What we heard dur the morn of the pass that brought us together on January 21 around the theme, “Psychoanalysis in the city”, gives new interpretative value to Lacan’s phrase: “The unconscious is politics [1] “. Ti to his Proposition of 1967, this assertion invites us to decipher, relentlessly, the regimes of reconstitution of a merciless Other, from the moment that the Discourse of the Master is pulveriz. Let us say that the hubbub that we encounter is not the same as that evok by Lacan in his conference given in Lyon in 1967 [2] .
We riscover that ths never happen
by themselves that changes in custom never suit everyone, “for extremely content reasons”, he said then. The possibility remains of read the present without nostalgia of construct our strategies: fight against administrative totalitarianism requires work to multiply the symptoms, to the point of mak them “epidemics”, accord to the happy formula of Christiane Alberti.
The question that guid the phone number list morn’s work could be formulat as follows: “What happens to political commitment when one has been analyz [3] ?” What can the AEs ask to intervene say about the impact of their personal analysis on their way of interven in institutions in the city? For the goal is to unify your omnichannel Dominique Holvoet. Each one was able to identify in their speech the particular moment when, in their treatment, the somewhat suspect alliance of enthusiasm with the ideal was undone.
For none of these four AEs did this turn
into unbearable disappointment, into narcissistic withdrawal, always possible if one remains in the state of des-être. Dominique Holvoet [4] drew for us the fiction of the guilty father who had conceal his devotion, Laurent Dupont, in his clean email testimony, “Bang on the other”, spoke to us of “the loudmouth” who had attach him to the figure of the leader whose cause he had espous, Véronique Voruz [5] unfold the subjective motives which had made her take refuge in invisibility devote herself to the precarious.