Geopolitics of psychoanalysis

By Livio Bonies very common to unite the two orders of the “history and geography” discourse of psychoanalysis as if they were complementary disciplines, as if they were a single “matter”...However, it is possible to see things otherwise, and consider the historical perspective and geographical perspective as, if not alternatives about each other, at least in tension.As if they were two discursive polarities that constitute a field of forces and internal tensions.

The primacy of history has been the subject of innumerable criticism and refutations in the thinking of the twentieth century, and often such criticisms have taken the form of an valuation of the geographical, spatial, topographic, cartographic element ... Cartographic ...

All these terms are not equivalent to each other, but they have in common the fact of pointing out a tentative questioning of the philosophical primacy of history, (precisely in the nineteenth century) or of reformulating it strongly, attempts in which very much thought of thought currents have participated Various from each other, from Walter Benjamin to surrealism, from structuralism to postmodernism, including contemporary Marxism, in which for example an influential author like David Harvey has formulated the notion, very interesting, of "geographical historical materialism" to suggest just a revaluation of the spatial aspect - “Spatial Fix” of capital - and also the idea that it is necessary to be interested in the modes of spatialization of capital in the contemporary world, in geopolitical contexts that seem very diverse, but that are governed by similar similar logics (For example, urbanization, real estate valuation and gentrification are global phenomena, which interest The five continents, crossing historical and cultural differences).

Psychoanalysis is undoubtedly fundamentally involved in this vast questioning and reform of the philosophy of history focused on the idea of the intelligibility of a more or less totalizing and coherent historical process.

The post-colonial unconscious

I refer to this general context to indicate that, if I should designate the most general and abstract attempt of the post-colonial unconscious, I would say that, rather than showing a different, or minor story, of psychoanalysis, outside or on the banks of the European world, it is treatedFirst of all, to break, but partially, with the dominant representation of the history of psychoanalysis itself as, precisely, a more or less unique process of westernization.

It is unquestionable that its historical evolution is usually represented.Born in the heart of the German Judeo Mitteleurop.

The advent of Stalinism and Nazism in the course of the thirties would have later given a decisive impulse to this destiny of westernization of freudism that however had already initiated its process, in which the diaspora of the Jewish intelligentsia of central Europe towardsGreat Britain and the United States tends to coincide with a certain colonial imaginary, betrayed just by Freud's identification with Christopher Columbus, the metaphor of the conquest of an unknown continent, or that, recurring, of the "pioneers" of psychoanalysis, to designateThe first generation of analysts.

Nor does the broad and deep penetration of psychoanalysis in Latin America escapes this Western geopolitical representation.Many are Lacanians in Argentina or Mexico, for example, who conceive of Lacanism as a form of cultural resistance to American imperialism ... And why not!

Unless, in this way, he enrolls to psychoanalysis in a history focused on westernization, in his Americanization, even if it was to resist it, without raising the question of his eventual "heterotopia", nor of what may happen, for example, whenmakes the transit of the European world to the post-colonial world.

This presentation would like to be a contribution to the tentative of refutation of this almost "spontaneous" narrative, seeking to open a perspective to the south and east, instead of always looking to the west!

It has really been a bit in these terms that I have represented things, giving me as a methodological red thread to dump into cases, not numerous but significant, in which psychoanalysis has taken other routes, outside the European world, towards the south andThis, precisely: India, Madagascar and Algeria ...

Bet on a south-eraiental geographical tropism against the great narration of psychoanalysis as a western conquest, this would indeed be a way of presenting my approach.But you could say things differently, perhaps simple.

A matter of origin

It is true that psychoanalysis is not directly confronted by a similar matter in its origin.It will be necessary in effect to expect roots first in France and Britain, the great nations of modern colonialism, to see if to some extent it will be able to intercept the colonial issue, and in which terms.That said, it is not my intention to repeat the content of my essay, which would be tedious for both me and for those who have already read it.

On the other hand, I would like to try some variations on the subject and prolong a bit elaborated.

First of all, observe that the three main authors that I decided to investigate-the Indian Girindrasekhar Boese, the Frenchman Octave Mannoni and the Franco-Martiniqués Frantz Fanon-precursors of post-colonial psychoanalysis, have lived, intellectually and subjectivelybelonging, and sometimes of intimate division, between at least two worlds, the world of colonizer and the colonized world.

This is evident in Fanon, which will make it an explicit theme, especially in black skin, white masks, but also applies to Octave Mannoni, which had passed, at the time when he begins to write psychology of colonization, in the second postwar period , more than twenty years in the colonial world, between Martinica, the meeting and Madagascar, as a philosophy professor, and had been deeply marked by a certain type of progressive colonial mentality, whose footprint is still very strong in his first book, Psychology of colonization, which I remember in passing, represents a true transition, personal, intellectual and political, from the colonial world to the post-colonial world, but which, despite its great and innovative intuitions, still has the ballast of a certain "Ethnographer" (Fanon), of Jesuit literature, and even a certain tradition of the "psychology of peoples", and, more generally, of a position of Surplomp and of objective observation of the "psi Malgache Cology ".

Together with these inlays of colonial positivist science, however, the book is distinguished by its being in a situation ... Not only because the notion of "colonial situation" is explicitly thematized (and partly weakened by reading, just a little ethnographic,of the encounter between the European inferiority complex and the Malache dependency complex), but as long as it progressively slides towards the problem of colonizer psychology.Decolonization becomes a common problem, even a problem to be treated especially on the side of the colonizer.

Indeed, Mannoni writes at the end of the introduction of his 1950 book (but it is an added paragraph in the first English edition of 1956): “But, in reality, when he wrote this book, the psychological analysis was located from anotherMODE: It was not so much about deepening the psychology of the observed subjects, that in the background it was no longer so dark, but rather that of the observer itself.

I often had the opportunity to verify, for example, the penetration and fairness with which some old settlers explained to me the behavior of the indigenous people.But, when for some reason I was surprised, they responded immediately that the indigenous people were impenetrable and they would always have been.

Little by little I realized that the settlers did not fully accept the understanding of the indigenous people, and that, in reality, the most difficult is not so much that men understand each other, however deep the differences are,but they want to understand each other, understanding "want" in a certain sense, as if the difficulty of recognizing themselves in all men were not different from that of accepting themselves entirely.

It is for this reason that the observer's self-understanding ended up worrying, as if it were a necessary precondition for any possible investigation in this field ”.

Quite extraordinary passage, which synthesizes the great lines of the Mannonian conception of the colonial situation:

1) It is not reduced to a political, military or economic domination, despite the fact that these aspects are real and pregnant, but implies a type of sui generis libidinal economy.

2) What is this type of "extremely dangerous psychological satisfaction", which is not reduced to colonial "benefit", and rather can sometimes occur to the detriment of the latter?Mannoni's response is double: on the one hand, the colonial man compensates for his feeling of inferiority, exposed in Madrepatria, giving him a positive value, making him a balance in favor and lasting feeling of superiority (the collective operator of such feeling, indisputable for theWhite that is born and grows in the colonial world, will be "the race"), on the other hand projects on the colonized everything that seems incompatible with such a feeling of superiority.The colonized must then be primitive, wild, pulsional, sensual, childish, more or less perverse, superstitious, not reliable, etc..

3) But be careful with confusing Mannonian reasoning with a kind of recovery of the Jungian idea of the somombra.It's not about this.There is actually no complementarity between the psychology of the settler and the colonized, but a kind of seeing him ("renegation", "denial"), because, as illustrates in the appointment, the settler has access to the knowledge of the indigenous, but he must believethat the latter is radically heterogeneous, inscrutable, of a nature completely another with respect to one's own race, otherwise the colonial situation would be threatened, it would become unsustainable, and the overcoming of castration through the feeling of superiorityracial would be definitely compromised.This is why Mannoni compares the rejection of recognizing the colonized with the ignorance of a part of himself.

4) In the end, the colonial situation appears to Mannoni as a huge "misunderstanding".The misunderstanding is somehow reciprocal, although asymmetric, because the colonizer believes in the inferiority of the indigenous, even when he knows, or suspects strongly, that things are otherwise, and this is intended to support the enjoyment itself, enjoySomehow it is exempted from castration;The "primitive" must believe on the part in the superhuman superhumanity, of the colonizer, indicated by a symbolically transcendent position (of ancestor, semi-God, of protector), because only then can its irruption can be transcribed inside the system itselfsymbolic, without the system ends annihilated.Which means that, for Mannoni, the overvaluation of the colonizer by the colonized retains a paradoxically defensive character.

5) This tragicomedy of ambiguities, in which Robinson makes a primitive on Friday, to deal with the anguish itself, while Friday makes Robinson a master to preserve himself better, he is intended to resolve traumatically, when for example theColonial master reveals the impotence itself (a determining factor of the 1947 Malache revolt, which Mannoni analyzes towards the end of his book, in which I delay in my essay, will in fact be the conflict between gaullistas and collaborationists in Madagascar, during thewar, and the brief and decisive English occupation of the great island during the war);and/or when the colonized rebel unexpectedly, thus restoring a horizontal relationship with the colonial master.

When this occurs, a supplementary dose of Verleugnung is necessary, the colonizer must consider the revolt as irrational, wild, crazy and pathological, otherwise it would be forced to recognize in the colonized an adversary, and therefore an equal, even if it was lowThe enemy's shape.

And it must then react with an excess of sadism, although only imaginary (what Mannoni calls the "fabulatory sadism" of a part of the French colonial staff in Madagascar, which reaches a series of imaginary repressive acts, including official processes, including official processes,occurred after the revolt to sanction some abuses of colonial repressive devices).

This sadistic mythomania is now interpreted by Mannoni as symptomatic of the attempt, by the colonial man, to safeguard the feeling of superiority, questioned by the revolt, and of expelling all castration anguish reactivated by the indigenous revolt.

The most acute analyst

Thus, for all these reasons, that I have grouped here succinctly, Mannoni is undoubtedly, together with Fanon, the most acute analyst of the unconscious implications of the colonial situation.

It is striking, regarding the Fanonian analysis, which will come almost immediately (black skin, white masks is published in 1952, shortly after colonization psychology), the total absence of the body in its analysis, and the extremely limited part it occupiesThe question of sexual difference.

Mannoni will recognize at another time and other limitations of his own analysis in the appendix to the second English edition of his book (1964), in a famous text, frequently cited in post-colonial studies, entitled The Decolonization of Myself, inThe one that admits, for example, having yet sinned, in the era of colonization psychology, of an abstract universalism, and having been wrong to distinguish between colonial racism and tout couc racism.

Anyway, Mannoni recognizes the essentials of Fanon's criticism - who dies in 1962 - of Aimé Césaire and other exponents of the movement of blackness.But, above all, he agrees to give the word to the exponents of the colonized world.The tea that I defend in my book is that it is necessary to read the Mannoni-Fanon pair, and then the Diptico Psychology of Colonization/Black Skin, White masks, such as an analytical tandem, a quiasm more than a contrast..

Mannoni's intervention will contribute in effect to the taking of Fanon's Word, in a controversial sense, and, at the same time, will release Mannoni from the Phardo from an endless self -analysis of the experience of the colonial world itself.Fanon then decolonizes Mannoni, while Mannoni transfers the word, even more arduous and dangerous because it happens in the first person, by Fanon, in his first book of ‘52, black skin, white masks.

Fanon's intervention, anyway, even being chronologically behind Mannoni's, significantly postpones the coordinates of the question of the possible contribution of psychoanalysis to decolonization as a process that exceeds its objective, political-economic dimension.

Not only for the emergence of an amount of unpublished anthropological issues - the colonized body, the role of sexual difference in colonization and decolonization, the criticism of colonial psychiatry, and so on - but also and above all, as long as Fanon inscribes theColonial issue on a horizon that we could call existential or post-existence.

It is true that the idea of a colonial survival of colonialism as a historical fact is already present in Mannoni, whereby the colonial condition is intended to survive, from the psychological point of view, at the end of colonialism, and to be somehow introjectedboth in the social world of ex-colonizer and in the decolonized.

But only with Fanon the colonial is part of an erlebnis, in a "lived life", which exceeds the imperative of political decolonization.This is why, in recent years, a spectacular return of Fanon is attended in the scene of critical thinking, not only or not as a thinker of the anti-colonial struggle, but also and above all of post-colonialism.

I will not take me however in Fanon, because it seems to me that this work of mine does not contribute anything particularly unpublished, except for the fact of showing, precisely, the analytical quiasm with Mannoni.

I will be content to make a only observation, to return to the initial matter of the subjective position, or the enunciation position, typical of each of the three initiators of post-colonial psychoanalysis.

Fanon's position is obviously diverse from that of Mannoni as Black, that is, as an exponent of the colonial world, of the inheritance of slavery and the courageous opponents of the assimilationist logic put into act in France in its oldest colonies,Those that date back to the ancient regime, such as the Antilles, in the second postwar period (politics that will instead be sustained by Aimé Césaire).

But Fanon's position is also different and especially because of the logic of identification and desidentification that presupposes.To say things in a slightly schematic way, if black skin, white masks is presented as an analysis taken by the dimension, essentially dual, between black and white, both designations in some way impossible, in particular for the AntilleanThe roots themselves in the history of slavery, but that is not thought of as black, nor as Afro -descendant, but as culturally white, or as created;Things will change significantly when Fanon identifies with the Algerian cause, becoming a mascarion of the national liberation struggle during the war of Algeria.

Algeria, a metonymic operator

The identification with the Algerian cause, and the total involvement of Fanon in the latter, now works as a powerful metonymic operator: the Algerian cause equals the Arab, Berber, African, Pan -Africanist and third world in general.

In other words, the incorporation of Fanon in the Algerian cause allows at the same time a momentary disdains with respect to its black being, constituting a leakage line with respect to the infinite black-white mirrors game analyzed in black leather, white masks.

The introduction of a third term-argelia-finally allows you to leave the dualism I love-sclavic, overcome the Antillean assimilation complex and identify with a third and universalizable cause, precisely the Pan-African, that of "the condemned of the earth" moreusually.

In this sense I think you can remember what Albert Memi writes at the end of a beautiful tribute to Fanon in 1971, entitled "The impossible path of Frantz Fanon":

“In any case, the circle closes: here Fanon returns to the starting point: he had refuted Antillean belonging in the name of a humanity that at that time had the face of France;The failure of such an effort leads him to choose a different incarnation, now becoming an Algerian patriot;It is now a universalism, but this time his face is African.But it is always a mediation.When later, in the condemned of the earth, they are seen with Europe, he does it in the name of the "sweat and the bodies of the blacks, of the Arabs of the Indians and the Asians".But very soon he will not be content to attack Europe, but he will want to save her: he wants to save the entire humanity.It is not more about Algeria or Africa, but about man and the whole world.That is why I would like to remember once what were the latest lines of his latest writing: “For Europe, for ourselves and for humanity, comrades, you have to have a new skin, develop a new thought, try to stand up a new man".

Anyway, this third term function as a desidentification and reconfiguration operator of symbolic and imaginary dualism inherited from the colonial situation seems to me an essential point.

The Gandhi case

We must not forget, in this sense, that Gandhi himself will do his first militancy not in India, nor in Great Britain, but in South Africa, where he spends about twenty years, fundamental years for his training, between 1893 and 1914.

Although the struggles for the civil rights of the large Indian community present at that time in South Africa are usually remembered, Gandhi's South African experience goes far beyond his work as a young lawyer committed against the discrimination of which the Indians and what the Indians are subject toThat at that time it is still, in large part, a space disputed between the British Empire and the Afrikaners.

Gandhi attends in fact, in the course of his long South African period, to two wars: the Second Boers War (1899-1900), precisely between English and Boers, and the Zulu War (against the English, in 1906).

Both will be rich in teachings for the progressive intervention of what will be transformed later into Gandhism as an invention and militant practice.

For example, the mass exodus of the Boers, after the lost war against the English, towards Namibia, Botswana and Zimbawe, will reactivate the founding myth of the Dutch presence in South Africa, that of the Grand Trek that allowed the first generations of settlers of settlersDutch and Hugues expelled from France after the edict of Nantes, entering the colony from the end to the interior, an exodus that, in the imaginary Boer, was parangated to the exodus of the Hebrew people.

Gandhi will use such an example, transposing it freely, when he conceives the great collective marches of civil disobedience, such as the famous march of Salt (1930).

And yet Gandhi, at the time of the Second Boer War, had taken, in a quite natural way, the English party, trying to form an Indian ambulance service, thus waiting to be able to negotiate better, at the end of the war, the Statuteof the Indian community in South Africa.

But that will not prevent him from being deeply impacted by the attitude of the Boers civilians, who, still defeated, and provisionally locked in British concentration camps, resumed, the war concluded, the exodus inward the interior of the African continent with weapons and luggage.

With regard to Gandhi's relationship with the Zulúes, the question is complex and is still very discussed by contemporary historiography.On the one hand, Gandhi has influenced some Zulu leaders like John L.Dube, founder of what the African National Congress will be, on the other hand, his relations with African militants remained sporadic and extremely cautious, and he will always refute the hypothesis, sustained for example by the South African communists, of a common front between Africans andIndians (Kafirs and Coolies, in racist jargon of the time).´

If it seems that I miss a little in this historical digression on the period of "incubation" of Gandhism, through South Africa, played by Boers, English and Zulúes, it is rather a metapolitical aspect rather than politic.

There is, in fact, the clear impression that this third South African space, between Great Britain and Colonial India, allows Gandhi to elaborate a position of its own, produce a series of partial identifications, sometimes with one sometimes with another protagonistof the competition, modular contradictory alliances, betting on this third -party Indian presence in the South African domain.

Almost all the great inventions of militant asceticism will be experienced first in South Africa, and only after in India, from the foundation of the first Ashram, in Phoenix (1904), to Satyagraha ("Perseverance in the truth", 1908), passing through theIntegral chastity vote (Brahmacharya), which intervened precisely during the revolt of the Zulúes (1906), and that the various interpreters consider a Gandhi reaction to the violence of the latter.

For the rest, the Indian community in South Africa occupied this fate of third position, somehow irreducible to white/black, European/African, Christian/animist, etc., which structured South African political and symbolic space.

Formally composed of subjects of the British Empire, the local Indian community (with respect to which the Muslim presence was preponderant, to the point that Gandhi's first official public speech took place in a mosque!), It was still subject to discrimination measuresthat they approached the African, with which he still refused to associate and solidarize fully.

Finally-and to make the transition to the Indian psychoanalysis-the position of Gandhi and his henchmen in South Africa has something strangely analogous to that described by Girindraekhar Bose through his theory of opposite Wish and his SEE-Saw technique (Subeybaja).

Freud in India

I would like to try to briefly justify this a little daring statement.What has appeared progressively, interested in the uniquely creative reception of Freudism in India, and in particular the work of Bose, in the last decades of colonial India (twenty years-cuartenta) is the anthropological-political value of itsAppropriation of psychoanalysis.

For Bose, whose clientele was essentially composed of male members of the Burgues of Calcutta, at the same time strongly integrated into the colonial world and based in the culture itself, Indian masculinity suffered from a strong castration complex, produced by colonial submission.

From the symptomatic point of view, most of the clinical cases illustrated by Bose is in effect to the crisis of virile identification.It is often treated cases of impotence, homosexuality or obsessive neurotics associated with a strong male self-identification crisis.

Now, instead of seeking to reinforce the latter, to consolidate it or fold psychoanalysis to a paternalistic version, seeking to reinforce the paternal ideal-as will try to suggest thirdly Owen Berkeley-Hill, the other protagonist of the history of the beginnings of psychoanalysisIn India— Bose has a rather great intuition: betting on the female identification of humiliated male subjectivity.

Giving free course to a certain ghost of becoming-woman of the colonized Indian male presents in effect various advantages: first of all, it allows the body to be subtracted with the masculine image of the colonizer, undoing, once again, the colonial dualism master-sclavic;Secondly, the hypothesis of a violent revirilization, of a "virile protest", which would result in the passage to the violent and terrorist act against colonial presence;Third allows, paradoxically, put the ghost of the phallic mother at a certain distance, omnipotent.

To the extent that the Indian subject castrated by colonial domination accepts a partial des-identification with respect to his own phallic position, and partially identifies with the female position, the ghost of the original mother, sublimation of the oedipal mother, losesHis unconscious pregnance.(This is the central thesis of an important article by Bose, "Genesis and Resolution of the Oedipus Wish", which Bose will send Freud in 1929 ...).

In other words, the free game between desidentification (in relation to the masculine), partial identification (with the feminine) and then reidentification in a kind of elongated, inclusive and non -exclusive male position with respect to the feminine, movement expressed by the theoryFrom Opposite Wish and for the SEE-SAW (Subeybaja) technique, which favors such an oscillatory movement between opposite identifications, puts in check the imaginary dualism established by the colonial situation.

In this case, then, the third space between the colonized and the colonizer is none other than the female.And it is not certainly a case.Bose's solution is not just the fruit of personal or cultural idiosyncrasy.

On the one hand, in fact as it has been frequently observed, for example by partha chatterjee, in a famous text, the feminine forward, for the first generations of thinkers of Indian emancipation, to an Inner World, to an intimate sphere, ghostlyprotected from pollution and colonial humiliation.

Trust this kind of symbolic-image reserve put again in the feminine then represents a semiconscious strategy of subtraction to the bite of the colonizer.Such a gesture can be found in various great representatives of the Indian Renaissance between the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the twentieth century, among which are Tagore, Gandhi himself, who could affirm, for example, towards the end of his life, have "psychically converted a woman ".

Obviously a similar position should not be confused with a feminist position.Let's say that it is rather a masculine exquisitametne revaluation of the feminine, which seeks a non-virilist renovation, not warrior and non-nationalist, which is delivered to a feeling, but of the psychological-cultural superiority of India with respect to the West,at least faith in its spiritual and symbolic resources.

For the rest it exists in India, and in particular in the Indian of Northeast, where Bose comes from, as well as Tagore, a long tradition of Shakti, that is, the feminine principle of the universe as a principle of mobility and transformation, whilethat the masculine refers to conservation and phallic-identity hardening.Girindraekhar Bose is undoubtedly impregnated with this mystique of the feminine, particularly omnipresent in Bengali culture.

Then there is the explicit influence of Advaita Vedanta, another philosophical current of extremely old origins (Sankara, eighth century), but which is strongly revitalized in India at the end of the colonial era, which supports the idea of a "non-dualistic duality”From the universe, and whose influence is explicit in Bose.(Non -contradiction, ultimately, between action and contemplation, between masculine and female, between the West and the East, etc..

In any case, all these influences appear only in filigree in Bose's psychoanalytic work, which never openly assumes a political position.Personally, it has taken me a long time to understand the depth of the political dimension, and the question of self -decollation, in the elaboration of its clinical theory.

To a large extent because I do not understand the Bengali language, and that a full appreciation of his work would also require accessing his production in this language, in which Bose, according to Indian scholars who have compared their analytical writings written in English with thosewritten in Bengalí, it establishes more openly certain connections between Indian philosophical conceptions and their own appropriation of psychoanalysis.

Indian psychoanalysis

This metapolitical function of Indian psychoanalysis at the end of the colonial era, at all evident for a foreign reader from India, and that Ashis Nandy's reading has greatly helped me to recognize, explains in some way how Indian psychoanalysis, after aSo promising principle, it has been almost entirely eclipsed after Independence (1947), so as not to emerge again until the seventies, through the work of Sudhir Kakar and, precisely, of Ashis Nandy.

Two eccentric figures, since Kakar has formed in psychoanalysis in Germany, in the seventies-night, before returning to India in the 1990s;And that Nandy, although being a clinical psychologist of analytical training, refers more to the Frankfurt School (Adorno, Horkheimer, Fromm) before metapsychology or psychoanalytic theory itself.

For both the encounter with Erik Erikson was decisive, during his stay in India in the sixties, to conceive his book Gandhi's Truth: On The Origins of the Militant Non-Violence, a masterpiece in the genre of psychoanalytic biography that will haveThe effect of a true revelation for Kakar and Nandy.

Who wants to write one day the history of Indian psychoanalysis will undoubtedly ask about this disinhibitory effect that Erikson's seminar had in Ahmedabad, around the sixties, for the vocation of a new generation of Indian analysts.

As if an external look had been necessary to return from the analysis of Gandhism, as the ultimate synthesis of the attempt of political and spiritual emancipation of colonial India, in order to then be able to address after post-colonial India and the new acquired forms of discomfort in discomfort inculture after independence.

And I would like to conclude this recapitulation of some fundamental lines of my research, venturing the projection that post-colonial psychoanalysis, almost an exact century of its birth in India (1921), perhaps has in this context an insured future.

For different reasons: the existence of a psychoanalytic tradition, of which I have remembered some outgoing moments; His current vitality in the university world, where he has long over the disciplinary confines of psychology to extend to literature, cultural anthropology, post-colonial studies; Due to the existence of an Indian cosmopolitan intelligentsia, accustomed to circular between vernacular and English languages, partly linked to the large Indian Diaspora in the West and partly at the internal subcontinetne itself; For the dissemination in India of an internal mental health and psychotherapies market, linked to the dissemination of forms of discomfort of advanced capitalism, and with respect to which psychoanalysis undoubtedly has a role to play and a position to occupy; For the reemergence, finally, of a nationalist and religious political project, which attempts to impose a homogenizing and traced state-state model, in reality, in the imitation of the colonial model, and which aims to liquidate the investigation, which has characterized Indian decolonization, of an alternative model of post-colonial coexistence; for the emergence of a new generation of women's analysts.For all these reasons, I risk prophesying that India will now be an important field for post-colonial psychoanalysis in the course of the 21st century.

That said, it is evident that the post-colonial condition is no longer ascribable, today, to precise geographical and cultural areas, and is somehow generalized, investing both Europe and the colonized world, and that a subsequent stage, after my attempt to trace a historical archeology or a critical cartography, it would be to try to establish what forms it takes today, in the globalized world, the post-colonial unconscious, through individual and trans-individual symptoms such as new forms of racism, identity, the "victimist" nationalism of the West, the forms of post-colonial populism in large emerging countries such as Brazil and India, the attempt of Islamic integrism on a part of the "condemned of the earth".

Decentrate psychoanalysis to intervene in the common, dialogue between Livio Boni and Jorge N.Reitter, in moderation of Alejandro Dagfal.Friday, January 28 at 20 at the San Martín Cultural Center (Sala A, Sarmiento 1551).

Livio Boni is a psychoanalyst and programs director at Collège International of Philosophie.His work focuses on the geohistory of psychoanalysis and in the city as a psychic field.He is the author, in particular, of L'End of the Psychanalyse.LE SOUS-CONTient de l'Conscient (2011) and Freud et la Question Archéologique (2014).