Community and Liberation Psychology Community Psychology and Liberation Psychology: A Creative Synergy for an Ethical and Transformative Praxis

Community and Liberation Psychology

Community Psychology and Liberation Psychology: A Creative Synergy for an Ethical and Transformative Praxis

Maritza Montero Universidad Central de Venezuela Caracas, Venezuela Christopher C. Sonn Victoria University Melbourne, Australia Mark Burton Manchester Metropolitan University Manchester, UK

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Liberation and Community Psychology 1

Liberation psychology (LP), which is part of a broad movement for a fairer world, is now considered a distinctive paradigm. It is an approach in which ethics is central. In this chapter, we describe the way LP originated in Latin America, inspired by and drawing on other currents in liberation theory and practice, such as popular pedagogy and dependency theory. Over the last three decades, liberation psychology has been developing, not as another branch of psychology, but as a distinctive way of doing psychology, producing new praxis, developing new methods, and systematizing others that originated in pedagogy, sociology and philosophy. Psychology was a relative latecomer in introducing liberation into its theory and practice, but community psychology (CP) has probably been the branch of psychology that has most contributed to its development. We describe the various roots of LP and Ignacio Martín-Baró’s formulation in the period 1986 to 1989. We show how community psychologists have used these ideas in Latin America and beyond, both with reference to Martín-Baró’s work and also independently of it, by drawing on a common engagement with oppression-liberation. We acknowledge the reciprocal influence between liberation and community psychology and identify the main innovations of those working within paradigms of LP. Roots of Liberation Psychology The movement named liberation psychology can best be understood in relation to the decolonizing movements and theories that gathered strength during the second half of the 20th century, in Latin America (LA), South East Asia, South Africa, and in the then French, Dutch and British Caribbean colonies. This movement rejected colonial and neo-colonial power relations, critically analyzed their situation within the relations of dependent capitalism that saw the flow of resources from ‘underdeveloped’ states to wealthy states, and challenged the stereotyped image of the people as inferior, created by colonialism.


In Latin America, the first of these developments originated when socioeconomic circumstances began to be analyzed in the 1950s by the Economic Commission for Latin America (CEPAL from its Spanish acronym). It led to a movement (cepalismo) critical of the dependence of Latin American countries on developed ones. In the 1960s, as a consequence of CEPAL's failed policy prescriptions (import-substitution industrialization), a very influential set of theories, grouped as the theory of dependency (DT), was developed by economists and some sociologists critically analyzing dependency imposed by external economic and political sources. DT had branches that variously emphasized the role of Europe and the United States of America in under-developing Latin America, and the way the cultural consequences of this under-development reproduced dependent relations within societies and economies. By the late 1970s, with the ascent of dictatorships in much of LA, the theory had been largely abandoned as a subject of study, supplanted in part by a return to neoclassical economics on the one hand, and World System Theory, which drew on both cepalismo and DT, on the other. Nevertheless, DT had produced an interesting psychological effect: many people in Latin America, instead of comparing themselves to a supposedly superior Europe and United States of America, began to acknowledge and feel proud of their intellectual, artistic, creative and transformational capacities. Notions regarding history, culture, civilization and spiritual values received increasing emphasis, although disparities in per capita revenues in comparison with those in the United States of America, Canada, Australia and Western Europe remained a source of concern. Although hard to pin down exactly, the idea of liberation was introduced in LA in the 1960s, first in pedagogy, and soon after in theology, then philosophy, anthropology, sociology, and psychology. Once the ideas of LP1 1 In 1976 Caparrós and Caparrós (1976) published a book in Spain that had ‘Psychology of liberation’ in its title, which could be considered a precursor.


were introduced, it spread and generated a line of work that exploded at the end of the 1990s. In the North of Africa and in the Caribbean, critical ideas with a liberating aim were also being produced. In the 1960s, Frantz Fanon (1967a,b) shook the social sciences with his books showing the effects of colonialism and racism on the colonized. At the same time, in the North of Africa (Tunisia, Algeria), Albert Memmi (1969,1984) was writing about the self-image of the colonized, who emulated the colonizers despite being oppressed by them. The same phenomenon was described by Alatas (1979) for South East Asia, in The Myth of the Lazy Native, a critique of the effects of colonization not only on their social identities but also on their histories. This was very similar to the critiques emerging in Latin America, which described oppression, exclusion and the diminishing conception of the colonized created by their exploiters. Some European philosophical and sociological developments were critical of oppression and alienation and their effects on people (Althusser, 1978; Goldmann, 1972; Gabel, 1973; Marcuse, 1964). The African American Civil Rights movements in the USA, the Black Consciousness Movement lead by Steve Biko in South Africa, and decolonizing movements in African countries, are examples of the spirit of that time and the significant contributions to understanding oppression and exclusion and the mechanisms disguising them. The Liberation Paradigm In this chapter we present the foundational ideas, stemming from different disciplines, which provided theoretical and methodological bases that have propelled liberation psychology. We also present how liberation psychology provided and exchanged concepts and methods with community psychology, thus introducing new psychological perspectives and developing methodological tools for their practices, evident in the relationship between liberation psychology and community psychology.


Liberation Pedagogy Two Brazilian pedagogues, Vieira Pinto (1961) who introduced the concept of conscientization, and Freire who developed it, followed by Barreiro (1974), were central figures in liberation pedagogy. Freire (1970) elaborated the concept of conscientization as the process of people, as active agents, developing a deeper awareness of their sociocultural reality and their capacity to transform it. Freire’s (1970, 1972, 1973) work also introduced other concepts still used in liberation psychology and in other disciplines such as banking education, dialogue and transitive consciousness. Two additional concepts are hard to translate into English: palavração (wording), and inédito viável (unprecedented but viable). The latter refers to limit situations, those extreme contexts that constrain human possibility but can nevertheless be transcended under the right conditions (Aron & Corne, 1994; Freire, 1970; Montero, 2009a, Oliveira, Gomes Moreira & Guzzo, 2014). Inédito viável expresses the possibility that what has not been expressed, but is within one’s consciousness, may be accessed and voiced with a liberating effect. In Freire’s terms, concepts are action-words: they lead to modes of praxis in which, cognition, politics, epistemology, ontology, and ethics are intertwined in consciousness, and the co-existence of fear and courage, human fragility and grandeur is part of the picture. Concepts, then, express the dimension of his approach; the historical future that is unachievable without facing and overcoming limit situations. His work remains foundational and, after all this time, continues to be developed into liberation theory and practice ideas in different disciplines. Theology of Liberation (TL) Theology of Liberation (TL) started in the late 1960s in Brazil, coming from several currents of thought and practice including Freire’s ideas, by critically discussing the Gospel and leading to a movement that spread around Latin America until the early 1980s. Liberation theology was created to empower and strengthen those in need, the oppressed and


the excluded, who make-up the majority in the American continent. At this time, many in the Catholic Church in LA, through the voice and deeds of priests and believers, decided to work and fight for those who had little or nothing. Liberation theology, then, was a movement vindicating the rights of indigenous people, of Black and mixed race people, of exploited workers and peasants, of women, and of the illiterate and the destitute. The Vatican silenced this movement but the ideas proposed by Gutiérrez, Casaldaliga, Boff, Ellacuría, and Sobrino, among many others, live on. Currently the ideas of Trigo and Moreno, have again been receiving attention. Their ideas concern the possibility for every person to have voice, to speak out, and also point to the “silence” of the excluded, the poor, and the oppressed. The creators of TL knew very well that in order to be able to help people, they had to liberate themselves from their limited conditions, and they also had to liberate the Roman Catholic Church – an insight that led to their institutional marginalization. Philosophy of Liberation Between 1969 and 1976, Scannone and Dussel among others began to produce a philosophy oriented towards liberation. Scannone is a priest who combines both theology and philosophy with a liberating orientation, and Dussel is a philosopher; both are from Mendoza, Argentina. The condition of the poor, the oppressed, and the excluded produced the basis for what Dussel considered the ethical foundation of the philosophy of liberation. Liberation had to be directed at uncovering exploitation and domination in a relationship in which the One (meaning the subject) has subjectivity, but the Other (the oppressed) is treated as an object. Both Dussel and Scannone began to publish their first works in 1972-1973, focusing on Latin America. Liberation philosophy can be considered as “thought that comes from the oppressed, the marginalized, the poor, from the dependent countries…” and “thinking from the exteriority of the Other” (Scannone, 1998, p.80) as well as stemming from the praxis and


knowledge of the poor. Hermeneutics, discourse, ethics and metaphysics are all part of this philosophy. Dussel’s work was disseminated both in the Americas and in Europe. In Philosophy of Liberation, Dussel (1985) proposed the extension and change of the scope of reason by introducing a focus on the Other or alterity. This is a relational conception, not anchored in the individual as self; it supposes a One that is with the Other and cannot be without that Other. From the perspective of liberation and community psychology, the key aspects of liberation philosophy are: 1) The ontological transformation from the One (meaning the I), to a dimension of the I-You, that is the I with the Other (and the We-You in the plural); 2) This different ontological (way of being) starting point opens a new horizon inhabited by Others, who though different or even strange are ethically equal to the One; and 3) Liberation happens (both materially and in consciousness) when the Others’ Being - and that of those who are like him or her - are acknowledged and included in the totality of the I. Based on this ontology, Dussel (1985, 2013) derived a philosophical method that is known as analectics (from the Greek word anas, meaning beyond, what is further away, and dialectics, a concept created and used by Aristotle and developed by Hegel and Marx). Anadialectics or analectics, has been studied and applied by liberation and community psychologists (e.g., Flores-Osorio, Moreno, Montero) in the development of methods such as problematization and conscientization, concepts in Freire’s work (described in more depth below). Burton and Flores Osorio (2011) provide an introduction to Dussel for psychologists. Liberation Sociology Since the mid-1970s, liberation sociology as presented by Fals Borda (1959, 1986) has provided psychology with the idea and practice of liberation and participation, as well as participatory action research (PAR) (Lykes, this handbook). Liberation sociology (also known as militant or critical sociology) emerged in Colombia (Fals Borda, 1959) with an emphasis on: a) overcoming the isolation of academic sociological theory through


meaningful engagement, or “insertion”, in struggling communities, and b) building theory from the ground up (Flores Osorio, 2011; Montero, 1994). These ideas and practices have simultaneously been used in some fields of psychology, including community psychology, shown in the following sections. Liberation Psychology: Principles and Concepts LP has been in a process of construction, step-by-step, since 1986 when Martín-Baró published a short, yet very significant, paper where he presented the idea of a Liberation Psychology based on three principles, listed below. Those principles were complemented in 1989 by his critique of the role of social psychology in Latin America and the need to develop a psychology committed to working for the oppressed and excluded, thereby reaching marginal sectors of society (Martín-Baró, 1983, 1989) Liberation Psychology Principles: Ignacio Martin Baró Martín-Baró’s principles for a LP were: 1) to re-orient psychology from an inward focus on its scientific status towards the urgent problems of the majority of the Latin American people; 2) To find a new way of seeking knowledge, from the perspective of the popular masses (Martín-Baró, 1986); and 3) To create, from the “denied potential” (MartínBaró, 1988, p.3) of those oppressed masses, a new psychological praxis in order to transform both people and societies. Martin-Baró was murdered in 1989, when his ideas about a psychology of liberation had only just been presented as principles. He was a radical social psychologist, but, as far as we know, he had no time to read and discuss all the philosophical and theoretical concepts elaborated by Dussel, Scannone, Fals Borda and others. His untimely death, his work commitments at the Instituto de Opinión Pública that he founded at his University, and his practice as a priest, did not allow him to further develop the idea of liberation in psychology. Nevertheless, his charisma and the force and passion of his work seeded a LP that paved the


way for the development of the liberation perspective in psychology. Moreover, his general method, of constructively criticizing and reconstructing psychology from the perspective of the oppressed (Martín-Baró, 1983, 1989) is a foundation for the contemporary movement of liberation psychology. Liberation Principles in other Contexts Other bases for a LP were also beginning to appear in other continents with similar social, economic, and political conditions of oppression and resistance. For example, in South Africa, Seedat (1997), drawing on ideas expressed by anti-apartheid authors (e.g., Biko, 1988) and critical international writing (e.g., Bulhan, 1985), described the development and need for liberation-oriented psychology, outlining four interlocking stages that psychologists with that orientation may move between as they seek to develop an emancipatory discourse. These stages were neither mutually exclusive nor linear and could be considered as principles or pillars for that movement. The pillars include: 1) Disillusionment, which is characterized by the recognition of the Eurocentric origins of psychology and its ideological functions, accompanied by a sense of disempowering ‘disillusionment’ experienced by those practicing psychology, 2) ‘Reactive critical engagement’, involving critical reflection and deconstruction of dominant ideologies to guard against the Eurocentric origins of psychology and its culturally imperialist functions determining the way in which psychology is applied, 3) ‘Constructive self-definition’, a proactive stage involving: (a) redressing the silences in the field (i.e., silences around the role of psychology in collective transformation, and silence around the subtle yet pervasive impact of oppression) and (b) securing the inclusion of Blacks, women and other marginalized groups at the level of knowledge production, and 4) ‘Emancipatory discourse, praxis and immersion’, seeking “to establish emancipatory paradigms and methodologies that account for more of humanity's diverse psychosocial experiences” (Seedat, 1997, para 36, line 2; see also Stevens, Duncan, & Sonn, 2010).


Antedating the South African work, Enriquez (1992) in the Philippines developed an approach to a de-colonized psychology similar to both Martín-Baró and Seedat’s proposals in what seems to have been an independent, parallel development. From 1989 and until 1998, there were researchers and practitioners in many places studying Martín-Baró’s work and practicing liberation ideas in psychology, while also using and discussing the emancipatory ideas of Freire, Fals Borda, Dussel and others. During this period there were also parallel expressions of black liberation psychology rooted in Africanist theology in the United States of America (e.g., Azibo, 1994). The Relationship Between Liberation Psychology and Community Psychology Liberation psychology is not a new branch of psychology, but rather the psychological branch of the liberation paradigm. Moreover, the boundaries between LP and CP are not marked clearly. This means that some of the concepts created by what could be called LP-CP are also being used and developed by others. Indeed, most LP practitioners also have another identity, whether as community, political, clinical, social, or educational psychologists, sociologists, philosophers, historians and activists, articulating in their practice liberation psychological praxis. With this in mind, we now identify some concepts that have flowed between liberation and community psychology, focusing on shared concepts, some emerging first in LP or CP and then influenced or adopted by the other field. Praxis Liberation psychology, like much community psychology, does not accept the separation between knower (researcher, practitioner, in this case) and subject matter (active subjects seeking liberation, community members, in this case). Instead, the knower is part of and acts upon the thing that is to be known. One way to understand this is through the concept of praxis, the unity of theory and practice. It is practice that generates theory, and theory that generates practice (Montero, 2006). For Freire (1972), keeping the unity between


theory and practice was the platform necessary to produce, innovate and transform situations while working towards liberation. In an empiricist understanding of science, social scientific theory is often seen as occupying the highest end of a scale of knowledge, while practice traditionally has been seen as the lowest. Since LP and liberatory CP are both concerned with principled social change, and both involve the interrelation between action, reflection and investigation, the idea of praxis is fundamental. This concept, used in philosophy and in sociology, was probably the first aspect of liberation psychology used in community psychology. What CP and LP both propose is that theory and practice should not be separated. For Martín-Baró (1998), theory should be built from practice rather than determining it. Liberation psychology, then, like the non-empiricist forms of community psychology, is inconceivable without interaction among actors. Critical Engagement Liberation psychology combines the idea of praxis with that of analectics, that is taking the critical perspective of, and from, the oppressed Other. Alterity or Otherness, as revised and articulated by Dussel (1985) as the basis for his analectic method, is a key concept in LP and is also evident in CP’s commitment to challenge oppression. It refers to the situation of those who are oppressed, excluded, and considered inferior, and without access to a society’s goods and benefits. The Other is excluded by, within, and beyond the ‘totality’ of the dominant system. However, the liberatory, analectic praxis constructs a new totality with the ‘new interlocutor’ who is the excluded or, via the medium of the catalyst, facilitator or animator. So, according to the traditional Hegelian and Marxist dialectics, thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, within the (Eurocentric) totality, are joined by a fourth element -alterity -- confronting the new unexpected element in those Others usually not consulted. The resulting analectic praxis is the philosophical basis for critical engagement. Yet, although critical engagement is essential to work with others, few tools have been developed


within liberation psychology in order to produce or organize that praxis (Montero, 2014). While there has been a body of oral and written material, most of it is rather abstract and vague, not including many descriptions of how praxis was carried out. Identifying aspects that are indeed unique as well as those that are common to all the authors already mentioned (e.g., liberation and the dynamics of oppression) could bring useful, locally sensitive and generative knowledge. The work of Moreno (1993), a Venezuelan psychologist, philosopher and priest, is an example of praxis premised on critical engagement with communities. In 1993, he introduced in psychology the episteme of Otherness and Relatedness (Moreno, 1993). An episteme is a general mode of knowing, a sort of tacit knowledge understood as a way of doing and saying. It is “the concrete being [meaning the I] in the reality of knowing” (Moreno, 1993, p. 46), because it is part of daily life and informs everything people do within a specific culture, including practices, ways of speaking and language idioms. “An episteme is not thought, one thinks within it and from it” (Moreno, 1993, p.47); those words are a way to manifest the author’s critical engagement with communities in poverty. Moreno (1993) critically analysed the concept of episteme showing the coexistence of a popular life-world 2 (in his case, the world of the poor, the marginalized and oppressed), within Latin American societies. Through everyday observation, by hearing people's narratives and later hearing and registering their life stories, while discussing and analyzing them with the narrators, he found a mode of living that constitutes a life-world of poverty, situated within a bigger society and ignored by other social levels, thus producing a theory, rooted in that life-world.

2

A concept, created by Alfred Schutz in 1952, that means daily life, common sense, and the region of reality in which people can intervene to change it and be changed by it.


Montero (2003, 2009a), has presented a paradigm of critical construction whose ontological bases are: 1) The transformation of the One, into a One-Other relation, as no one can be without others, as a base for liberation. Ignoring others and what they feel, know, or need, cannot lead to liberation; 2) The participatory construction of everyday life; and 3) The critical internal and external view of what is being done needs to depart from the relationship with others. This paradigm goes further than the three domains usually presented in scientific work, traditionally only consisting of ontology, epistemology and methodology, by including ethics and politics (Montero, 2003, 2004a). De-colonization De-colonization is a key concept and stance in liberation psychology, working to remove characteristics from the nexus of colonial domination, broadly understood, and to promote liberation. This common raison d'être of LP and the liberation disciplines – in both theory and practice, can be seen in Martín-Baró’s critique of North American concepts and theories of psychology when applied in Central America. It is a constant, if often largely rhetorical, theme in Latin American liberation and community psychology. Harnessing an overtly political approach to engage critically and reflexively in disrupting oppressive practices and promoting change has more recently been called for in community psychology (e.g., Reyes Cruz & Sonn, 2011) in several contexts. For example, in the United States of America, Gone (2011) has written about the tensions and predicaments that exist between Western-based mental health service delivery models and practices and the frames of reference guiding Native American understandings. He outlined how Native American ways of knowing and being can often be incommensurate with dominant ways of viewing the world, which underpin core ideas such as community. In his view, Native American conceptions can inform and transform how we understand and promote notions of community.


Affectivity Affectivity is another concept important in the work of Moreno and community psychology researchers (e.g., León & Montenegro, 1993, 1998). It demonstrates the importance of emotional dimensions in community work aimed at liberation. Brazilian community social psychologist Sawaia (2001) has also highlighted the significance of affectivity, viewing it as an ethical-regulator for liberating psychosocial interventions. An example given by Sawaia (2001, pp. 97-118) is the concept of ethico-political happiness, which goes further than individualism and corporativism. The concept is open to humanity, as can be seen in the works by Arendt (1988) and Weil (1979). Power Dynamics The LP focus on challenging power dynamics in research and practice in relation to various dimensions of marginality and social exclusion is a central feature of what is now known as critical political community psychology. This focus on power dynamics can be seen in CP approaches in programs from Australia (e.g., Sonn & Green, 2006; Sonn & Lewis, 2009); from some Latin American countries (e.g., Flores-Osorio, 2009; Montero, 2003; Sawaia, 2001), from the United States of America (e.g., Lykes, 2013; Nelson & Prilleltensky, 2010; Prilleltensky, 2008; Sloan, 2009;Watkins & Shulman, 2008; Watts & Serrano-García, 2003); from South Africa (Seedat & Lazarus, 2011; Stevens et al. 2010); New Zealand (Nikora, 2007); Spain (García Ramírez, Hernández-Plaza, Albar, Manzano & Paloma, 2009); United Kingdom (Burton, 2013a, b; Burton & Kagan, 2005; Kagan, Burton, Duckett, Lawthom & Siddique, 2011), and Ireland (Moane, 2003, 2011). In 1989, Martín-Baró presented a critical analysis of the social psychology of power, reconstructing the dominant interpersonal conception expressed in terms of power of A over B to incorporate a social-systems view (see, Kagan et al., 2011, 296-7, for a summary of the critique). Building on this, the concept of asymmetrical power has been constructed


within community psychology and later developed in LP (Montero, 2003). Max Weber (1922/1964), wrote that power is the “probability of imposing one’s own will, within a social relationship, even against every resistance and whatever may be the foundation of that probability” (p. 228). Contrary to this, Serrano-García and López Sánchez (1994) presented a conception of power as a daily “personal or indirect relation in which people express their social consensus and ruptures between their experience and their consciousness”, that is “historical and materially defined, with two agents in conflict over a resource controlled by one and wanted by the other” (p. 178, authors translation). Emphasis on power and its dynamics leads LP’s and CP’s to a very practical concern with how it can be both combatted and harnessed. In some of the most interesting praxis liberation-orientated community psychologists work closely with social movements and community organizations. In so doing they exercise humility, following the needs and interests of the community, yet exercise shared leadership when required. Freire taught us that concern with power and domination does not mean abdication of responsibility and leadership. History and Historical Memory History and historical memory are key concepts shared by both by CP and LP (in LA, New Zealand, and in South Africa). In liberation psychology, psychological phenomena, whether individual or collective, are understood as historically produced and changeable through shared action. The idea of historical memory as a resource in healing and empowering peoples and communities is a constant point of reference in LP and CP in Latin America. It began to be used by Latin American community psychologists in the 1980s and included critique of psychology’s ahistorical stance and the need to understand psychological phenomena as historically produced and thus changeable. Knowing a community’s history is crucial when intervening, as it reveals values, sorrow, pride, fears and other important


elements that variously characterise the strength and weakness of communities, as also opening a path to reveal new possibilities for change and liberation. Knowing, understanding, and constructing history can provide fundamental access to freedom as well as provide a way to reorganize and re-signify the ideas and beliefs people have of themselves and of others. In contexts of extreme human rights abuses, the recovery of collective historical memory is a powerful tool in the struggle against the organized forgetting of abuses and impunity (Gaborit, 2007; Girón, 2010). Cultural Practice and Enactment Cultural practice and enactment has to be taken into account in any liberation task. The engagement with culture is part of the de-colonial critique in LP, and also more recently in CP as noted earlier. Culture stores the past and constructs the present, while laying the steps for the future. Development and affirmation of knowledge about health, wellbeing and healing, based on cultural wisdom, as well as histories and social, spiritual, and cultural knowledge and practices, can sustain and defend not only ethnic groups, but also other people in many places. Examples of this can be seen in the work of Dudgeon, Milroy and Walker (2014) in Australia, and Nikora (2007) in Aotearoa/New Zealand where there is a focus on cultural practice that is vital to processes of community construction and reconstruction. Cultural practice is central to the construction, reconstruction, and maintenance of well-being in community psychology. Liberation psychologists and other practitioners work in a radical interdisciplinary way with a variety of cultural expressions. In Guatemala, for example, the exhumation of victims of the State genocide of indigenous people from the 1980s plays several roles: a) it is a focus for cultural and religious practices that affirm and strengthen cultural identity and community cohesion, b) a way of coming to terms with trauma, c) a way of fighting against social forgetting, d) a way of collecting evidence in the struggle for justice and e) an end to impunity (Flores et al., 2002).


Consciousness Consciousness (as distinct from cognition), is a key concept in LP and CP. There cannot be liberation if people are not conscious of their oppressed and excluded condition, that is, their dependence on others who decide what to do and how, why and when to do it. Yet oppressive social arrangements insinuate their way into the consciousness of people, socially constructing the psyche in its collective and individual manifestations. As Freire (1970) explained in his liberation pedagogy, through facilitating the mobilisation of people in action, qualitative leaps in consciousness can occur. The use of this concept in both LP and CP has been a parallel process and also one of mutual influence, with both LP and CP being influenced directly by popular pedagogy, other currents of liberation praxis and by each other. In the above section we show how certain key concepts are present in both community and liberation psychology. We have only discussed concepts that connect both fields. It is not possible to be categorical about the relative strength of influence in each direction. The important point is that there is overlap and mutual influence whereby LP and CP have strengthened each other and, critically, that a liberation perspective is significant in community psychology. Working With the Oppressed and Excluded in Liberation Community Psychology LP and CP have focused on the specific realities of a variety of categories of oppression and exclusion and the people so affected. For example, many migrants experience profound levels of oppression and exclusion. When one has to leave one’s place of birth, one loses not just material possessions but a country, a landscape, a culture, a language, most of one’s family, and one’s place in society. Sometimes one also loses a trade or craft. One example is that of Moroccan migrants in Andalucía (Spain), who are participants and producers in a programme created at the University of Seville (García-Ramírez, de la Mata,


Paloma, & Hernández-Plaza, 2011). Together researchers and migrants apply analectical methods, while also working with new communities and groups. Work on migration has also been a strong theme in Costa Rican (e.g., Paniagua, 2010), British (e.g., Kagan et al., 2011) and Australian (e.g., Sonn & Lewis, 2009; Sonn & Fisher, 2010) liberatory community psychology. In all of this work there is an emphasis on understanding the structural dynamics that cause migration, hearing the voices and witnessing the lived experience of migrants, and working together to make changes, whether at the level of the community group or of social policy. Some migrants are also refugees, displaced people, and the victims of torture and trauma. There is an interesting contribution to LP by CP and other psychologists being carried out with those displaced because of wars or persecution (religious, political, ethnic); such as the work carried along with Mayan groups in Guatemala, doing CP and also ethnic empowerment (see Anckermann et al., 2005; Figueroa Ibarra, 2007; Flores-Osorio, 2011), or the displaced people in Colombia (Sacipa & Montero, 2014) . There is also work being carried out by groups of community psychologists, as well as political, clinical and environmental psychologists, who are doing psychological and liberating work through the social accompaniment method created in Colombia for therapeutic treatment of victims of war and persecution (Sacipa & Tovar-Guerra, 2004, Sacipa, Alzate, Ballesteros, Borja, & Durán et al., 2014). Indigenous peoples usually colonized or invaded, and dispossessed of their land, culture and languages and excluded from benefits that they produce for the exploiters, are now claiming what is due to them in liberation movements. Glover Dudgeon, and Huygens (2010; O’Connor, et al., 2011) highlight important CP and LP activities such as recovering history, building community-based research and action, establishing holistic and culturally anchored health programs, and developing decolonizing liberation-oriented methodologies. Some community psychology authors (e.g., Huygens, 2011; Sonn & Green,


2006) have introduced LP ideas in highlighting the important implications related to inherited unearned privilege for members of settler or dominant cultural groups, including the need to identify practices and roles for liberation-oriented scholars and activists. These practices include: deconstruction and critique of dominance and injustice; learning to practice in the presence of history; affirming indigenous authority, expertise and self-determination; and advocacy through arts and other forms of protest (Glover, et al., 2010). Related to gender and sexuality, women and LGBT groups also experience oppression. In spite of important changes developed and facilitated by civil rights and feminist movements, which have introduced important changes in various countries, women still fight against lower wages, fewer rights, less access to social benefits and less capacity to enjoy the rights that are due them. In Dublin, Moane (2003; 2011) has used Martín-Baró’s LP concepts such as critical consciousness and the recovery of historical memory to develop a praxis that integrates post-colonial and feminist politics with group work. A special issue of Feminism and Psychology (Lykes & Moane, 2009) contains examples of feminist liberation psychology from several different countries using a variety of methods and modes of practice. Disabled people, many of whom are also migrants, women and/or poor often experience extreme levels of oppression. They, and the dynamics of their situations, have not been a major focus for LP praxis, although there are some exceptions (e.g., Burton & Kagan, 2009; Menezes, Loja & Teixeira, 2014, Solis, 2012). Finally, the largest group that both community and liberation psychology work with is the poor, those living in relative or absolute poverty, present in all countries. The concern with and for these sectors echoes the ‘preferential option for the poor’ found in Liberation Theology and adopted from Martín-Baró and CP practitioners in many countries. For example, the Ceará program, described below (Gois, 2012; Ximenes & Gois, 2010), works at multiple levels to address conditions that create poverty as well as the consequences of


poverty. Community psychologists similarly worked in Cusco, Peru, with indigenous people, including children, adolescents and women. An example from Australia includes the community arts and cultural development programs aimed at fostering indigenous empowerment in Western Australia (see Sonn & Quayle, 2014). Currently, under the auspices of the European Community Psychology Association, Community Psychologists across Europe are collaborating on policy interventions to tackle the politics of austerity and its consequences. Liberation Psychology Praxis for Community psychology As a paradigm, LP can be applied in any of psychology’s specialties and has been particularly valuable in CP. In this section, we review some key methods of the participative approach, since, as we have seen, participatory, ‘analectical’ practice is the core characteristic of LP. They are Participatory Action Research (Lykes, this handbook), conscientization, and biographical methods. Conscientization, popularised by Freire (1964), following Viera Pinto, has been an essential part of LP since Martín-Baró used it in 1983, Later in 1991, and in 2006, 2007, Montero critically used it, then researching its relation with the concept of problematisation, separated conceptually yet inextricably linked to it (Montero, 2014). Yet whenever an issue or situation is problematized, it leads to modes of conscientization, and onscientization leads to new forms of problematization. However, problematization usually takes a long time, so it does not generate immediate change (Montero, 2014). An example could be a deeper process of questioning (maieutics, Montero, 2009b) where the way that certain social arrangements have become naturalized is revealed and new ideas emerge about how things could be different. In this manner, some dimensions of consciousness in relation to the problematized situation become available for discussion and action. Similarly, whenever conscientization occurs in relation to a situation, the social and political dimensions


of that situation, its social reality, become defined as a problem. Talking, thinking and action, together produce changes in consciousness (Montero, 2014). A key aspect of conscientization, is the set of methods used to produce consciousness changes such as: de-naturalization, de-habituation, de-ideologization and de-alienation (Montero, 2009b). These processes are based on discussing, questioning, reading about aspects related to problems. Even jokes, making comparisons, and answering something concerning a problem, idea, or practice, are important in the conscientization process. In this way, it is demonstrated that some specific action, or idea considered natural, does not have some basic root in daily life, but is constructed, and by way of questions, can be deconstructed (see Montenegro, 2002). Habituation refers to daily habits that are practiced without having to think about them. People need to create habits or routines, since they help to perform everyday actions without having to stop to decide or consult someone about them. The same mechanism that lead to habits also may naturalize deep-rooted ideas, including modes of exclusion and the naturalization of negative aspects concerning one’s own life. De-habituation results from consciousness of the ideas that support our habits. Cultural and historical aspects also need to be identified and analyzed because the ways of narrating or forgetting actions and modes of living may produce about the present and the future. There is no set method of facilitating conscientization and, indeed, Freire was very careful not to suggest one, thus preventing its application from becoming formulaic or mechanical, insensitive to context and people’s already existing consciousness. However, community psychologists have developed some helpful descriptions of conscientization processes (e.g., Kagan et al., 2011; Montero, 2006, 2009b; Montenegro, 2002; Moane, 2011; Watts, Williams & Jagers, 2003).


Biographical Approaches Biographical approaches have been used by anthropology since the beginning of the past century and are also used in community psychology. Moreno (1993) used life-histories and narratives of people living in slums and in jails, with their approval - a task that can take years - to describe psychological elements, including emotions, and to understand and develop a social structure in their contexts. Narratives, life-reports, and biographical methods in general have been very useful when combined with participatory interviews (Fals Borda, 2001) and collective discussions about issues presented by people, for example in communities, or in ethnic groups (Montenegro, 2002). Narrative approaches have also gained prominence in community psychology (e.g., Rappaport, 2000). Individual and collective narratives are also used in liberation and community psychology and are often combined with modes of research regarding the retrieval of historical memory by discussing and representing cultural aspects (see Lykes, 2013). Life histories are very useful and rich in details, but they can take a long time to carry out and require patience. Stories need to be checked, and sometimes the narrator may change his/her initial version, adding other narratives that require further analysis: after all, memory is an act of reconstruction. Autobiographies are also useful, and detailed field notes may also produce interesting insights that can be used in the conscientization processes. Examples of the use of biographical information in a liberation and community psychology practice can be found in work on the impact of armed struggles on family life in Colombia (Estrada, Ibarra, & Sarmiento, 2007) and in Dobles and Leandro's (2005) work on the careers of political militants. Lykes, Terre Blanche and Hamber (2003) have shown how participatory methodologies such as photovoice can be used in different contexts (South Africa and Guatemala) to narrate survival. Theatre of the Oppressed, Forum Theatre (Boal, 1979), and


Oral History Theatre are also popular approaches used in liberation and community psychology. Two Examples of Liberation Community Psychology Programs We selectively describe developments in some countries and contexts, later providing more detail on the IRA program in Mexico and Guatemala, and the Ceará program in Brazil. In Australia and Aotearoa/New Zealand, scholars and activists, many of them community psychologists, have highlighted the ongoing effects of colonization and racism in the life experiences of indigenous peoples (Glover, et al. 2010). Their approach is guided by principles of self-determination and social justice and works practically towards social liberation. An example of this work is reflected in the Maori development agenda, which includes the development of psychologies that can meet the needs of Maori people, affirm cultural identities, and improve their living conditions and future (Nikora, 2007). O’Connor, Tilyard, and Milfont (2011) argue that such work is a variety of liberation psychology. In Italy, Marzana and Marta (2012a) edited a special issue of the journal Psicologia di Communitá (Vol. 3) dedicated to LP. They argued that liberation and empowerment can be conceived as parallel notions, that the commitment to promoting civic engagement is an expression of seeking social justice, and for the imperative of a relational ethics (Marzana & Marta, 2012b). They further suggested that LP could advance by strengthening its focus on mediating structures, such as informal youth groups and civic associations in promoting the participation of marginalized communities in that context. Natale, Arcidiacono and Di Martino (2013) in Caserta (Southern Italy) present another recent example of CP work applying liberation principles such as conscientization, along with organizing and participation. They describe a program of initiatives aimed at fostering new values of


community via a work-based social system developed to counter organized crime, and to improve people’s living conditions. An innovative program in depth psychology offered at the Pacifica Graduate Institute in California has a focus on community psychology, liberation psychology, and ecopsychology (see http://www.pacifica.edu/cle.aspx). Watkins (who leads this programme) and Shulman (Watkins & Shulman, 2008) focus on liberation psychologies, in the plural, as a result of struggles with narrow, universalizing psychotherapeutic and research paradigms. For them, liberation psychologies are the coming together of "ideas, practices, and projects that nurture the imagination of alternative ways of thinking and acting together that can transform participation in social, economic, and ecological change and address psychological sufferings" (p. 3). They draw on psychology, including psychodynamic clinical theory, understood in its social, cultural, historical context, as well as community-based approaches including PAR and methods of practice such as community theatre, film making, arts practice and testimony. The IRA Program Guatemalan-Mexican LP-oriented community psychologist Flores-Osorio (2011) and his colleagues have developed a praxis called Investigation, Reflection and Action (IRA), created for, and with, indigenous communities by teams including psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists. Although originally created for a specific situation, their approach can be applied to other cultures, not only in rural indigenous contexts but also in communities generated by urban subcultures. It is a transdisciplinary method, drawing on psychological, psychiatric, sociological and liberation methods and concepts. Daily practice is analyzed producing both critique and self-critique in order to generate knowledge about the conditions of exclusion in groups or in communities, supporting their own liberation.


The Organization of Critical Communities (CC) (small intersectorial, working groups) is the first step. In the process, community workers collect life narratives and community beliefs, reflecting the group`s historical memories and their views of the world. The information is analyzed, using a visual matrix, in order to construct a counter-hegemonic history as well as a new social identity, free of diminishing stereotypes. Those analyses allow an understanding of the meaning and sense of community, of people’s lives, and the possibilities to transform them. ‘Re-signification’, the Freirean-like construction of a new reading of the world and of oppressive community relations and resistance, allows for new ways of living. This use of analectic methods then helps in moving from oppressive to democratic practices (see Flores Osorio, 2011). The Ceará Program In 1982, in North East Brazil, Cezar Wagner de Lima Góis, a social psychologist, along with students, and colleagues at Federal University of Ceará, began developing what perhaps is the most ambitious, extended and varied participatory community and liberating CP praxis program in Latin America, and perhaps in other regions of the world. Liberation pedagogy, LP, CP, community therapy (Barreto, Rivalta, Grandesso, & Camarotti, 2006), education, health, and the practice of biodance (Toro, 2008), which is a fusion of music, emotion and movement, have been present since the program began. The program covers political education, developing ways for people in situations of poverty to understand and exercise citizenship, by way of being part of municipalities and town councils, voicing needs and ideas. At the same time, they work at the level of public policy, learning while producing changes in peoples’ lives and in the environment (Góis, 2012). Psychological inquiry is carried out using PAR, an active dialogical approach, biodance, arts, Theatre of the Oppressed (Boal, 1979), and other methods and techniques presented in Table 1. A liberating aim is present in these approaches, as well as in their


publications (by psychologists and community members). There is a CP, LP and health network of programs involving teaching, both in the city (Fortaleza) and in the Ceará countryside. Stakeholders, students, researchers, some State offices and especially local social movement organizations contribute to the Ceará Program. Among their most important contributions to LP are the practices generated within the community; which help in overcoming the ideology of submission and resignation, strengthening their social identity as well as enhancing their capacity to change their communities in a positive way. Researchers (psychologists and community members) use a variety of methods (some created with community groups), collectively analyzing communities’ experiences as well as providing health care. They undertake participatory interventions, e.g., participatory systematizing of the material produced in all activities. The NUCOM (Community Psychology Centre or Núcleo) links communities and the University (Ximenes & Góis, 2010). A further development is that of clinical-community psychology (to be distinguished from community clinical psychology), which applies therapeutic process to work at the community level (Góis, 2005; 2012). Challenges, Problems and Future of the Relation between Liberation and Community Psychology Over the last 20 years, LP and CP have been producing new modes of praxis as well as developing a theoretical base. Both LP and critical CP, whose goals are social transformation, have coincided in detecting certain challenges and problems. Here we summarize those challenges, including our own perspective on both the internal and external contexts of LP and CP related endeavours. We present several current challenges for liberation and community psychology.


Empty Rhetoric and Lack of Praxis Today there are liberation psychology movements not only in Latin America but also in other regions of the world. The real test of their commitment to liberation is in the effects of their praxis: does liberation, as a process and an outcome, actually result? The philosophical roots of liberation psychology may be a challenge for practitioners and psychologists since the language may be difficult. While the liberatory praxis of critical social scientists is relatively familiar, through its representation in the literature, there is a need to reflect those liberatory praxes emerging from diverse communities, academic and popular, worldwide, in their search and struggle for social justice knowledge using other means of communication to exchange experience, ideas and their forms of expression and praxis. So, the most important challenge in dissemination is not the language but the liberating actions, demonstrated by the effects on otherness and relatedness in daily life. Critical reflection and the production of new knowledge are real challenges. The critical point is that it is not words that produce liberation but rather how the shared praxis of liberation is carried out, why, from where, and with whom. Pseudo Analectics LP has adopted, developed, and still practices analectics, by including the Other, and making “alterity” a condition in life and in society. Yet, there is a risk for the LP-CP relation, of becoming more like 'traditional psychology' masked as pseudo-analectics. The figure of the Other may become a caricature, trivialised, romanticised or demonised. The challenge is to strive for the genuine involvement of Others of any age, gender, ability and ethnicity throughout the praxis of LP and CP, including them in conferences, publications, workshops and as co-action-researchers. Including as partners and as leaders, those who are so often silent, can be a way to make liberation real, while guarding against pseudo-liberations that


turn out to be the old alienated approaches in “analectic dress”, casting the Other into dependent roles, objects of pity rather than active subjects with whom we have the privilege of partnership. A Supportive Network Since the work of liberation can often bring the practitioner into situations of stress, confrontation and even personal danger, it is essential to develop networks of liberation psychologists, exchanging means and extending practical solidarity and support to their members, reaching for those working in isolation. Most LP work is being carried out with communities; thus it is important to generate supportive relationships between psychologists and community members, with effective practical sharing, support and solidarity. That is the object of periodic discussions in CP and LP, for example via conferences, while the new tools of social networking make an important contribution. Development of Theory and Practices Liberation Psychology is relatively new so it is arguable that it still lacks a distinctive conceptualisation. The reason, as already indicated, may be that much of its theory comes from other fields (pedagogy, theology, sociology, philosophy) and practices. There is therefore a danger that despite adopting liberation as a centre, traditional ways of doing psychology are retained, in spite of them not being useful regarding liberation challenges. Meanwhile, in the background there are many ideas, beliefs, experiences and approaches that can inform both CP and LP to be aware of, such as the concept of coloniality of being (see Maldonado Torres, 2007); and the innovations of the “vivir bien/buen vivir” and degrowth movements in the Andean Region and Europe respectively (D'Alisa, Demario & Kallis, 2014). As liberation psychology is beginning to flourish, it should continue to practice what Martín-Baró identified as the critical but constructive reconstruction of social (and we include


much community) psychology, from the standpoint of the world's poor and oppressed majority, and his critique of individualistic social psychological ideas. There have been at least three moments of critical reflection on LP progress: during the early 1990s after Martín-Baró´s death, when awareness of LP produced a few, papers from various places, but at the same time there was wider reflection and practice, most of it created and applied in CP. Then, during the first decade of the new century, when in 2003, Dobles, Gaborit, Montero, Quintal de Freitas, Sousa-Pinheiro, Traverso-Yepes, Sloan, among others, presented critiques and proposed ways to sustain a LP true to its ethical origins. Two books eventually appeared as a record of those critical reflections (see Guzzo & Lacerda, 2009; Lacerda & Guzzo, 2010). The third moments is in the present decade, after 2010, when there is a ferment of activism, not always accompanied by critical reflection, and as a result, there can be a domination by the interests of political parties or sectional groups. Many voices are being heard and read. In the context of an unfair world, the erosion of democratic institutions under neoliberal globalization and pseudo-democracies, among other challenges, indicate the need for a redefinition of democracy, development and strengthening of community and civil society, a debate to which LP has much to contribute. LP-CP have to consider the main political phenomena happening around the world including: 1) increasing inequality in nearly every country; 2) erosion of democratic institutions under neoliberal globalization, terrorism and ‘globalized national security’, promoted by pseudo-democratic governments, and that human rights and social movements are criminalized (Dobles, 2009a); 3) imposition of a market fundamentalism, tied to the perennial crisis of the present capitalist accumulation regime, that commodifies social goods, public services, nature and knowledge (Burton, 2013a; Dobles, 2009a, b); 4) the problem of securing authentic democracy, through both participative and more accountable


representative processes; 5) ecological crises and ecosystem collapse, of which climate change is just the most obvious, and their impact through “unnatural disasters” on vulnerable populations (Dobles, 2009a; Kagan et al., 2011); 6) organized crime and gang violence and the associated drug trade, human trafficking and hyper-exploitation; 7) major regional wars and conflicts, often underpinned by deteriorating ecosystems and resource depletion; 8) the destruction and re-constitution of communities in the face of those tensions, shifts and upheavals (Stark, 2011), and the increasing differences within communities that complements the huge diversity among them, making urgent the task of understanding and working against exclusion and oppression, a task where careful participative investigation and reflection are indispensable (Wiesenfeld, 2011). These challenges, mostly of global-system origin but with local and supra-local spheres of impact, are daunting for any social science that aspires to a transformational mission. For both liberation and community psychology, they are the raison d’être and the testing ground where the discipline of LP-CP is confronted. Just because a movement gives itself a name with radical and critical resonance, like liberation psychology, does not guarantee a praxis that is truly liberatory. There can be no such guarantee, other than a continual process of reflection, analysis, and analectical renewal, from the critical interlocutor: the oppressed, the poor, the excluded and the exploited. Our answers to them and the consequent elaboration of a better synthesis are also necessary. Summary and Conclusion In this chapter we have highlighted the development of liberation ideas in different contexts and countries, their infusion into psychology and the synergy between CP and LP. LP understands that liberation is not given, but produced by those who are victims of oppression. In working with people as active agents of their own liberation, psychologists accompany them in the construction of a liberated consciousness. Critical denunciation of


violations of human rights, including torture, violent dispossession and displacement, and in general, all modes of oppression and impunity, have led to the development, both within critical CP and in LP, of new ways and methods to help those who are oppressed, victims and survivors, and their allies to both improve their situation and address the causes of their oppression. So far, the contribution of LP and CP is small in relation to the scale of worldwide oppression and people's resistance to it. Ethics is fundamental to LP and CP and, at its best, can help leaders and stakeholders develop new conceptual tools to defend their communities and models of fairness. Introducing in community and other contexts different modes of understanding reality may support positive community identities, rejecting imposed and internalized stereotypes of ignorance and laziness. The main link with CP has been through work with disadvantaged people and communities, helping in the gaining of critical consciousness, unmasking and challenging dominant ideology, in dialogue with people's awakening critical voices. The challenge now is how community and liberation psychology can be applied in consonance with its dialogical, or analectical, ethical foundation. Today’s challenges and developments may lead to new understandings and approaches to liberation. Retrieval and renewal of ideas and practices from the past may still create helpful praxis in the future. New paths and tools will be created to liberate, supporting people to become more conscious, and hence potentially freer, and generating respect among people for Others and for themselves. While the challenges are enormous, this is the promise of the synergy between liberation and community psychology -- the construction of an ethical and transformative praxis for the benefit of humanity.


References Anckermann, S., Dominguez, M., Soto, N., Kjaerulf, F., Berliner, P., & Naima Mikkelsen, E. (2005). Psycho-social support to large numbers of traumatized people in postconflict societies: an approach to community development in Guatemala. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 15(2), 136–152. doi:10.1002/casp.811 Alatas, S. H. (1979). The myth of the lazy native. London: Frank Cass. Alisa, G., Demario, F., & Kelli, G. (Eds.). (2014). Degrowth a vocabulary for a real era. New York, NY: Routledge. Azibo, D. A. (1994). The kindred fields of Black Liberation theology and liberation psychology: A critical essay on their conceptual base and destiny. Journal of Black Psychology, 20, 334-356. DOI: 10.1177/00957984940203007. Althusser, L. (1978). Ideología y aparatos ideológicos del estado. [Ideology & ideological state apparatus]. Medellín, Colombia: PEPE. Arendt, H. (1988). Da revolucão. [The Revolution]. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Atica e Brasilia Aron, A., & Corne, S. (Eds.). (1994). Introduction. In Ignacio Martín-Baró: Writings for a liberation psychology (pp. 1–11). New York: Harvard University Press. Barreiro, J. (1974). Educación popular y proceso de concientización. [Popular education and conscientization process]. Mexico, DF.: Siglo XXI. Bareto, A., Rivalta, M., Grandesso, M. and Camarotti, H. (2006). Community therapy: building webs of solidarity. Retrieved February 2010 from http://www.accademiapsico.it/web/oaxaca%20ing.pdf 26 Biko (1988). I write what I like: a selection of his essays. Ringwood, Australia: Penguin Books. Boal, A. (1979). Theatre of the oppressed. Sidmouth, England: Pluto Press.


Bulhan, H. A. (1985). Frantz Fanon and the psychology of oppression. New York: Plenum Press. Burton, M. (2013a). The analectic turn: critical psychology and the new political context. Les Cahiers de Psychologie Polítique, (23), online. HYPERLINK "http://lodel.irevues.inist.fr/cahierspsychologiepolitique/index.php?id=2465"http://lod el.irevues.inist.fr/cahierspsychologiepolitique/index.php?id=2465 Burton, M. (2013b). Liberation psychology: a constructive critical praxis. Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas), 30(2), 249–259. HYPERLINK "http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103166X2013000200011"http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-166X2013000200011

Burton, M., & Flores Osorio, J. M. (2011). Introducing Dussel: the philosophy of liberation and a really social psychology. Psychology in Society, 20–39. Burton, M., & Kagan, C. (2005). Liberation social psychology: Learning from Latin America. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 15(1), 63-78. Caparrós, N., & Caparrós, A. (1976). Psicología de la liberación [Psychology of liberation]. Madrid: Editorial Fundamentos. Dobles, I. (2000). Proceso a la psicología de la liberación: ¿Es posible en nuestra América? [Process to liberation psychology: Is it possible in our America?]. In J. Vazquez (Ed.) Psicología social y liberación en América Latina [Social psychology and liberation in Latin America](pp. 27-40). Mexico, DF.: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana Iztapalapa. Dobles, I. (2009a). Ignacio Martín Baró y psicología de la liberación: un desafío vigente. [Ignacio Martin-Baró and Liberation psychology]Retrieved 3 March 2014 from HYPERLINK "http://www.catedralibremartinbaro.org/pdfs/PCL_DoblesI_UnDesafioVigente.pdf"http://w

ww.catedralibremartinbaro.org/pdfs/PCL_DoblesI_UnDesafioVigente.pdf


Dobles, I. (2009b). Psicologia da libertação: Condições de possibilidade [Liberation psychology: Conditions of possibility]. In R. Guzzo & F. Lacerda, Jr. (Eds.). Psicología social para América Latina (pp. 165-188). Campinas, Brazil: Alínea. Dudgeon, P., Milroy, H., & Walker, R. (2010). Working together: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mental health and wellbeing principles and practice (2nd ed.). Canberra, ACT: Department of Health and Ageing. Dussel, E. (1985). Philosophy of liberation. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. Dussel, E. (2003). Philosophy in Latin America in the Twentieth Century: Problems and Currents. In E. Mendieta (Ed.), Latin American philosophy: Currents, issues, debates (pp. 11–56). Bloomington and Indianapolis, USA: Indian University Press. Dussel, E. (2013). Ethics of liberation, in the age of globalization and exclusion. Durham, NC. USA: Duke University Press. Enriquez, V. G. (1992). From colonial to liberation psychology: The Phillipine experience. Quezon City: University of the Phillipines Press. Estrada, A. M., Ibarra, C., & Sarmiento, E. (2007). Regulation and control of subjectivity and private life in the context of armed conflict in Colombia. Community, Work & Family, 10 (3), 257 – 281. Fals Borda, O. (1959). Community action in a Colombian village. Bogotá, Colombia; Colombia National University. Fals-Borda, O. (1986). Conocimiento y poder popular. [Knowledge and people’s power]. Bogotá, Colombia, Siglo XXI. Fals Borda, O. (2001). Participatory (action) research in social theory: Origins and Challenges. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.) Handbook of Action Research (pp. 81-90). London, UK: Sage. Fanon, F. (1967a). Black skins white masks. New York, NY: Grove Press.


Fanon, F. (1967b). The wretched of the earth. London, UK: Macgibbon & Kee. Flores, J. M., Cajas, E., Navarra, S., Salado, M., Suasnavar, J., & Solis, R. (2002). Symposium: El papel de la psicología en el proceso de exhumaciones en Guatemala. In Fifth Congreso Internacional de la Psicología Social de la Liberación. Guadalajara, Mexico. Flores-Osorio, J. M. (2009). Praxis and liberation in the context of Latin American theory. In M. Montero & C. Sonn (Eds.), Psychology of Liberation: Theory and Applications (pp. 11-36). New York: Springer. Flores- Osorio, J. M. (2011). Psicología y praxis comunitaria: Una Visión Latinoamericana [Psychology and community praxis: A Latin American vision]. Cuernavaca: Editorial Latinoamerica. Freire, P. (1969/1984). La educación como práctica de libertad. Mexico, DF.: Siglo XXI Freire, P. (1970). Cultural action for freedom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review. Freire, P. (1972/1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin. Freire, P. (1973/1964). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Seabury Press. Gabel, J. (1973). Sociología de la alienación [Sociology of alienation]. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Amorrortu. Gaborit, M. (2007). Memoria histórica: aspectos psicosociales en la recuperación de la memoria histórica. In I. Dobles, S. Baltodano., & V. Leandro, (Eds.), Psicología de la Liberación en el Contexto de la Globalización Neoliberal (pp. 82-99) [Liberation Psychology in the Context of Neoliberal Globalization]. San Jose, Costa Rica: Universidad de Costa Rica. García Ramírez, M., Hernández-Plaza, S., Albar, S. M. J., Manzano, V. & Paloma, V. (2009). Psychology of liberation and community integration: Identifying conditions of


oppression in immigrants. In C. Vazquez-Rivera (Ed.), International community psychology: Shared Agendas in Diversity (pp. 212-234). San Juan: Puerto Rico. Universidad de Puerto Rico. García-Ramírez, M., Manuel, L., Paloma, V., & Hernández-Plaza, S. (2011). A liberation psychology approach to acculturative integration of migrant populations. American journal of community psychology, 47(1-2), 86-97. Girón, C. (2010). El rol reparador y transformador de la memoria: de la eficacia simbólica a la acción política colectiva. In Barrero, E & Salas, J. R. (Eds.), Memoria, silencio y acción psicosocial. Bogotá: Cátedra Libre Matín-Baró and Fundación Manuel Cepeda Vargas. Glover, M., Dudgeon, P., & Huygens, I. (2010). Colonization and racism. In G. Nelson & I. Prilleltensky (Eds.), Community psychology: In pursuit of liberation and wellbeing (2nd ed.) (pp. 353-370). New York: Palgrave. Góis, C.W.L. (2005). Psicología comunitaria: Atividade e consciência [Community Psychology: activity and consciousness. Fortaleza, Brazil: Viver. Góis, C.W.L. (2012). Psicologia-clínico comunitária [Clinical-community psychology].Fortaleza, Brazil: Banco do Nordeste. Goldmann, L. (1972). Epistemología de la sociología. In L. Goldmann (Ed.) Epistemología de las ciencias humanas [Epistemologies for the human sciences](pp. 65-118). Buenos Aires, Argentina: Proteo. Gone, J. (2011). The red road to wellness: Cultural reclamation in a native First Nations community treatment centre. American Journal of Community Psychology, 47, 187202. DOI 10.1007/s10464-010-9373-2. Gutiérrez, G. (1971, 1988). A theology of liberation: History, politics, salvation. NY, Maryknoll: Orbis books.


Guzzo, R.S.L. & Lacerda, F. (Eds.) (2009). Psicología Social para América Latina. O resgate da Psicología da Libertacao. Campinas, Brazil: Alinea. Huygens, I. (2011). Developing a decolonisation practice for settler colonisers: a case study from Aotearoa New Zealand. Settler Colonial Studies, 2(1), 53-81. Kagan, C. Burton, M., Duckett, P., Lawthom, R. & Siddiquee. A. (2011). Critical community psychology. Manchester, England: BPS-Blackwell. Lacerda, F, & R. S. L. Guzzo, R.S.L. (Eds.) (2010) Psicología & Sociedade, Interfaces no debate sobre á questao Social. Campinas, Brazil: Alinea. Leon, A. & Montenegro, M. (1998). Return of emotion in psychosocial community research. Journal of Community Psychology, 26 (3), 219-227. Lykes, M. B. (2013). Participatory and action research as a transformative Praxis: Responding to humanitarian crises from the margins. American Psychologist, 68(8), 772-783. DOI: 10.1037/a0034360 Lykes, M.B. & Moane, G. (Eds.) (2009). Feminist liberation psychology [Special issue]. Feminism & Psychology, 19(3). Whole Issue. Lykes, M. B., Terre Blanche, M., & Hamber, B. (2003). Narrating survival and change in Guatemala and South Africa: The politics of representation and a liberatory community psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31(1), 79-90. Marcuse, H. (1964/2002). One-dimensional man: studies in the ideology of advanced industrial society. London: Routledge. Martín-Baró, I. (1983). Acción e ideología: Psicología social desde América Central [Action and ideology: Social psychology from Central America]. San Salvador, El Salvador: UCA. Martín-Baró, I. (1986). Hacia una psicología de la liberación [Towards a liberation psychology]. Boletín de Psicología, 22, 219-231.


Martín-Baró, I. (1988). Los grupos con historia: Un modelo psicosocial [Groups with histories: A psychosocial model]. Boletin de la AVEPSO XI, 1, 3-18. Martín-Baró, I. (1989). Sistema, grupo y poder [System, groups and power: Social psychology from Central America. II]. San Salvador, El Salvador: UCA. Martín-Baró, I. (1990). Retos y perspectivas de la psicología latinoamericana. [Challenges and perspectives in Latin American psychology]. In G. Pacheco & B. Jiménez (Eds.) (pp. 51-79).Guadalajara, Mexico: University of Guadalajara-ITESO. Marzana, D., & Marta, E. (2012a). Revisiting liberation psychology from a theoreticalmethodological perspective. Psicologia di Communitá, 3(1), 1-5. Marzana, D., & Marta, E. (2012b). Psychology of liberation: A review of constructs and areas of application in Italy. Psicologia di Communitá, 3(1), 27-48. Menezes, I., Loja, E., & Teixeira, P. M. (Eds.). (2014). In/Capacidade e In/Diferença. Porto: CIIE/Mais Leitura/University of Porto. Memmi, A. (1969). Dominated man: Notes toward a portrait. Boston: Beacon Press. Memmi, A. (1984). Dependence: a sketch for a portrait of the dependent. Boston: Beacon Press. Moane, G. (2003). Bridging the personal and the political practices for a liberation psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31, 91-101. Moane, G. (2011). Gender and colonialism: A psychological analysis of oppression and liberation. London, UK: Palgrave/McMillan. Maldonado-Torres, N. (2007) On the Coloniality of Being. Cultural Studies, 21 (2) 240-270. Montero, M. (1994). Construcción y crítica de la Psicología Social. [Construction and Critique of Social Psychology]. Barcelona, Spain: Anthropos. Montero, M. (2003) Teoría y práctica de la Psicología Comunitaria.[Theory and Practice of Community Psychology]. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Paidós.


Montero, M. (2006). Hacer para transformar. El método en la psicología comunitaria. [Action for transformation: Method in community psychology]. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Paidós. Montero, M. (2009). Methods for liberation: Critical consciousness in Action. In M. Montero & C. Sonn (Eds.) Psychology of Liberation. Theory and Applications (pp. 73-92). New York: Springer. Montero, M. (2014) From Liberation pedagogy to Liberation Psychology: the Construction of a Paradigm in Social Sciences. Key Note Address. 10th Biennial Conference SPSSI June 28. Montero, M. (2014). Consciousness. In T. Teo (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Critical Psychology (pp.303-307). New York: Springer. Montero, M. (2014). Algunas premisas para el desarrollo de métodos analécticos en el trabajo psicosocial comunitario. In J. M. Flores Osorio (Ed.), Repensar la psicología y lo comunitario en América Latina. Tijuana: Universidad de Tijuana. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/8424848/Repensar_la_psicologia_y_lo_comunitario_en_a m%C3%A9rica_latina Montenegro, M. (2002). Ideology and community social psychology: Theoretical considerations and practical implications. American Journal of Community Psychology, 30, 511-527. Moreno, A. (1993). El Aro y la trama: Episteme, modernidad y pueblo. [The hoop and the weave: Episteme, modernity and the people]. Caracas, Venezuela: CIP- Univ. de Carabobo. Natale, A., Arcidiacono, C., & Di Martino, S. (2013). From “Gomorrah Domain” to “Don Peppe Diana Lands”: A southern Italian experience of work-based liberation,


community networking, and well being. Universitas Psychologica, 12 (4), 1037-1047. DOI: 10.11144/javeriana.UPSY12-4.fgtd Nelson, G. & Prilleltensky, I. (Eds.) (2010). Community psychology: In pursuit of liberation and well-being (2nd ed) (pp. 331-352). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Nikora, L. (2007). Maori and psychology: Indigenous psychology in New Zealand. In A. Wetherall, M. Wilson, D. Harper, & J. McDowall (Eds), Psychology in Aotearoa/New Zealand (pp. 80-85). Auckland, New Zealand: Pearson Education New Zealand. O'Connor, S., Tilyard, B. A., & Milfont, T. L. (2011). Liberation psychology: from Latin America to Aotearoa/New Zealand. Journal of New Zealand Studies, 11, 151-170. Oliveira, L. B. de, Gomes Moreira, A. P., & Guzzo, R. S. L. (2014). Ampliando o conceito de situação-limite de Martín-Baró: diálogos com o conceito de crise. Revista de Psicologia, Fortaleza, 5(2), 96–105. Paniagua Arguedas, L. (2010). Vidas prohibidas: vivencias de las personas inmigrantes nacaraguenses. In I. Dobles & S. Baltodano (Eds.), Psicología: dominación, compromiso y transformación social [Psychlogy: Domination, compromiso and social transformation]. (pp. 115–128). San José de Costa Rica: Universidad de Costa Rica. Prilleltensky, I. (2008). The role of power in wellness, oppression and liberation: The promise of psychopolitical validity. Journal of Community Psychology, 36 (2), 116136. Rappaport, J. (2000). Community narratives: Tales of terror and joy. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28(1), 1-24. Sacipa, Rodriguez S. & Tovar, C. (2004) Acompañamiento social a una comunidad desplazada por la violencia. In A. Ospina (Ed.), Enfoques y metodologías de atención psicosocial en el marco del conflicto sociopolítico colombiano [Psychosocial


attention approaches and methods within the Colombian social-political frame] (pp. 139-150). Bogotá, Colombia: Terre des Hommes, Italy, European Union. Sacipa Rodríguez, S. & Montero, M. (Ed). (2014). Psychosocial approaches to peacebuilding in Colombia. New York: Springer. Sawaia, B. B. (2001). As Artimanhas da Exclusão/Inclusão. Taubaté, Brazil: Cabral. Scannone, J. A. (1998). Filosofía de la liberación y sabiduría popular.[Philosophy of liberation and common lore]. Anthropos 180: Enrique Dussel. Un proyecto ético y politico para América Latina [Enrique Dussel: An ethical and political project for Latin America] (pp. 80-86). Barcelona, Spain: Anthropos. Schutz, A. & Luckmann, T. (2001/1977). Las estructuras del mundo de la vida. [The Structures of the Life World]. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Amorrortu. Seedat, M. (1997). The quest for liberatory psychology. South African Journal of Psychology, 27(4), 261-270. Seedat, M., & Lazarus, S. (2011). Community psychology in South Africa: origins, developments, and manifestations. Journal of Community Psychology, 39(3), 241257. doi: 10.1002/jcop.20429. Serrano-García, I. & López, G. (1994). Una perspectiva diferente del poder y el cambio social para la psicología social comunitaria [A different perspective of power and social change for community psychology]. In M. Montero (Ed.) Psicología Social comunitaria [Community social psychology: Theory, method, and experience] (pp.167 – 209). Guadalajara (México): Universidad de Guadalajara. Sloan, T. (2010). Globalization, poverty and social justice. In G. Nelson & I. Prilleltensky (Eds.), Community Psychology: In pursuit of liberation and well-being (2nd ed) (pp. 331-352). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.


Solis, R. (2012). La discapacidad: más allá de los cuerpos. [Discapacity: Beyond the bodies]. Revista Análisis de La Realidad Nacional, (19), 57–62. Sonn, C. C., & Green, M. J. (2006). Disrupting the dynamics of oppression in intercultural research and practice. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology [Special Issue], 16(5), 337-346. doi: 10.1002/casp.877 Sonn, C. C., & Lewis, R. (2009). Immigration and identity: The ongoing struggle for liberation. In M. Montero and C. C. Sonn (Eds.), The Psychology of liberation: Theory, research and applications (pp. 115-134). New York: Springer. Sonn, C. C., & Fisher, A. T. (2010). Immigrant adaptation: Confronting the challenges of cultural diversity. In G. Nelson & I. Prilleltensky (Eds.), Community psychology: In pursuit of liberation and wellbeing (2nd ed)(pp. 371-388). London, UK: McMillan, Palgrave. Sonn, C. C., & Quayle, A. F. (2014). Community cultural development for social change: Developing critical praxis. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology, 6(1), 16. Stark, W. (2011). Community psychology as a linking science. Potentials and challenges for transdisciplinary competences. In E. Almeida (Ed.), International community psychology: Community approaches to contemporary social problems (pp.123136).Vol. 1. Puebla, Mexico: Universidad Iberoamericana. Stevens, G., Duncan, N. & Sonn, C. (2010).The apartheid archive: Memory, voice and narrative as liberatory praxis. Psychology in Society, 40, 8-28. Toro, R. (2008). Biodanza. [Biodance] Providencia, Santiago: Editorial Cuarto Propio. Tovar, C. & Galindo, F. (2006). Indagar em el desplazamiento forzado desde uma perspectiva psicosocial. In M. Bello (Ed.) Investigación y desplazamiento forzado.


Reflexiones éticas y metodológicas. [Research and forced displacement. Ethical and methodological reflections] (pp. 188-198). Bogotá, Colombia: Redif. ColCiencias. Vieira Pinto, A. (1961). Consciencia e realidade nacional [Consciousness and National Reality] Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: ISEB-MEC. Ximenes, V. M. & Gois, C. W.L. (2010). Psicología Comunitária: Uma práxis libertadora latino-americana. In R. Guzzo & F. Lacerda, Jr. (Eds.) Psicología e Sociedad [Psychology and society] (pp. 45-64). Campinas, Brazil: Alínea. Watkins, M. & Shulman, H. (2008). Toward psychologies of liberation. London, UK: Palgrave/McMillan. Watts, R. J., & Serrano-García, I. (2003). The quest for a liberating community psychology: An overview. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31(1), 73-78. Watts, R. J., Williams, N. C., & Jagers, R. J. (2003). Sociopolitical development. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31(1/2), 185–194. Weber, M. (1922/1964). Economía y Sociedad.[Economy and Society]. México City: FCE. Weil, S. (1979) A Condicao Operaria e Outros Estudos Sobre A Opresao [The Workers condition and Other Studies About Oppression]. Rio de Janeiro, Brasil: Paz e Terra.

Wiesenfeld, E. (2011). Community social psychology in Latin America: Myths, dilemmas and Challenges. In F.H. E. Almeida Acosta (Ed.) International community psychology: Community approaches to contemporary social problems. Vol.1 (pp. 95122). Puebla, Mexico: Universidad Iberoamericana.

Community and Liberation Psychology

Table 1: The Ceará program in a nutshell. Based on: Góis, 2012; Ximénes & Góis, 2008. Communities and programs Bom Jardin (Fortaleza) Canafistula (Ceará, countryside) Pedra Branca (Ceará, country side). Pentecoste (Ceará, countryside) Movement program CIPO community: Pre-High School of PRECE= Educational program in educational cells. UAVRC: Union of Associations from the river Canindé valley. ADEL.

CP & LP Trainingteaching programs Teaching-learning. Community Nucleus Psychology: NUCOM Laboratory. Master course. Extention & Cooperation. Community carers Health psychology Clinical psychology Liberation psychology. Community health. Consciousness studies Health education Community Health Clinical-Community Psychology

Main Concepts Used.

Methods

Techniques

Life praxis. PPParticipatory Action Theater of the Biocentric principle. RResearch. Oppressed. Consciousness. Problematization. Dramma. Identity Conscientization. PProblematizing Art and Content analysis. g dialogue. metamorphosis Discourse analysis. Elder groups Biocentric education. Biodance. commissions Popular psychology. Short Term Therapy Existential chat. Liberating education. Research-Facilitation. Psychosocial Social psychological maps. Community life analysis. processes Community Therapy by Encounter Ideology of submission & production Participant Observation resignation. groups. Biocentric strategies in Collectively Identity and suffering of Community Health solving needs & oppressed -exploited. Problems Personal value Mutirão. Power. Life stories Oppression, Stress & And telling Distress. Health Radio Community insertion program Ideology. Circles Subjectivity Domination.

Community and Liberation Psychology Community Psychology and Liberation Psychology: A Creative Synergy for an Ethical and Transformative Praxis

Recommend Documents