Shared Traumas, Silent Loss, Public and Private Mourning

Buy Shared Traumas, Silent Loss, Public and Private Mourning here. - Free shipping worldwide

This book aims to question the junctions of the private and the public when it comes to trauma, loss, and the work of mourning - notions which, it is argued, challenge our very ideas of the individual and the shared. It asks, to paraphrase Adorno, 'What do we mean by "working through the past"?, 'How is a shared work of mourning to be understood?', and 'With what legitimacy do we consider a particular social or cultural practice to be “mourning”?' Rather than aiming to present a diagnosis of the political present, this volume instead takes one step back to pose the question of what mourning might mean and what its social dimension consists in. Contributors reflect on the trauma of the Holocaust, the after-effects of the Vietnam War in the US, the Lebanese war-torn experience, victims of the Pacific War in Taiwan, and the Chilean dictatorship.

Lene Auestad: "The Other, Belonging and Dignity" - Psychoanalytic Lecture Series, November 7, 2016

The current refugee crisis is a marker of worldly and political change which puts dignity into question. This paper examines the nature of the contemporary forms of dehumanisation of refugees and reflects on the ethical challenge it poses to us as modern subjects. In Arendt, Heidegger's thoughts on the spatiality of being––on how we dwell in places that afford possibilities for being, where we can be projected so as to have potentiality, make space and show care for things, people and projects––are reconstructed as communicative and political. The loss of a place in the world, of membership in a political community, entails the loss of the relevance of one's speech, the capacity to disclose one's 'who' and thus one's dignity. Thinking psychoanalytically, I shall argue that the dehumanisation involved in the current depiction of refugees has two distinct modes: 1) demonization in terms of invasion of one's 'I', body, or territory; and 2) non- or misrepresentation as expressions of shared primary process thinking (i.e. of today's social unconscious). This making invisible or blurring of the non-belonging other raises questions of representation in relation to spatiality. I shall end by outlining some conditions for hospitality, for sharing the world with others.

Lene Auestad holds a PhD in Philosophy from The University of Oslo. She is editor of Psychoanalysis and Politics: Exclusion and the Politics of Representation (Karnac, 2012), Nationalism and the Body Politic: Psychoanalysis and the growth of Ethnocentrism and Xenophobia (Karnac 2013) and a book on Hannah Arendt in Norwegian (Akademika, 2011). Her monograph Respect, Plurality, and Prejudice: A Psychoanalytical and Philosophical Enquiry into the Dynamics of Social Exclusion and Discrimination was published by Karnac Books in 2015. She founded and runs the international and interdisciplinary conference series Psychoanalysis and Politics.

See also

Nationalism and the Body Politic: Psychoanalysis and the Rise of Ethnocentrism and Xenophobia

Psychoanalysis and Politics: Exclusion and the Politics of Representation

Respect, Plurality, and Prejudice: A Psychoanalytical and Philosophical Enquiry into the Dynamics of Social Exclusion and Discrimination 

Psychoanalysis and Politics: Anxious Encounters & Forces of Fear - Paris, March 31st-April 2nd 2017

Anxious Encounters and Forces of Fear – Spring Symposium in the rooms of the Paris Psychoanalytic Society March 31st-April 2nd 2017

Sign up here.

Complete list of speakers

(The conference will begin on Friday morning and close at about 5 pm on Sunday.
A programme with times is forthcoming)

FADI ABOU-RIHAN – War Games (Psychoanalyst, Toronto, Canada)

PINA ANTINUCCI – Encountering the Uncanny (Psychoanalyst, British Psychoanalytical Society, London, UK)

LENE AUESTAD – Unconscious Fear, Authoritarianism and Experience (PhD, prev. Research Fellow, Philosophy, University of Oslo/ Centre for Studies of the Holocaust and Religious Minorities, Norway/ London, UK)

NAYLA DEBS – Thinking and Being in Times of Change (PhD candidate, Psychoanalytic studies, Paris-Diderot University/clinical psychologist, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Paris, France)

FERENC ERŐS – The Politics of Trauma: From Shell-Shocked Soldiers to Holocaust Survivors (Professor emeritus, Dep. Of Social Psychology, University of Pécs, Hungary)

JAY FRANKEL – Clinical Impasse, Political Impasse (Adjunct Clinical Associate Professor, Postdoctoral Program in Psychotherapy and Psychoanalysis, New York University, USA)

LESLIE GARDNER – The Brutality of ‘Home’ (PhD, Rhetoric, Fellow of Centre Psychoanalytic Studies, University of Essex, UK)

JIM GRABOWSKI – Department of Abuse and Neglect – A Confusion of the Tongues in Chicago Child Welfare (Chicago Institute for Psychoanalysis, Institute for Clinical Social Work, USA)

SCOTT GRAYBOW – Fearing the News: On the Role of Fear in the Social Character of American, White, Working Class Males (Psychoanalytic psychotherapist, adjunct professor, Metropolitan College of New York, USA)

GAIL HAMMILL – With All Due Respect: Fear and the Homosocial Contract in Totem and Taboo (Assistant professor of English, American University in Dubai)

THOMAS JUNG – Scusami, Scusami! When There Is No Name (Psychoanalyst in Training, Group Analyst, Architect, Vienna, Austria)

KIRSTEN KLERCKE – The Pervert’s Efficient Avoidance of Anxiety (Prev. Lecturer, assistant professor, University of Copenhagen, Roskilde University, Denmark)

SUE LIEBERMAN – Brexit: A Suitable Case for Treatment? (Group Analytic psychotherapist, Edinburgh, Scotland/UK)

GILI LIVIATAN – Jocasta’s Reparation: The Feminine Element and the Call for Peace in Cultural Products. A Critical Study of the Psychoanalytic Thought on War and Its Restraint (Bar Ilan University, Israel)

MERSIJA MAGLAJLIC – Celui qui ne peut se server de mots: Dogs are Muslims, too. (Stud., Australian Institute of Professional Councillors, Australia)

MJ MAHER – Riding the Rumbling Terror of The Mystic Hour (Group analyst, London, UK)

ŽELJKA MATIJAŠEVIĆ – Fear, Anxiety, and Terror: A New or the Old Authoritarianism? (Professor, Comparative Literature, Head of the Comparative Literature Department, University of Zagreb, Croatia)

JENYU PENG – Encountering State Violence to Re-Create a Collective Identity. Political Trauma, Subjectification, and Space for Alterity (Institute of Ethnology, Academica Sinica, Taiwan)

WERNER PRALL –The Were-Wolf is a Fearsome Beast, or: How to Draw a Line under the Human (Senior Lecturer, Dep. of Psychoanalysis, Middlesex University, London, UK)

BARIŞ ÜNSAL – Why Can’t We Be Fat and Cheerful? Appearance Anxiety and Gaze of the Other (Stud. Psychology, Istanbul Bilgi University, Turkey)

PIERRE DE SENARCLENS – The Emotional Aspects of Nationalism and Ethnicity (Professor emeritus, University of Lausanne, France)

JONATHAN SKLAR – Forces of Fear on the Border: Memory and Trauma in Society (Training Analyst, British Psychoanalytical Society, London, UK)

ERIN SOROS – Who’s Afraid of Lee Maracle? An Indigenous Author’s Challenge to Freud (Postdoctoral fellow, Toronto, Canada)

LINDEN WEST – The Case of Brexit: Anxious Encounters and Forces of Fear: A Psychosocial Perspective, (Professor, Faculty of Education, Canterbury Christ Church University, UK)

Sign up here.

View our Psychoanalytic Events Calendar >>

See also

Nationalism and the Body Politic: Psychoanalysis and the Rise of Ethnocentrism and Xenophobia

Psychoanalysis and Politics: Exclusion and the Politics of Representation

Respect, Plurality, and Prejudice: A Psychoanalytical and Philosophical Enquiry into the Dynamics of Social Exclusion and Discrimination 

Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society: Editor’s introduction to special section on Psychoanalysis and Politics

Lene Auestad, Psychoanalysis, Culture and Society, Volume 20, Issue 4 (December 2015)

Psychoanalysis and Politics (www.psa-pol.org) is a conference series that addresses how crucial contemporary political issues may be fruitfully analysed through psychoanalytic theory and vice versa – how political phenomena may reflect back on psychoanalytic thinking. Since the first conference in Copenhagen in 2010, three-day symposia have been held each spring in Oslo, Stockholm, London, Helsinki, Budapest and Barcelona, with next year’s conference planned for Vienna. The series arose from a need for a dialogue with others who make use of psychoanalytic ways of understanding to think about social and political problems, past and present. Perhaps due to its provocative and radical potential, psychoanalysis is marginalised in most social institutions today and in most academic fields, save for literature departments. Thus the series brings people together who spend most of their time alone in thinking psychoanalytically beyond the consulting room. Due to the fit with the aims of Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society, I am delighted to have been asked to contribute this special section of the journal with contributions presented in our conferences.

Psychoanalysis and Politics is the general title of the series, which rules out non-psychoanalytic accounts (that do not draw on a notion of a dynamic unconscious) on the one hand and purely clinical papers (that do not investigate a social/political theme) on the other. Each symposium also has a more specific theme: thus far we have focused on social exclusion, discrimination and ‘othering’; fantasies and affects involved in neo-nationalist developments; shared traumas and social and politicized practices of mourning or its avoidance; riots, revolts and political upheavals; the role of action in psychoanalysis within and beyond the clinic; rhetorics of power, proto-totalitarian formations and their opposite in conditions for freedom of thought; and migration and exile as states leading to questions of how to understand culture and cultural complexity. The choice of topics is governed both by an inner and an outer logic. Questions arising out of the theme of one symposium have often led to the outline of the next one. The topics have also been stimulated by recent or current political events, often troubling ones that lead to a need to try to understand what is happening around us.

Bridging a range of divisions continues to be an aim of the series. The participants represent a variety of psychoanalytic schools as well as different academic fields and practices. Only in the very first symposium was there a tendency to fall into discussions about ‘this versus that psychoanalytic school’. Since then the forum has evolved as a space for listening to, and learning from, other perspectives. Perhaps this is due to the combination of clinicians and non-clinicians; perhaps also to the fact that the symposia move between different countries, where we most often rely on friendly psychoanalytic societies to lend us their rooms for the occasion. As a result, there is no clear centre of power, but rather a range of different perspectives.

Since psychoanalysis is about what lies beyond words, what is communicated non-verbally and implicitly, a conference’s form is as important as its content. Whilst many conferences present pro-democratic papers and simultaneously stage culturally entrenched hierarchies by targeted idealisation, denigration and exclusion, coherence between what is argued and what is done or performed carries weight in this forum. A psychoanalyst friend advised me that the most central effect of saying a few opening words is to set a tone – think about what mood you would want to create. The mood we aim to create is democratic, inclusive and welcoming – to friends and to strangers. This is communicated in giving the same time to each speaker, whether more or less famous, familiar or experienced (30 min for the paper itself and 20 for discussion). Since there are no parallel sessions – all papers are held in plenary – participants are not made to choose between one presenter and another, but strongly encouraged to stay for all the speakers and for the duration of the conference. The seating in a u-shape facilitates active participation by all, presenters and non-presenters. Furthermore, two shared dinners (for all the participants) enable relaxed and informal dialogue. These non-verbal elements are central to fostering a community of thought in which one is present not just for one’s own sake but for the sake of mutually engaged and thoughtful understanding.

The three articles included here are centred on three different continents. Starting from German cinema, Fassbinder’s Fear Eats the Soul, Lene Auestad makes use of Winnicott’s thought to present a phenomenology of racism. In the aftermath of the Egyptian Revolution, Amal Treacher Kabesh reflects on identification and intergenerational transmission that takes place within the context of colonialism. Finally, in the US, Jay Frankel revisits Ferenczi’s theory of trauma to account for the appeal of right-wing politics.

About the Author

Lene Auestad holds a PhD in Philosophy from The University of Oslo. She is editor of Psychoanalysis and Politics: Exclusion and the Politics of Representation (Karnac, 2012), Nationalism and the Body Politic: Psychoanalysis and the Growth of Ethnocentrism and Xenophobia (Karnac 2013) and a book on Hannah Arendt in Norwegian (Akademika, 2011). Her monograph Respect, Plurality, and Prejudice: A Psychoanalytical and Philosophical Enquiry into the Dynamics of Social Exclusion and Discrimination was published by Karnac in 2015. She founded and runs the international and interdisciplinary conference series Psychoanalysis and Politics, www.psa-pol.org.

Solidarity and Alienation: Social Structures of Hope and Despair - Sigmund Freud University, Vienna - May 6th-8th 2016

Psychoanalysis and Politics conference: Solidarity and Alienation

Sigmund Freud University, May 6th-8th 2016

The complete listing of papers for next year's Psychoanalysis and Politics conference in Vienna.

Questions of what founds and undermines solidarity appear central today. Psychoanalysis, however, may be said to have addressed the notion of solidarity only marginally. In ‘Civilization and its Discontents’ Freud asserts that “human life in common is only made possible when a majority comes together which is stronger than any separate individual and which remains united against all separate individuals” and posits this togetherness as the “decisive step of civilization” (Freud, 1930, 94 – 95). In this sense, there is scope for further enquiry into solidarity as the core of civilization and its motivations.

To Kropotkin (1998), mutual aid within a species is an important factor in the evolution of social institutions. Solidarity is essential to mutual aid; supportive activity towards other people does not result from the expectation of reward, but rather from instinctive feelings of solidarity.

Hoelzl (2004) raises the problem of the particularity of solidarity; Aristotle’s ethics understood friendship in terms of a network among male Aristocrats within the polis. Since, however, only Aristocratic and wealthy men were eligible for a friendship that constituted the social bond of the community, the politics of friendship was elitist and linked to personal wealth. The shift from solidarity among friends to solidarity with strangers summarizes the problem of universal solidarity and identifies a problematic source in the history of the concept. This raises the question of whether or to what extent solidarity is restricted to identification based on similarity, and to what extent it can go beyond perceived similarity.

Jürgen Habermas describes solidarity as standing in for one another. While Habermas’ discourse-ethics examines successful interactions of understanding, Axel Honneth’s critical social theory also takes negative practices of misrecognition into account. Solidarity is seen as one form or pattern of recognition, with law and love as two other forms. Humiliation and insulting acts are seen as the negative counterpart to solidarity. Habermas’s theory of communicative action and Honneth’s social theory of recognition share the Hegelian assumption of recognition as reciprocal. Because of the asymmetrical relationship between the master and the slave, an asymmetrical act of solidarity is understood as a deficient mode of reciprocal solidarity. Asymmetrical acts of solidarity establish the master-slave relationship and therefore bondage. In contrast, Hoelzl (2004) asserts that further to recognition, the individual must be willing to occupy the position of sacrificial victim given that solidarity, in its most radical form, may mean giving one’s life for the other. Questions may be raised, in this sense, on the nature, dynamics and stakes of solidarity and solidary acts. How far can acts of solidarity be unilateral? What do they presuppose in terms of mutuality, individual investments and social relationships? Further, what distinguishes solidarity from related emotions such as empathy, compassion, pity and love?

We may, furthermore, ask what constitutes the opposite of solidarity. Amongst several conceivable opposing poles such as egoism, disengagement or radical individuality, alienation is arguably at the core of its decline. Consensual definitions posit alienation as separateness and estrangement of the subject from the other, the social group and social institutions leading into a meaningless, inauthentic existence (Skelton, 2006). Questions can be raised as to whether alienation indeed undermines solidarity or constitutes its negative condition of possibility.

Since the Industrial Revolution, technology and capitalism are said to have a causal relation with alienation, as Gerlach (2009) states paraphrasing Marx, “when the life [the subject] has given to the object sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force.” Alienation is thus characterised by the universal extension of “saleability” – the transformation of everything into commodity – the conversion of human beings into “things” to appear as commodities on the market – the “reification” of human relations – and by the fragmentation of the social body into “isolated individuals” who pursue their own limited, particularistic aims, making a virtue out of their selfishness in a cult of privacy (Mészáros, 1970).

Paul Verhaege’s contemporary diagnosis links alienation today with an increase in systems of monitoring and measurement and an ethic of competition where effectiveness is postulated as the highest aim: “Only the best – that is, the most productive – are to be rewarded, so a measuring system is devised. Quality criteria are then imposed by the powers that be, fairly soon followed by a rigid top-down approach to quality that stifles individual initiative. Autonomy and individual control vanish, to be replaced by quantitative evaluations, performative interviews, and audits. From then on, things go from bad to worse. Deprived of a say over their own work, employees become less committed (‘They don’t listen anyway’), and their sense of responsibility diminishes (‘As long as I do things by the book, they can’t touch me’). […] This harmful trend is destroying work ethos and, in the long run, communal ethos as well” (Verhaege 169-170). Thus competition undermines solidarity and external measurement systems renders the product of one’s labour unrecognizable and alien.

Fromm (1955), describes the alienated subject as being “out of touch with himself as he is out of touch with any other person”, leading into different social visible forms of alienation such as over-conformity and non-commitment. Primitive anxieties and forms of attachment are said to pre-date alienation if understood as an individual or social schizoid phenomenon (Lerner, 1985). Different philosophical schools, furthermore, relate alienation to dialectical recognition and estrangement (Hegel 1807; Marx, Engels, 1846); absurdity of meaninglessness and nihilism (Sartre, 1938), loss of connection with God (Kierkegaard, 1849) and third-personal relationships to the I and the other (Heidegger, 1927; Buber, 1923). A thread can be found from Rousseau’s ideas on alienation from nature to psychoanalytic conceptualisations, and parallels could be drawn with Winnicott’s (1965) concepts of the true and the false self, though ‘false self’ formations are not linked with an account of social structures. We might refer to Menzies Lyth’s descriptions of a ‘forced introjection of a social defence system’ that ‘relied heavily on violent splitting’ to ask what forms of splitting (not necessarily always negative) are socially required of people today and about their consequences for our sense of solidarity and alienation. For Durkheim (1897), anomie is common when society has undergone significant changes in its economic fortunes, whether for better or for worse, and when there is a major discrepancy between the ideology and values commonly professed and what is achievable in one’s everyday life.

Lynd (1961) suggests that alienation understood as separation may have beneficent as well as terrifying aspects. Regarding the former, the myth motif of the wandering prophet “is the precondition for the discovery of that which is newer and older and more real than the parochial customs of the village” (170), versions of which can be found in Anna Karenina, Bread and Wine, and Doctor Zhivago. “The true prophet”, argues Lynd, “goes into the unexplored wilderness and […] returns to be a leader and life-giver to his people” (170), alienation being the precondition of this experience. Going beyond the settlement “and setting one’s face toward the more enduring, universal realities, involves conflict with many accepted social forms” (170). In this sense, questions can be raised on the hopeful potential of alienation itself and its potential to unsettle social establishments.

(The symposium lasts for three full days, from 9 am Friday 6th until about 6 pm Sunday 8th. Two dinners, Friday and Saturday, are included in the ticket price. Link to sign up)

More info here.

Respect, Plurality, and Prejudice: A Psychoanalytical and Philosophical Enquiry into the Dynamics of Social Exclusion and Discrimination

Buy Respect, Plurality, and Prejudice here. - Free delivery worldwide

This book helps us understand the current resurgence of social prejudice against ethnic minority groups, the logics of scapegoating and the resulting violence.

Our time is characterised by a growth in expressed hostility and violence towards people who are perceived as 'others'. Hatred towards and discrimination against minorities is on the rise. This book presents a new understanding of prejudice, racism, antisemitism, xenophobia, islamophobia, sexism and homophobia. It combines philosophy with psychoanalytic thinking, sociology and psycho-social studies, analysing the unconscious elements of social processes.

The author makes a case for framing a questioning of prejudice, not in terms of normality versus pathology or deviance, but in what is socially unconscious. Hypocrisy and double standards are inherent in our social practices, reflecting the contradictions present in our thinking about these issues: that we both believe and do not believe in equality. Thus this study takes account of conflicts between theory and practice, layers of implicit- and explicitness, pre- and unconscious experience and the power differentials that shape these constellations.

There is no neutral point of view from which prejudice can be addressed. The chapters in this study approach the problem of how to understand prejudice from different angles, aiming at ways of enabling listening to voices that are rarely heard. It questions how to reshape society so as to make room for people who appear to embody so-called contemptible qualities - for extension of respect across differences and inequalities.

Buy Respect, Plurality, and Prejudice here. - Free delivery worldwide

 

Psychoanalysis and Politics: Exclusion and the Politics of Representation

Buy Psychoanalysis and Politics here.

Thinking psychoanalytically about the nature of social exclusion involves a self-questioning on the part of the interpreter. While we may all have some experiences of having been subject to stereotyping, silencing, discrimination and exclusion, it is also the case that, as social beings, we all, to some extent, participate in upholding these practices, often unconsciously. The book poses the question of how psychoanalysis can be used to think about the invisible and subtle processes of power over symbolic representation, in the context of stereotyping and dehumanization: What forces govern the state of affairs that determine who is an 'I' and who is an 'it' in the public sphere? Thinking in terms of 'containment', a communication which is denied a social space for expression can be said to be actively stripped of meaning.

Through its original contribution of attending to, and interpreting material that so far had seemed meaningless, psychoanalysis demonstrates a capacity to reinstall meaning where none was before - but how are such acts performed on a social level? When common responsibility is displaced onto a suitable class or group and its representatives, the end point is reached when the individual is objectified and the social aspects of the process are no longer recognized. His or her position becomes an illegitimate one from which to speak - the person's subjectivity is excluded. The book poses the question of how we can conceive of the 'how' and the 'why' of this phenomenon and of possible counter-actions.

Anxious Encounters and Forces of Fear – Spring Symposium in the rooms of the Paris Psychoanalytic Society March 31st-April 2nd 2017

 

Nationalism and the Body Politic: Psychoanalysis and the Rise of Ethnocentrism and Xenophobia

Buy Nationalism and the Body Politic here.

This volume aims to question the recent revival of neo-nationalist policies in the light of what unconscious fantasies are involved in these developments. It examines both recent movements of right-wing extremism and the way in which rearticulated neo-ethnic ideas have been adopted by main stream politicians and in main stream public discourse. Politicians from other than the right-wing populist parties have tended to resist specific ways of talking that are considered too extremist, rather than their underlying frame of interpretation. Governments across Europe have adopted anti-immigrant and anti-Roma policies. Xenophobia and hostility towards 'others' is on the rise, along with appeals to 'Tradition and Security'. 'Cultures of Fear' are linked with fantasies of fusion or 'imagined sameness'. Alongside the image of the nation as a mother and/or father, Reich (1933) called attention to the fantasy of the nation as a body, echoed in Money-Kyrle's (1939) characterization of 'group hypochondria' in connection with the burning of witches and heretics; 'The Church, and State united to it, could tolerate no foreign body within itself, and turned ferociously upon any that it found.' To address the current political developments, the volume stresses the urgency of understanding the fantasies and affects which underpin them.

Anxious Encounters and Forces of Fear – Spring Symposium in the rooms of the Paris Psychoanalytic Society March 31st-April 2nd 2017

 

Psychoanalysis and Politics - Memory and Counter-memory: 70 years since the liberation of Auschwitz

Institute of Psychoanalysis, London, October 3rd 2015

A one-day Psychoanalysis and Politics symposium to commemorate 70 years of the liberation of Auschwitz and pose the question of what the Shoah means for us today.

Confirmed speakers:

DAVID CESARANI, OBE, Professor, History, Royal Holloway – Survivors as Diagnosticians: Early Attempts to Comprehend the Nazi Catastrophe by Physicians and Psychologists

EDIE FRIEDMAN, Director, Jewish Council for Racial Equality – Jews and the Struggle for Social Justice: Why We Sometimes Fail to Live up to Our Tradition and Experience

GABY GLASSMAN, Psychologist, Psychotherapist, Trustee AJR – Trauma and History: What Do We Do with What Has Happened?

CALUM NEILL, Lecturer, Psychology, Edinburgh Napier University – Not to Naught: Paul Celan and the Necessary Failure of the Ever Coming Word

DAVID POLAK, Psychotherapist, UKCP reg. – Sleeping with the Door Open: The Unconscious Transmission of Intergenerational Trauma

IRENE BRUNA SEU, Reader, Psychosocial Studies, Birkbeck/Psychotherapist, UKCP reg. – Bystanders to Human Rights Violations and Genocide: A Psychosocial Perspective

ZÖE WAXMAN, Associate, Oriental Institute, Oxford – An Exceptional Genocide? Sexual Violence in the Holocaust

Tickets are available from Eventbrite; General admission £ 45. A small number of discounted tickets are available at £ 35 – please only use this option if you really need it. We thank you in advance for additional donations. Lunch is included. Please note that the fee is non-refundable.

Link to register for the symposium

PSYCHOANALYSIS AND POLITICS SYMPOSIUM 2016

SOLIDARITY AND ALIENATION: SOCIAL STRUCTURES OF HOPE AND DESPAIR

The next Psychoanalysis and Politics symposium will take place in Vienna May 6th-8th 2016. The title is Solidarity and Alienation: Social Structures of Hope and Despair. A call for papers and more information is forthcoming Sept./Oct. 2015. The deadline for abstracts will be in November/early December. Venue: the Sigmund Freud University, Campus Prater, Freudplatz 1, A-1020 Wien. See also the guide for abstracts.

 See also

Nationalism and the Body Politic: Psychoanalysis and the Rise of Ethnocentrism and Xenophobia

Psychoanalysis and Politics: Exclusion and the Politics of Representation

Respect, Plurality, and Prejudice: A Psychoanalytical and Philosophical Enquiry into the Dynamics of Social Exclusion and Discrimination