Social Change and Social Narcissism

A.  Narcissistic Hurt and the Repressed.

      My views on the subject of narcissism is very likely to differ from the common and prevailing meaning that is adopted by main stream psychoanalysts. Since Freud used the term in 1910 to “vaguely” describe the person’s attachment to an image of himself (in homosexuality!) narcissism became a phenomenon resulting from the dynamics of the libido: its objects and investments. As a consequence of creating that term at the peak of the libido theory, and the ease by which the concept libido was able to explain several psychical issues in terms of narcissism, analysts adopted the notion that narcissism is a state of a libidinal deviation; i.e., psychopathology. Kernberg published several very valuable clinical works on narcissism and other related psychopathologies without a hint of incongruity with the libidinal basis of narcissism. Therefore, coming with a different conception of narcissism that has no place in it for libidinal cathecting is not going to be accepted comfortably by main stream psychoanalysis.

My point of view, which is basically more acceptable to thinkers than clinicians, is that narcissism is a cornerstone in the process of the formation of the sense of being (self defining), and that could make it get a rudimentary link to psychopathology.

      Narcissism-as in the Myth of Narcissus- is identifying one’s self -unconsciously-with what we think is our picture, or what might appear or mean to others. This image (identity) is originally given to the infant by the caregivers and constitutes the core of the sense of “me-ness”. However, the child should gradually formulate his own sense of identity(I-ness) according to his developing sense of awareness and the ongoing realization of the discrepancy between his: I and me. Me, is what the other sees of my ‘I’. However, we should not oversee neglect that the relationship between the I and the   me is in core, if not is the core of narcissism itself. The subject tries and succeeds or fails in not treating himself as an object. There is always the risk of subject’s merging the I and me in one undifferentiating entity. The most glaring model of that “terrible” condition is Donald Trump.

In the process of forming a sense of being, the subject might maintain aspects of the identity he assimilated from the ‘others’, but is expected to develop his own concept of himself. What is important in that twist in having one’s own self-concept is the independence, flexibility, stability of that identity, and the authenticity of the sense of being: only successful in degrees but always an aspiring objective.

    Change is the explicit and implicit enemy of narcissism. Just imagine Narcissus sitting in front of his reflection on the surface of the pond, deeply in love with his self that is there in the pond. Then imagine him falling asleep for serval years (in myths this could happen), He wakes up and looks at his beloved self again. He finds someone else there that he cannot love anymore.  Not knowing that change happens, no one could have been able to explain to Narcissus that changes in the person in the pond have happened to him, himself, not to his image. Change in the material world, history, societies, and other non-psychical matters happens gradually, silently, unnoticeably, and permeates all aspects of the phenomena. In psychical matters, change happens unconsciously, and could not be understood without analysing its indirect manifestations. Psychical changes give signs of their happening but always faintly, indirectly, and through other means and manifestations like the oxidation of a metal, or the fall of the Roman empire. Another aspect of psychical change is sensitivity to admitting the change. Sensitivity to change is very much the core of narcissism because it means the necessity of creating another me, to replace the inadequate present one: I am sorry, that was not me, I am someone else. The narcissistic bind between the I and me make the sense of identity quite volatile because the subject tries very hard to match the two entities of his identity. But the unconscious aspects in them is not equal and one, the I, is more conscious than the Me.  

Change is anti narcissism because of that link between I and me. I believe that I am not racist but I surprise myself by refusing my daughter to marry some one from another race, religions, or social class. In order to make my I and my Me match I have to break the narcissistic bond between them. This is when the return of the repressed exposes my hypocrisy.

Next I would like to deal with social narcissism.