I very much agree with your perspective. But to drs rube what we are doing in terms of denial is perhaps to apply such a broad brush to our situation, it sweeps a more focussed psychoanalytic perspective almost entirely away in a flood of all the shit show of destruction we are witnessing from the Trishuli river disaster.
Gaza, Iran, and Sudan likewise bring into our living rooms and screens, images of apocalypse.
I suspect a finer point on what you describe as denial, is that we are inwardly terrified of the future and frantically back pedaling into the age of oil and coal in order to cope.
From an analytic perspective our terror reminds us of previous trauma. Our own and civilisational. We are waiting for the inevitable third, after wars 1 and 2.
What we need I think is to have a psychoanalytic theory of power and how it is distributed. Any thoughts?
There are two kinds: Power over….people, nations, intimates. And Power to…achieve, move, change , construct etc.
Personally I take comfort in the flow of traffic. Humans can cooperate to stay in our lane, stop at red lights, to an amazing degree. But we need the rules that facilitate and channel our vehicles.
How should we begin to metabolise our terror into something more like the depressive position? There is a crisis to be gone through in achieving this most difficult step.
Thanks for that thoughtful response! It seems we agree on the problem of denial. I also agree that a “broader psychoanalytic perspective” is needed to address the various cataclysmic situations you identify. In a chapter I wrote for one of Salman Akhtar’s books, I address the problem of climate change and nuclear proliferation by exploring a. denial (which, I agree, is insufficient). But I also get pretty deeply into the problem of greed.
I’d add tribalism to that list now, which, in a sense, addresses the point you made about power dynamics. I suppose those dynamics deserve their own separate category. I don’t buy the death drive as a motivator. (If you have trouble sleeping, you can find my article, “Laying the Death Drive to Rest,” on my website. That takes me back to tribalism, which I believe is fueled by Eros, e.g., I want to live, gather with my fellow tribespeople, project badness onto them, and so I attack them. Therein, you have all the wars you mentioned (and more).
Thanks for much again for taking the time to respond to my last essay. You’ve got me thinking. My second book, The Psychoanalyst As Revolutionary,” will be released this December. I’m working on another one about threats of climate change and nuclear proliferation with a tentative title of something like, Dying Fast, Dying Slow. You gave me some fresh ideas to consider for that book.
I very much agree with your perspective. But to drs rube what we are doing in terms of denial is perhaps to apply such a broad brush to our situation, it sweeps a more focussed psychoanalytic perspective almost entirely away in a flood of all the shit show of destruction we are witnessing from the Trishuli river disaster.
Gaza, Iran, and Sudan likewise bring into our living rooms and screens, images of apocalypse.
I suspect a finer point on what you describe as denial, is that we are inwardly terrified of the future and frantically back pedaling into the age of oil and coal in order to cope.
From an analytic perspective our terror reminds us of previous trauma. Our own and civilisational. We are waiting for the inevitable third, after wars 1 and 2.
What we need I think is to have a psychoanalytic theory of power and how it is distributed. Any thoughts?
There are two kinds: Power over….people, nations, intimates. And Power to…achieve, move, change , construct etc.
Personally I take comfort in the flow of traffic. Humans can cooperate to stay in our lane, stop at red lights, to an amazing degree. But we need the rules that facilitate and channel our vehicles.
How should we begin to metabolise our terror into something more like the depressive position? There is a crisis to be gone through in achieving this most difficult step.
Thanks for that thoughtful response! It seems we agree on the problem of denial. I also agree that a “broader psychoanalytic perspective” is needed to address the various cataclysmic situations you identify. In a chapter I wrote for one of Salman Akhtar’s books, I address the problem of climate change and nuclear proliferation by exploring a. denial (which, I agree, is insufficient). But I also get pretty deeply into the problem of greed.
I’d add tribalism to that list now, which, in a sense, addresses the point you made about power dynamics. I suppose those dynamics deserve their own separate category. I don’t buy the death drive as a motivator. (If you have trouble sleeping, you can find my article, “Laying the Death Drive to Rest,” on my website. That takes me back to tribalism, which I believe is fueled by Eros, e.g., I want to live, gather with my fellow tribespeople, project badness onto them, and so I attack them. Therein, you have all the wars you mentioned (and more).
Thanks for much again for taking the time to respond to my last essay. You’ve got me thinking. My second book, The Psychoanalyst As Revolutionary,” will be released this December. I’m working on another one about threats of climate change and nuclear proliferation with a tentative title of something like, Dying Fast, Dying Slow. You gave me some fresh ideas to consider for that book.
All best wishes to you,
Alan