Ariel KingDr Paulina TambakakiThe Human Sciences: Perspectives and Methods 1ISP7A226 April 2010Word Count: 4566

Is psychoanalysis irrelevant to the study of politics and society?

Introduction

! In politics, scholars strive to explain and analyse the relationships and actions that

occur within the world. This has been demonstrated by the fundamental concepts of

theories such as Realism and Liberalism. Creating a systematic description for why

nations wage war against each other does provide scholars with a foundation for

understanding politics. Concurrently, legitimising the situations in which there is not war

but rather cooperation amongst actors does offer an alternative understanding of political

actions. However, there is a still an aspect that is lacking from the discussion. The term

ʻactorʼ singularises the groups of people that are involved in either side of the discussion.

That is to say, to understand political decisions as being comprised of a sole universal idea

rather than a collection of ideas from a diverse group is inconclusive. Therefore, the

individuals that form the collective ʻactorʼ ultimately have an influence over decisions and

should also be analysed.

! Critical theories such as Constructivism has offered a means to understanding

politics through behaviour. It is not enough to only explain political participants as ʻrationalʼ

actors. Nor does the cooperation between state and non-state actors offer scholars with a

full interpretation for the reasonings of these relationships. Consider, for an instance, the

role of political leaders such as Prime Ministers, or Presidents. The decisions made for

their nations are not made alone, but rather through advisors and specialists. Each

individual that participates in the created collective actor has their own experiences, values

and concerns that in turn have an impact on the political decisions that are discussed.

Examining the role of individuals is made possible through the collaboration of

psychoanalysis and political discourse.

! This paper will argue that psychoanalysis plays a relevant role in politics and offers

a method for understanding decisions that are made and acted upon. To do this I will

follow the works of Jacques Lacan in relation to politics. First I will explain the role of the

individual in Lacanian discourse. Through this, I will then attribute a Lacanian

interpretationʼs influence on politics and combine his opinions with political theories.

Furthermore, this paper will show the relevance of psychoanalysis by concluding with the

discussions of democracy promotion from the West to the East and examining how a state

comes to understand what some would call a human right and others a threat to the

nationʼs common values.

Lacan and Politics

! To begin the discussions of psychoanalysis in politics, we must first define what is

meant by the individual. The construction of the individual is the main focus of this

argument as the final result of the individual develops the validity of psychoanalysisʼ use in

understanding politics. This construction begins at the first stages of development in a

personsʼ life. One begins to define who they are, what they look like, how they will speak

in comparison to the environment in which they live. Each person is involved in a moment

in which they first identify “I”. In Lacanian terms, this is the mirror stage1. In this stage, a

person is said to have the ability to visually see oneself for the first time. I do not believe

this is to mean a person is literally placed in front of a mirror and witness themselves for

the first time with this mirror. In following with the format of construction, this mirror stage

emerges through the realisation of oneself in relation to others. That is to say, a child

identifies oneself as smaller, less able to talk and walk and having less hair by comparing

their attributes to those around them.

King, 2

1 Miller, J-A., (2007). Jacques Lacan and the Voice. In: The Later Lacan: An Introduction. Voruz, V., Wolf, B., (eds). Albany: State University of New York Press. p139

! Yet it is not enough to say that an individual is constructed only from the moment of

being placed in front of the mirror. A major characteristic of development occurs through

speech and ultimately shapes the individual. In order for the child to identify itself from

others it must have a language of terms that helps it to understand its position in

comparison to others. The child learns its name, who their family is and who they should

trust, all through the works of language. Therefore when they are placed in this mirror of

realisation, the experiences from language helps them to construct or signify what they are

viewing. Much like the mirror this does not only occur through the verbal act of speech.

Before one is able to speak and form words, they are still able to comprehend the many

ways that language is produced. The ability to hear oneself is different from listening to

oneself2 as hearing in this case is audible but listening can be internal and even occur in

the subconscious. But this is not the end of the process for the construction of an

individual. When one attributes what they are, how they sound and what they look like in

comparison to others, another inherent tool emerges: desire. By comparing oneself to an

other, the wants for qualities and abilities that one does not possess, or what one

perceives to not possess, begin to influence the individual.

! Desire can have both positive and negative connotations to the construction of the

individual, or in Lacanian terms the subject. On one hand, it can cause the subject to

empower themselves and acquire qualities that will help form a stronger sense of self. On

the other hand, desire can be destructive and result in the subject losing its persistence to

obtain what it desired or reaching, what Lacan refers to as, jouissance. What is desired

and reaching jouissance are interlinked by language. In a political framework, a society

considers what is natural through history and myths. But laws, and rights are constantly

being reformed and evolving with time. This is due to the desire of the society changing

King, 3

2 ibid. 143

and challenging what is considered natural3 . Obtaining a level of jouissance is

continuously being worked at through the changing desires of the subject, mistrusting and

questioning what is considered a norm. Through this understanding, one can see where

Lacanʼs teachings can be related to political discourse in relation to the ever changing

needs of a society or nation.

! Lacan is seen as an influential thinker in various fields outside of psychoanalysis

such as film, the arts and literature. His works are also understood as beneficial to politics,

yet not without criticisms. To reduce the practice of politics to acts which occur on a

subconscious level can become very controversial. However, his examination of the

individual is a useful resource when studying the behaviour of politics. As Lacan was

neither a political theorist, nor a philosopher, the following arguments will be an

interpretation of his works as they are superimposed on political discourse. Political

science and psychoanalysis are two fields that rarely interact, yet much can be understood

from the combination of their concepts.

! In political dialogue, scholars often debate the reality of the world through issues

such as a nationʼs financial status, government capacity, wars, including terrorism in recent

years and defining human rights. This coincides with the ideas of Lacan insofar that both

politics and Lacan seek to define reality 4. Much like the cycle of identifying oneself with

the mirror image, constructing oneself in relation to other objects and believing oneʼs

reality yet desiring to reconstruct oneself again, the political moves in the same direction.

Once a nation identifies itself, and challenges its identity in comparison to other nations

and desires arise to become more or less like said nation, the political is reached and the

act of politics is observed. When encountering reality or the political, government norms

are formed, policies are debated and citizens form an identity within the nation. Viewing

King, 4

3 Apollon, W., (1996). A Lasting Heresy, the Failure of Political Desire. In: Lacan, Politics, Aesthetics. Apollon, W., Feldstein, R., (eds). Albany: State University of New York Press. p31-44.

4 Stavrakakis, Y., (1999). Lacan and the Political. London: Routledge. p73

politics from this angle can assist in explaining why no government is identical to their

original version and why political parties emerge, why what is understood as a human right

has been redefined more than once and why a nationʼs economic position influences their

relationship with other actors.

! These constructions of reality also come packaged with a set of illusions or

fantasies. In order to hold a belief as real, there is some fantastical foundation that also

holds the belief to be the only and the best reality. As an adolescent, one may think that

their reality of life is the only reality that exists and cannot be swayed to believe otherwise

until this reality is challenged. For example, an average teenʼs schedule consists of

waking each morning, travelling to school, participating in a school schedule, perhaps a

sport practice or a part-time job after school, revising at home and sleeping. When a

parent tells their child that they are lucky to have very few responsibilities the teen sees

their personal reality as full of exorbitant demands. This reality, however, is challenged

when the child moves from home, finds work, and/or has children of their own. In political

terms, the rights of women come to mind for this argument. Not allowing women to vote,

work or have an education have all been issues which were once given fantastical reasons

in mostly Western societies for not being practiced and considered a reality of the time.

These reasons were then challenged and new constructed realities, in which women could

enjoy more liberties emerged.

! Thus far, this paper has examined the concept of the individual on its quest to

identifying its reality. During this journey the individual compares its own identity to that of

others and the individual creates desires for its perceived reality and aspires to end its

search at the inception of jouissance. However, this is never fully obtained as more

desires and questioning of reality occur and continue the cycle of constructing an identity.

This concept was then put into political terms and was found to occur during the act of

King, 5

politics, which is where the political reaches reality. This is furthermore challenged when

the illusion of a reality is met with new desires which will then construct, yet another reality.

! The combination of these concepts within the political arena can be argued as a

theory of its own, however I do not believe this to be the case. With the foundational

theories of International Relations; Realism, Liberalism and arguably Critical Theories, the

actions of the psyche are not seen as prominent or even relevant actors. Each of the

dominant theories in the political field, can be understood through the operations of

coloured lenses. Death is real, violence is real, but each theory has its own coloured lens

and views the same reality in different ways. It is difficult to validate a place for a Lacanian

point of view as a political theory as reality is an illusion. Rather than assigning a specific

theory in politics to the works of Lacan, it would be beneficial to place his views alongside

those of major theories in International Relations. Perhaps the addition of Lacan to politics

does not create a new lens, but rather intensifies the other lenses to create a sharper

image.

! The question to ask now is what do we, as academics in the political field, do with

these intensified lenses in relation to explaining politics. As I previously mentioned, using

Lacanʼs viewpoint can help with the dilemma of behaviours in politics. The concept of a

ʻrationalʼ actor, or depicting game theories to predict war or even cooperation can be

constructed with the behavioural indications that arise within each individual. Perhaps the

actor can never be rational as its psyche is desiring a reality that is only imagined and

therefore their actions take place in a state of delusions rather than what is considered to

be rational. Additionally, various individualsʼ desires have helped to redefine how human

rights are viewed world-wide and create a reality for what is considered a right. Defining a

political subjectʼs actions and explaining how a concept is viewed can be understood as a

direct product of Lacanian thinking. To exemplify this argument further I will investigate the

reasoning for democratic peace and the spread of democracy from the West to the East

King, 6

through imposition and illusion of realities. Moreover, I will then look at the formation and

changes of human rights discourse through the notion of constructing identities through

desires, and in particular focus on the debate of gay rights.

Relevance in Democracy

! In Lacanian discourse there are several themes that continue throughout his

teachings. It all begins with the individual, or the subject, and the way this subject

constructs its reality. The journey of construction is just as important as the supposed

reality, or even imagined reality of which the subject attempts to, but never fully attains.

The imagined reality is consistently at war with other realities and ultimately one rises as

the winner and becomes the new accepted reality amongst the individual. This does not

only happen on a singular level but can also help to explain the commonalities of

communities that arise in politics such as terrorist groups, religious orders and even

nationalists. Lacan and politics share a common factor in defining reality which is the

characterisation of the other. It is fair to say that if an other is not constructed in politics an

ʻUsʼ or nation would never exist. There is always the need for exclusion to determine who

we are in comparison to who they are. We are who we are because of who we are not,

and thus this formulates an ʻUs versus Themʼ complex. This defining of an other transfers

into the world of democracy as well. A nation who defines itself as democratic reaches this

conclusion by defining what is not democratic and placing the other actors in that category.

Therefore the application of psychoanalysis in democratic studies is useful insofar that it

helps to understand the construction of the other in comparison to the reality of the

subject.

! Yet even before a nation defines itself as democratic in comparison to what it

believes is not, the must be a formation of realities within the community that will ultimately

reflect as the accepted democracy. For example, the tales of revolutions, particularly the

French and American revolutions, struggling to reach a unity within the nation, displays the

King, 7

results of two realities battling to overcome the other. In order to form this solidarity, there

had to be a moment where the individual had a challenge to their perceived reality.

Perhaps this can be understood by the acknowledgment of the reality for what was

considered as freedom, being challenged by what was defined as an authoritarian regime.

A split is introduced to the individual, the reality that was accepted in the mirror is now

seen as a fragmentation from the subject and there is a division between those who

accept the current government and those that wish to unify under a different regime. This

split or fragmentation is necessary in the process of not only defining the nation but also in

transferring this acceptance to democracy. By introducing a split in realities amongst

individuals, there is a unity 5 that arises and ultimately one will prevail. This can also shed

light as to why a multitude of political parties can occur within particular governments.

Although this first characterisation of psychoanalysis in democracy helps to explain why

different models of government arise, this does not explain why some nations feel the

need to impose their model on other nations. This is a dilemma, as the other is always

necessary in relation to the subject, yet the subject continuously desires to embrace the

object. This can be further explained in the ideals of democratic peace and the desire of

Western democratic governments to spread democracy amongst all nations, namely those

in the East.

! A common phrase that arises in the discussion of International Relations, is the

concept of what can been argued as a ʻClash of Civilisationsʼ. This section will not argue

that there are war games and theories that lead to violence behind this phrase but rather

only that there is a difference in values. Of course violence measures have been taken in

the name of promoting a reality, but this has occurred in Western and Eastern political

systems. Again, each element of this discourse must be considered as constructed by the

individual or subject. The values that exist in nation A have been identified, challenged

King, 8

5 ibid. p124

and formed new realities, and nation B has followed this same process resulting in their

own realities. Yet, as always when developing a political argument using psychoanalysis,

desires from each nation must be applied to these realities. Perhaps it would be sufficient

to explain the West versus East conflicts as a Clash of Desires or even further a Clash of

(Imagined) Realities. In the study of democracy, this does not necessarily mean that

nation A or nation B desires to resemble the other. Rather what should be understood, is

that either nation desires an acceptance from the other in forming their reality, and this is

where conflicts emerge.

! Western nations have expressed their desire to reach their understanding of reality

through the ideals of a democratic peace obtained through the spread of democracy in all

nations. In this scenario a distinct other is formed, and all members who are not inducted

into this democratic club are at risk of having their realities challenged by the democratic

nations. Just as the multiple constructed realities battled during the revolutions, the same

occurs on an international level in terms of government models. Examining how a

dominant reality can unify a community one can better explain why the democratic model

has been so successful in the sense that many nations share this system. The

fragmentation between democratic and non-democratic actors builds the foundation for a

nation to desire that their reality be embraced by the other. This other and the split in

realities within the individual are crucial to the continuing cycle of democracy and are best

understood through the impact of the West encouraging democracy to the East, Rest or

ʻotherʼ however it may be phrased.

! What should be of concern to those studying democracies, is the effectiveness of

this reality. As these desires are formed through a constructed reality, one must take into

account that it is constructed in an imaginary state. That is to say, as a reality can never

be satisfied and desire continues to drive an individualʼs need for this reality, the final result

can not be constituted as a reality. In this sense the ideal state of universal democracy

King, 9

can be seen as an imagined reality. As previously noted, the only way to obtain a unity is

to have an other of what is not. There can be no true unity as each individual, each

government or each nation forms its own desires and realities against the other, which can

not exist under total unity. In this sense, one can better understand the conundrum that is

met when encouraging the promotion of democracy throughout the world. The

fragmentation is needed to continue the cycle of democracy, leaving the subject with an

dissatisfied reality and thus results in the perceived resistance from the non-democratic

others.

Relevance in Human Rights

! Moving past the psyche that develops from the top of society through its

government, I will now examine the psyche that develops from the bottom from members

within a given society. Human rights encircles the concept of desires as demonstrated in

Lacanʼs works. It is not a new trend to have a community fighting for what it considers to

be their freedoms and it should be examined and perhaps more properly understood as to

why this continues. As demonstrated earlier, the subject is trapped in a vicious circle of

identifying itself and this is driven by desire. Without plunging too deep into the clinical

aspect of psychoanalysis, this desire, is linked to our inherent needs that have been

limited through our language and furthermore law. That is to say, until restrictions were

placed on what was acceptable in a society, man was free to express his desires as he

wished. Therefore when a society accepted that murder was wrong, this desire was

forced to be repressed within the individual. The reason that oneʼs psyche continues to

desire is due to humanityʼs need to once again possess an ʻuntamed personalityʼ6. This

understanding of desire is very relevant in the discourse of human rights as it is a

fundamental force that drives the discussions. By applying a Lacanian method to law and

King, 10

6 Douzinas, C., (2000). The End of Human Rights: Critical Legal Thought at the Turn of the Century. Oxford: Hart Publishing. p300

politics in this sense, those in the political field can better understand why their

constituents feel the need to demand more or less rights.

! To begin, one must again start with the individual. I have referenced earlier that the

community accepts what is considered to be the norm or reality until this reality has been

challenged. With human rights, this reality can be challenged in relation to the other, the

person who has more rights which the individual desires to have. The mirror image that

was once felt to reflect their personal image was then split from the self and created an

imaginary reality. This reality that was formed was one of utopia and jouissance, where

the desires of the subject were fully realised and they were accepted by the other.

However, there is another Other, that must be included in this cycle. This capital ʻOtherʼ in

psychoanalysis can be understood by terms such as Father, Chief, Leader, the Law, Priest

and so on. Where human rights reaches its perplexity in attainment of reality is when it

encounters the Other. Norms or laws of a society are not only articles found on paper

determining the rules of lifestyle, but also personified and enforced through these Others7.

The Other, therefore, constructs or blocks the desired reality for the subjects seeking what

they consider will fulfil their identity. This can explain the constant desire for human rights.

It may not be that the subjects, or citizens only envy what rights they consider their

counterparts in other nations to hold, nor may it be that an outside other is trying to liberate

and develop human rights in a region where they feel it is lacking. What continuously

occurs, is the encounter with the Other, the personified force that is stronger than the

subjects, which forms a role that will keep them on the cycle of desire, leaving them with a

little object a, or a fraction of what reality they hoped to attain. The point of this argument

is not to say that humans will never be happy therefore one will continue to desire more

rights. What this argues is that there should be an ever more understanding presence of

King, 11

7 ibid. p130

human rights debates and its emergence in the political field through the concepts of

psychoanalysis and placing them on the individuals who are fighting for these rights.

! For human rights, and in particular the gay rights debates that are occurring in the

United States and throughout the world, this cycle of desire is apparent. As explained in

the case of promoting democracy the fragmentation and formation of the other was very

important to its cycle of desire. An other is also present in the discourse of human rights,

but it must be reminded that this is not a clinical application of psychoanalysis. By this, it is

meant we are not looking at the moment in which one identifies as being gay, a woman or

a particular ethnic race, although these constructions of reality do help to form the subject.

In this sense there is indeed an other, used to differentiate the subjects identity of who they

are from who they are not. Rather, the role of the Other, the law through language that is

personified and enforced through an other, is of most concern in the case of human rights.

When looking at gay rights, perhaps the strongest Other that challenges the individualʼs

reality are the rules of religion which are enforced by their leaders. Without applying an

ample amount of psychoanalysis to the constructions of religion, the place of this Other is

very similar to the role of the democratic nations in contrast to the non-democratic nations

insofar that a shared perceived reality by the Other is desired to be accepted by those

influenced by another reality, imagined or not.

! What must be understood is how this desire found within human rights, continues

and how, if at all, it can ever be satisfied. Applying the concepts of psychoanalysis can

firstly explain why human rights are continuously debated upon and how gay rights have

been included in this debate. As social beings, we must remember that our realities are

continuously constructed, a reality that is not independent of the construction of the

subject, but nonetheless, a reality that is actively changing. Because of this inherent

nature for our perceived realities to be constructed, our desires also follow these

movements and change through time. Our needs are consistently being redefined as

King, 12

each reality is challenged and reconstructed. Therefore moving from rights that were

granted from the abolition of slavery, to the acceptance of women in society, and even the

formation of animal rights, our desires have changed to be constructed within a given

reality. Gay rights can be seen as the most current rights movement but I do not believe it

will be constituted as the last. Starting from what was understood as a right to have a

partner and live with a partner, through to raising a child with a partner and more recently

enjoying marriage rights with their partner, politics has witnessed the construction and

reconstruction of gay rights. In comparison with my challenge to the idea of a democratic

model shared by all, one can also challenge the ideal for human rights as shared by all.

One can suspect that there will be an endless amount of desires that arise and perceived

rights that are challenged and therefore nullify the image of human rights completely.

However, what psychoanalysis brings to the discussion of human rights, is that these

constant challenges are to be expected. That is, to understand that an individualʼs desires

can never be fully satisfied and a true jouissance can never be reached, a government can

use this reality to construct their own realities. This use of psychoanalysis helps

governments better understand their citizens desires for human rights, and ultimately helps

to offer a fragmented reality to their society which will then feed this cycle of desires.

Conclusion

! This paper has aimed to present the relevance of psychoanalysis in politics through

understanding the concepts that construct realities. After providing a brief background to

this field through the works of Lacan, I then argued that itʼs application to political theory

could be beneficial in gaining a new perspective for the foundational theories in

International Relations. I then strived to place place psychoanalytic concepts within

politics, by examining the cases of democracy promotion and the understanding of human

right to demonstrate how gay rights has emerged. This paper has found that

psychoanalysis is indeed useful when applying these concepts to the political world. For

King, 13

democratic promotion, psychoanalysis gave a perspective on the fragmentation of nations

and explained the desire to spread democracy as a way of shaping and maintaining the

necessary other. The emergence of gay rights was then understood to be a part of a cycle

of desires that reconstructs with time as the communityʼs desires change. By reviewing

these examples, psychoanalysis can then be argued as influential and relevant in

understanding the political world.

King, 14

Bibliography

Apollon, W., (1996). A Lasting Heresy, the Failure of Political Desire. In: Lacan, Politics, Aesthetics. Apollon, W., Feldstein, R., (eds). Albany: State University of New York Press. p31-44.

Bellamy, E., (1993). Discourses of Impossibility: Can Psychoanalysis be political? Diacritics. 23 (1), 24-38. [online] Available from: JSTOR. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/465244> [Accessed 23 February 2002].

Douzinas, C., (2000). The End of Human Rights: Critical Legal Thought at the Turn of the Century. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

Frosh, S., (1987). The Politics of Psychoanalysis. London: Macmillan Education LTD

Miller, J-A., (2007). Jacques Lacan and the Voice. In: The Later Lacan: An Introduction. Voruz, V., Wolf, B., (eds). Albany: State University of New York Press. p137-146

Stavrakakis, Y., (1999). Lacan and the Political. London: Routledge.

Wolf, B., The Perception and Politics of Discourse. (2007). In: The Later Lacan: An Introduction. Voruz, V., Wolf, B., (eds). Albany: State University of New York Press. p.191-208

King, 15