Analysis of non-Analytic Material:

Any analysis, specifically psychoanalysis, is as good as the work of reconstruction that it could generate and follows. This is the criterium of good analytic work. What that means is that whatever we analyze, psychological, political, chemical etc. is as good as it leads to the restructuring the elements of the analyzed product. In psychoanalysis the analytic work is to reach the events, memories, early constructs that contributed to the psychoneurotic structure, and bit by bit reconstruct the patient’s intrapsychical entity.

Something similar is could be done with social phenomena: how to reconstruct the events that preceded the invasion of the Tatars  to West  Asia? or what led to the first world war? The historian’s reach for an answer is identical to the point when a patient decides to seek treatment. This issue is commonly not emphasized enough: The patient does not suddenly or even gradually realizes his need for therapy because that realization is commonly existed before starting the analysis. The difference is in the patient’s realization that his condition is Analyzable, i.e., should and could be reconstructed and understood. Even what we call ‘resistance’ is a manifestation of that realization: when the patient says to the analyst (in nonverbal ways too): “I do not see how what I said could be explained by what you said”, this is not resistance but could be-in some instances- an unconscious hint that the interpretation does not fit with the work of reconstruction. 

I mention this point because “psychoanalysis” is a way of thinking, working, doing something in any area of human nature. It is not merely a technique of psychotherapy. The question is what is the nature of the material we analyze and re-construct? In our clinical work we know that the psychodynamic of a psychosomatic skin rash (an infantile demand for physical contact with the mother) is different from the psychodynamics of hysterical skin rash (a symbolic call for closeness). In the first case there is no interpretation for the rash, and reconstruction will be of the physiology of the body being affected by childhood unresolve relations with the caregivers. In the hysterical condition the work will be on the skin condition as a symbolic message of sorts, and as an expression and a request from the analyst for that closeness.

The same issue of analyzing a historical or a social event. A historian with an analytic mind could analyze and understand a political situation, like the one we are witnessing now, and reconstruct it to shed light on several other issues that are part of it, but do not seem to be. An example, this war seems to create material damage that correspond well to the technical advancements in in all human tools, of late. Yet, the human casualties compared to the material damage is strangely very low. This is a important point because in reconstructing the whole event of the war there should be a question about the purpose and meaning of this war: is it a conflict of people or a conflict in issues. Personally, I think the Ukrainian war was created by what I mentioned before which is the problems of NATO and it is not a conflict between Russia and the Ukraine.

However, the instance of the European Union to expand NATO and get physically closer to pressure Russia politically and militarily is related to something completely different. It is like an analytic work getting closer to a patient’s unconscious repression of homosexual tendencies which abhors him.

The End of ‘The European Empire’.

In my clinical experience, the strongest resistance (not refusal as a preconscious condition) is a patient coming to realize a latent homosexual inclination, whether in men or women. The homosexuality I mention here has nothing to do with the sexual component it is famous of: it is attraction and captivation in a narcissistic relation with one or more persons of the same sex. The cause of that abhorrence is its complex narcissistic structure that steals the individual sense of identity (complex but necessary to understand to appreciate the importance of transference).  

The European Union is resisting the fact that the whole European Empire is faltering, and the world is not as it was in the last six centuries, i.e., a European Dominion. Africa is no longer divided as colonies of European countries. Asia has two or three greater countries than any European country. South America has finally liberated itself from the American domination and is giving the signs of more new surprises. The USA, as an extension of Europe, is obviously struggling with significant and profound internal social issues. Comprehensively, the European domination (Europe and the USA) of the world is coming to its ends.

Therefore, in reconstructing the present political crisis of the Ukraine  we should consider  more serious and more encompassing historical reasons for it. The decline of Western Empire is behind a political stupid gesture that Russia has to be contained by the force of NATO as a manifestation of the still dominant Wester Europe. Two things should be done: make the world hate Russia and bring it its knees militarily.

Media and Hate:

Although- it goes without saying- the enemy in any war is a hateful entity. Yet, wars cannot be won by hate alone. The other danger of relying on hate as a psychological weapon against an enemy is the ease by which -in desperation- hate could turn into admiration of the successful hateful enemy. This was one of the most serious issues Churchill was aware of during WWII. More importantly, is how much truth is there in the negatives of enemy, i.e., how much lying about the enemy is good. Managing hate- Psychoanalytically speaking- is very important in war because it is the foundation of projection and if it is misused it could affect the process of projection.

The danger in the Ukraine War is that the media reporters are not reporting about their nation and people, thus they are serving a function that does not pertain to themselves. This is exactly like when one says I know how you feel which is a gesture of empathy but far from being of any real effect or value. Thus, it makes the issue more of a psychological quandary because reality- if it existed- it will be impersonal and a dictation from a paid ‘piper’. The other factor is that people are not stupid: they have an unconscious that they store in it what they realize and truly believe. Thus, without managing hate properly the issue could backfire after a while and the Ukrainians will retrieve from their unconscious what was temporarily ignored.

That leads to the question: If the Western empire is dying or dead but still refuses to join the world on equal grounds what will happen.

Failed psychoanalyses tend to create a messy ex-patient. They keep trying other therapists and therapies with no results. Yet, the lucky ones find one or few persoOns who realize the crisis and just keep that person under observation and guidance. The equivalent to that in civilizations is new politicians or thinkers within the defunct civilization or empire who keep it from total collapse and being a political risk. The end of the two Roman empires (west and east) was the creation of nations and union of nations. The Western or the European empire will be forced to occupy a place in the world but not the only empire that existed.

WE WILL BE SAVED FROM THE NOTIONs OF OUR DEMOCRACY, OUR VALUES, OUR SO AND SO.