ReviewFrontiers in sociology2026
Impossible futures and the ethics of hopelessness: learnings from Black liberation system entanglements part III.
Review in Frontiers in sociology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Black Liberation work focuses on the flourishing of people of African descent across interconnected life components-community, health, education, employment, nutrition, and housing. Because these components are porous, connected systems, Black Liberation and social justice work are projects of system Futures. Yet what justice workers can or cannot imagine is deeply entangled with our experience as parts of these wounded systems. The resilience of systems of injustice has produced a future orientation of Afropessimism and Afronihilism within the African diaspora. White or Eurocentric Futures and design employ an ethics of hope that does not work for communities without hope, making these dominant paradigms exclusive. Futures has always been practiced by communities since the beginning of human and ecological life, especially by oppressed and decolonial movements. Viewing Futures as a spiritual practice, this paper uses a Black Liberation theology lens, informed by intersectional liberation theologies, to critique White Futures practice and its ethics of hope. This paper then presents how Black and underutilized communities that include people without hope practice futurism through an ethics of hopelessness founded in Impossible Futures. Rather than using impossibility as a euphemism or temporary state, Black Liberation and social justice workers mean it literally-a future that will never happen. This practice is called Black Liberation Futures Design, one contextualized glimpse of pluriversal Futures practices. This paper also makes a methodological argument for sociological research on race. Dominant Futures methodologies embed epistemological assumptions-about hope, agency, and linear temporality-that function as hidden scholastic bias, reproducing the racial hierarchies they claim to study or disrupt. Drawing on standpoint theory, Black Liberation theology, and lived experience, this paper shows how researcher positionality and the categories embedded in research practice shape what knowledge about race and racialization becomes possible. Black Liberation Futures Design offers sociology a reflexive, community-rooted methodological alternative for studying race, temporality, and structural oppression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.