounder scholarship in Black Studies. This purpose can be accomplished if some of the major historical forces which have influenced and are now influencing the selection and explication of problems by black scholars are clearly understood. If effort along these lines serves to clarify at least one point of contention or presents a simple new aspect on which further development of black social inquiry can proceed, a contribution of worth will have been made.

The effort here is undertaken first by attempting to review and identify the trends in black intellectual activity. That the rise of Black Power is correlated with a new intention regarding black social inquiry is assumed; it is then necessary to deal with the development of Black Studies-what it has been, what it is, and what it is to be.

The focus then turns to the context in which black social inquiry is embedded and argues for the development of the Pan- African frame as the most relevant one for black intellectual activity. Black Studies is suggested as the formulation which best recon- ciles the context with our present needs. The basic theme throughout this paper is the desire not only to present the arguments for various perspectives, but to do so in a way that leads to a

97

98 RONALD BAILEY

better understanding of what led to them; consequently, arguments which may be used to counter the points herein are antici- pated and commented upon.

BLACK SOCIAL INQUIRY: A REVIEW Conspicuous by its absence in contemporary academia is a

critical and interpretative history of black intellectual traditions. Such a history seems essential if w e are properly to understand current attempts to develop a newer framework for black social inquiry. With the recognition that such a treatment is underway, the discussion below provides only an outline of the broader themes.

It is perhaps first necessary to note the causal primacy of Euro-American racism in creating the context in which black social inquiry (and all social inquiry and thinking about blacks) has been undertaken. T h e impact of this racism distorts the questions selected, influences the modes of analysis adopted, and shapes the conclusions reached. Neither black nor white scholars have escaped this phenomenon. T h e full explication and understanding of this reality will reveal much about the true nature of the problems faced by black people-then and now. T h e quality of intellect demonstrated by black scholars functioning in the face of racist absurdities should serve to inspire generations to come.

To begin, we might well let W. E. B. DuBois (1898), as much a precursor of black intellectual traditions as any, pose the guiding question:

The present period in the development of sociological study is a trying one; it is the period of observation, research and comparison-work always wearisome, often aimless, without well-settled principles and guiding lines, and subject ever to the pertinent criticism: What, after all, has been accomplished? [p. 141.

In assaying the tremendous opportunities a developing United States offered for the field of sociologists, DuBois was moved to make an observation which seems strikingly current:

In one field, however, and a field perhaps larger than any other single domain of social phenomena, there does not seem to have awa- kened as yet a fitting realization of the opportunities for scientific inquiry. This is the group of social phenomena arising from the pre- sence in this land [circa 18981 of eight million persons of African descent [p. 141.

DuBois’ treatment is one which strives to place the problems of black people in the context of American society; he describes

BLACK STUDIES IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE 99

them as “not one problem, but rather a plexus of social problems . . . that . . . group themselves about those Africans whom two centuries of slave-trading brought into the land.”

T h e prophetic vision which was to characterize much of what DuBois would say is obvious:

So far as the Negro race is concerned, the Civil War simply left us face to face with the same sort of problems of social conditions and caste which were beginning to face the nation a century ago. It is these problems that we are to-day somewhat helplessly-not to say carelessly-facing, forgetful that they are living, growing social questions whose progeny will survive to curse the nation, unless we grapple with them manfully and intelligently [p. 171.

A recent review of the beginnings of black sociology asserts that “Dubois’ plea for an objective study of American blacks and American race relations became the hallmark of the next stage in the history of the sociology of the black community-the mono- graphs emanating from the famous Chicago school of American sociology [Bracey, 1971, p. 51.” Bracey discusses what he sees as the substantial impact of the Chicago school and Robert Park on black sociology as exemplified by such black scholars as Charles S. Johnson, E. Franklin Frazier, Bertram W. Doyle, St. Clair Drake, and Horace Cayton. Park demanded that the discipline of sociology attempt to cast off much of the racism that characterized it in his day; he emphasized a conviction that scientific knowledge could help to solve race problems, but that only detachment in research would produce scientific knowledge. His popu- larity with young black scholars was due perhaps in part to his liberal attitude and “objectivity” displayed in the racist climate of that period. Park also viewed detached social knowledge as essential for decisions of policymakers. His conceptual and meth- odological influence can be seen in the work of his students, most of whom viewed race relations in an international context. Park’s advocacy of the use of techniques such as participant observation, case studies, and his conceptualization of race relations in terms of conflict, competition, and accommodation were car- ried on by the young black scholars of the day.

It is necessary to understand the climate in which earlier black social scientists endeavored if we are to recognize the forces which shaped them. Much of the work of such scholars as Johnson and Frazier was in the spirit of detachment urged by Park, but significant in the sense of urgency with which it was undertaken. T h e classic themes which pervade much of the social research on black people were epitomized by DuBois:

100 RONALD BAILEY

I determined to put science into sociology through a study of the condition of problems of my own group. I was going to study the facts, any and all facts, concerning the American Negro and his plight, and by measurement and comparison and research, work up to any valid generalization which I could [ 1940, p. 511.

I t is important to note that Gunnar Myrdal’s A n American Dilemma (1944) was completed with the assistance of several of the black scholars mentioned above. According to Myrdal, “The primary purpose of studies of this character is the collection, analysis and interpretation of existing knowledge.” Guided by this, he attempted no less than a “comprehensive study of the Negro in the United States, to be undertaken in a wholly objective and dispassionate way as a social phenomenon [ 1944, p. 361 .”

The classic study of Chicago by Drake and Cayton (1945) reflected the influence of Park, to whom it is dedicated. An important commentary is found in Richard Wright’s introduction to this volume:

Black Metropolis is not a volume of mere facts. The basic facts are assumed. The hour is too late to argue if there is a Negro problem or not. Riots have swept the nation and more riots are pending. This book assumes that the Negro’s present position in the United States results from oppression of Negroes by white people, that the Negro’s conduct, his personality, his culture, his entire life flow naturally and inevitably out of the conditions imposed upon him by white America [Wright, 1945, p. xxix].

Clearly the volume is substantially different from earlier studies of “the Negro problem” in America, particularly with respect to its underlying assumptions.

The assumption guiding such research was that “racial prejudice” and “discrimination” were the causes of the predicament of black people. The implications of this assumption are succinctly noted by Alkalimat (1969):

While the concepts prejudice and discrimination are helpful on an analytical level of theory because they are so easily operationalized and quantified, racism is the more appropriate theoretical description because it captures the qualitative nature of the oppression [p. 291.

Alkalimat notes also that the kind of empirical research associated with such concepts as prejudice and discrimination has increased our access to more incidents of social reality but only at the cost of the “falsification of our understanding.”

Closely allied to the above generalization is one which seems to indicate that many of the scholars we have discussed adopted the conviction that only detached scientific research could help to solve race problems-a point repeatedly stressed by Park. This

BLACK STUDIES I N HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE 101

is understandable, given the scientific tenor of the times. There was also a general desire to give the nation a body of “truth” upon which it might act intelligently. Yet, black scholars have always recognized the limits of “detached scientific” research.

Regarding the state of sociological study DuBois (1 940) once stated, “What, after all, has been accomplished?” His answer provides an appropriate introduction to the current critique of black intellectual traditions in social inquiry:

To this the one positive answer which years of research and speculation have been able to return is that the phenomena of society are worth the most careful and systematic study, and whether or not this study may lead to a systematic body of knowledge deserving the name of science, it cannot fail to give the world a mass of truth worth the knowing [DuBois, 1940, p. 201.

The crux of the current critique is that while a “mass of truth” is necessary for black survival, it is no longer-indeed never has been-sufficient. Inherent in the current critique is the need to work out the imperatives of present necessities. Realizing this temporal shift, we can recognize that the works of DuBois, Frazier, Drake, Cayton, and others have laid substantial foundations on which to construct a newer framework for guiding black social inquiry. With the confidence of knowing that we have been pro- ceeded by black intellectual giants, we can proceed successfully to meet our present duties.

BLACK STUDIES: PAST AND PRESENT It is difficult to specify the point at which the watershed

in the quality of race relations in the United States occurred. Certainly the rise of Black Power, which surfaced dramatically during the summer of 1966, should be considered. The cry heard around the world from Africans domiciled in North America was no longer one for “integration,” but one which signalled a determination among black people to amass the power necessary to secure their liberation-by any means necessary. It is this same context which hastened a crystallization of a newer perspective on the recording and interpretation of black experiences.

Black Power was fueled by and in turn spurred on intensifica- tion of the questioning of prevailing modes in (black) social inquiry. In areas characterized by more militant or nationalist thought (mainly the urban North), the upsurge of interest in new interpre- tations was most profound. Those who were very early followers of (or listeners to) the Honorable Elijah Muhammad and the

102 RONALD BAILEY

late Malcolm X, for example, were exposed to such interpreta- tions.

Interest in a newer black interpretation which had for a long time remained in the province of the mosque and headquarters of nationalist organizations soon began to spill over into other areas of the black community. The appearance of a variety of black student organizations on white campuses facilitated an or- ganized drive for the institutionalization of this new black perspective into the college curriculum. Under pressure to provide (or allow or tolerate) an educational experience more relevant to the lives of black students, many colleges and universities took steps to grant this demand, invariably formed in terms of the need for “Black Studies” programs. Those schools which were initially reluctant in 1965-66 were sufficiently guilt-ridden after the slaying of Martin Luther King in 1968 to capitulate to student demands.

It is interesting to note that this was not the first time that turmoil had led to the creation of new mechanisms to deal with the scholarly treatment of the experiences of Africans. The suc- cessful struggles of several African countries against colonial rulers in securing their independence had much to do with the expansion of African Studies Programs in the U.S. during the 1950s.

This push for the introduction of Black Studies into traditional white curriculums, when properly chronicled, contributes much to our understanding of what may prove to be a critical factor in the struggle of African people for their liberation. Its para- meters are thus very important.

The case of Yale University, one of the few where a meaning- ful body of published material emerged from its developmental stages (Robinson et al., 1969), is perhaps characteristic of the general movement. After several months of effort, the Black Stu- dents Alliance of Yale “discovered that little progress was being made in the struggle to convince the faculty at large of the validity and importance . . . [and] the urgent necessity for including the study of Afro-American societies and cultures in the curriculum of Yale College [p. vii].” The immediate solution was to convene an educational experience for professional educators de- signed to bring together faculty and administrative personnel from a number of schools and a group of respected and recognized black and white intellectuals who were vitally concerned with the issues raised by student demands. The conference pro- ceedings provide some critical comments regarding issues related


to Black Studies. But a careful perusal of the document reinforces the view of the young black sociologist, Abd-1 Alkalimat:

I think the symposium that’s being held here is very impressive, but-as many people feel-I think there are many false issues being raised. I don’t know whether or not these are consciously being raised as false issues, but I think the question whether or not the black experience is relevant for intellectual inquiry is indeed beyond a question of a doubt-and everybody here, it seems that if any human experience is relevant for intellectual consideration-the black experience has to be included. And the notion that it would be questioned in such an audience is too grotesque to be amusing [Robinson et al., 1969, p. 541.

If we are not to engage in definitional acrobatics, how then are we to approach Black Studies? Let us look at some of the issues. Since these concerns are very valid ones, no attempt at refutation will be attempted. One criticism voiced was that Black Studies was nothing more than a diversionary outlet-a mere palliative offered by white college administrators as a ploy to further subvert the struggle for liberation. A quote in an article by Howard (1970) is appropriate:

The problem which the European in South Africa must face is what to do with those Africans whose learning has given them ambitions beyond the industrial colour bar. Ambitions need outlets if their latent energies are not to be diverted by continual frustration into anti-social activities [p. 671.

Howard’s comment following the quote is most instructive: “Per- haps we can begin to see the booming ‘black studies business’ in light of the South African experience!”

The relationship of activism and scholarship and the question of “relevance” have also been sharply raised. Drake (1969) suggests that:

The activism of the black student movement . . . has resulted in an anti-intellectual bias among some of the most committed students, and in a demand for greater relevance of intellectual activity among a wider segment of the student population . . . there are intellectual tasks associated with the Black Revolution just as there are with any revolution; and these tasks are as important as the “street tasks [p. 41 .”

The tenuous and historic relationship of many black intellectuals to the struggle of black people certainly has as much to do with the demands now being placed upon them as does the activism of students. That such pressures are likely to intensify in the future is probable, but how responsive black scholars are in mak- ing themselves accessible and relevant to the legitimate aspirations

104 RONALD BAILEY

of black folk will prove to be the decisive factor in the outcome. Despite indications to the contrary, there are some very

important questions which suggest themselves in the discussion of Black Studies. A most important one has been pinpointed by Drake (1969):

The very use of the term Black Studies is by implication an indictment of American and Western European scholarship. It makes the bold assertion that what we have heretofore called “objective” intellectual activities were actually white studies in perspective and content; and that a corrective of bias, a shift in emphasis, is needed, even if something called “truth” is set as the goal. To use a technical sociological term, the present body of knowledge has an ideological element in it, and a counterideology is needed. Black studies supply that counterideology [p. 51.

The point being made in the above quotation is at the base of most of the current discussions of the need for Black Studies. The whole process of education is seen as one which is basically geared to produce those supportive inputs for the system of which it is a part. In a Western setting, of course, this can only mean the perpetuation and embellishment of values and norms which are part and parcel of the Western tradition. As Turner (1970) notes:

White studies is a system of intellectual legitimacy which defines the activities and experiences of white Western people as the universal yardstick of human existence. Black studies challenges this assumption and asserts that white is not now, nor has it ever been either intrinsically right or complete. However, whites have attributed universal value to their own Anglo-American particularism, and have sought to absorb and distort other cultures in their midst [p. 61.

Implied in the comments above are several ideas related to a long-standing debate in the social sciences. An anonymous law- yer who participated in the Yale symposium on Black Studies cited above put the point in excellent fashion:

It seems to me that the question before this university is whether there is some intellectual integrity in widening further and further the range of inquiry and the range of discussion in looking at new problems and also those problems which we’ve never explored before . . . Then . . . we’ve created a viable basis for expanding the curriculum and inquiry without acquiescing in the notion that tied to such expanded inquiry has to be any particular programmatic notion of how our society should be changed [Robinson et al., 1969, p. 291.

This comment raises two issues. One of these involves the relationship between theoretical and applied research. The other-widening the range of inquiry and discussion-is related to that area of social inquiry termed the sociology of knowledge.

BLACK STUDIES I N HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE 105

The position of the relativity of knowledge is dealt with rather thoroughly in the work of Karl Mannheim (1936). He suggests that much of what we “know”-and almost all of the process of arriving at this knowledge-is socially conditioned. And, further, that certain kinds of knowledge are only accessible to people who have experienced particular kinds of social reality. The discussion centering around this issue has usually been re- ferred to as the problem of objectivity in science. The pitfalls of this argument for the treatment of the experiences of African people are becoming more clearly understood.

In an excellent argument charging that problems of episte- mology (i.e., the validity of knowledge) have been neglected in favor of rampant empiricism, and that social scientists have ig- nored the question of the relativity of social knowledge “as though Mannheim and Marx never existed,” Clark (1970) states the thrust of Black Studies as follows: (a) all forms of knowledge in the social sciences emanate from the social reality created by the organization of society; (b) to the extent that race forms the basis of American social organization, there are different domains of social reality possessed by blacks as opposed to whites; (c) there is an official version of social reality legitimized by those in control of the dominant knowledge generating apparatus in society; and (d) this official social reality forms the basis of theoretic inquiries into social problems, and to the extent that it does, such theories are racist.

Thus, Clark defines Black Studies as: . . . the research, practice, and teaching of a social science whose repertoire of concepts include as fundamental and essential these derived directly from the Black American cultural experience. Black Studies is a weltanschaunng, an orientation, a way of viewing problems- particularly those problems related to the life of Black Americans.

The genesis of Black Studies lies not so much in a complex of reactions to traditional disciplines, per se, as it does from a need to employ concepts which have direct empirical referents [are relevant] in the body of Black cultural experience. Traditional concepts are rejected insofar as these deny, distort, or otherwise modify the content of Black social reality [ 1970, p. 41.

. . .

What is indicated above, it seems, is the explication of the beginnings of a new mode for black social inquiry-a mode that is substantially different from the prevailing mode rooted in the Euro-American academic tradition which has guided what Clark refers to as “the study of Black people” (as opposed to Black Studies). In part a reaction to white social science but in larger

106 RONALD BAILEY

measure providing its own internal justification, this new mode is becoming the philosophical foundation on which much of black social inquiry in years to come will be built.

It is possible, indeed necessary, to point to the growing body of writings flowing from this emerging tradition. In an excellent unpublished manuscript, “Toward a Black Social Science,” Walters (1970) applauds the work of black social scientists “who have had the courage to try to criticize wrong-headed approaches whether from whites or blacks and the originality to try and create a black framework for their analysis [p. 121.’’

Harold Cruse, an important commentator on the overall thrust of black social inquiry, states in a recent essay:

[The] critical assault on Black social, political, and cultural thought was premeditated. It was my conviction that black social thought of all varieties was in dire need of some ultra-radical overhauling if it was to meet the comprehensive test imposed by the sixties. Now that the sixties are history, I am still convinced-even more so-that black social thought is in need of ultra-radical overhauling. In fact, the arrival of the seventies revealed to me that I had underestimated the critical reassessing black social thought really needed [ 1971, p. 151.

Writing on the ideology of black social science, Alkalimat claims that:

Social science has constructed a set of terms to explain black people and their experiences and, for the most part, these terms have suffered from being based on sterile analytical theory that attempts to classify social reality and not explain its essential nature [ 1969, p. 311.

And, in response, he argues, “We must develop a social theory consistent with a revolutionary Black ideology so that what we know will be worth knowing.” Furthermore, Alkalimat develops for social analysis in line with this need a set of concepts presenting a clear alternative to those prevalent in conventional (i.e., Euro- American) social science. A partial list of these follows:

White Social Science Negro Segregation Tokenism Integration Equality Assimilation

Black Social Science African (Black) Colonization Neo-Colonialism Liberation Freedom Africanization

The conceptual framework implicit in the work of Carmichael and Hamilton (1967) is an indication of this new mode in black social inquiry. They characterize the relationship between black communities and the American system as one of political, eco-


nomic, and sociocultural colonization. Their use has contributed much to the clarification and use of the concept of colonization as a paradigm in analyzing such relationships. It is important to note, again, that the new modality in black social inquiry does not begin in a reaction to Euro-American social science. As Walters notes, “Black life has been distinctive enough and separate enough to constitute its own uniqueness and it is on the basis of that uniqueness that the ideology and the methodology of Black Social Science rests [ 1970, p. IS].”

CONCLUSION If Black Studies is to become a workable area of endeavor,

what is perhaps most needed is some explication of the notion of social inquiry. Much of the polemics which revolve around Black Studies can be traced to a basic misunderstanding of what is involved in this process. Consequently, reactions are usually based on stereotyped notions of what science is or should be, or what validation is, or should be, and the like. Definitional clarity of the process of social inquiry is essential. From the perspective of Black Studies, what do such words as “fact,” “concept,” “generalization,” “hypothesis,” “theory,” “model,” and the like suggest? What are the facts about the black experience? What purposes will concepts serve? With what process do we test and validate hypotheses? What is involved in the process of theorizing, and why is it at all significant? Are we in search of explanation, prediction, or something else?

These questions have been broached in a more practical sense. The colonial analogy is being widely used as a model which offers an explanation of the plight of African peoples throughout the world. Perhaps “political traumatism” might serve better to explain the impact of Euro-American intrusion on African peoples than “alienation,” “apathy,” and the like (Bailey, 197 1). The use of such terms as “oppression,” “slavery,” “Pan-Africanism,’’ “negritude,” and a host of others suggests itself as worthy of consideration if we are serious about an understanding and alter- ation of the present conditions of black people.

The question of methodology also needs serious attention. The task ahead is to create new methodologies which flow from and do justice to the exigencies of our experiences as a people. How much time we have to engage in the kind of polemics which attack established disciplines is an open question. From my own experiences, debates over the quantitative /qualitative tension in

108 RONALD BAILEY

social science, the implications of the behavioral persuasion in political science, the developmental polemic, and similar others have proven, in the words of Bennett, “abstract, false, and diversionary.”

This is not to suggest that anything which is traditional is not useful for our purposes. As Hare (1969) suggests, our attempts at dealing with these questions anew will “in some regards . . . subsume and overlap existing norms of scholarly endeavor [p. 621.” The essential difference will be that our goals will be something other than the blind attachment to ideas, ideals, and norms which tend to destroy rather than chrify and to classify rather than explain the nature of our situation.

REFERENCES Alkalimat, A. H. The ideology of black social science. Black Scholar, 1969,

Bailey, R. Black business enterprise. New York: Basic Books, 1971. Bracey, J. The black sociologists. Belmont, California: Wadsworth, 197 1. Carmichael, S., & Hamilton, C. Black power. New York: Vintage, 1967. Clark, C. Black studies and the study of black people. Unpublished manu-

Cruse, H. Black and white: Outlines of the next stage (Part I). Black World,

Drake, St. C. Black studies: Toward an intellectual framework. Address

Drake, St. C., & Cayton, H. Black metropolis. New York: Harcourt, Brace

DuBois, W. E. B. Dusk of dawn. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1940. DuBois, W. E. B. The study of the Negro problem. Annals of the American

Academy of Political and Social Science, 1898 (January), XI. Hare, N . The challenge of a black scholar. Black Scholar, 1969, 1 (2), 58-63. Howard, J. How to end colonial domination of black America. Negro Digest,

Mannheim, K. Ideology and utopia. New York: Harcourt, 1936. Myrdal, G. A n American dilemma. New York: Harper & Row, 1944. Robinson, A. L., et al. (Eds.) Black studies in the university. New Haven:

Turner, J. Black studies and a black philosophy of education. Blacklines,

Walters, R. W. Toward a black social science. Unpublished manuscript, 1970. Wright, R. Introduction to St. C. Drake & H. Cayton, Black metropolis. New

1 (2), 28-35.

script. Stanford University, 1970.

197 1 , January.

delivered at Brooklyn College, September 23, 1969.

& World, 1945.

1970, January.

Yale University Press, 1969.

1970, Winter, 5-9.

York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1945.

black studies in historical perspective

Documents