The Future of Foreign Policy

Published by

Clarissa

January 2, 2015

Absent a complete withdrawal into itself, any foreign policy that takes a more active position will have to use measures that will be coercive to some degree. There is no way of ensuring environmental controls or nuclear nonproliferation without coercion and strategy. And strategy will have to involve some secrecy if it is to function.
But that doesn’t seem very possible in a society that is as profoundly Oedipal* as the American. While the citizens revel in the Oedipal joys offered by the Assanges and the Snowdens, they fail to notice that the only foreign policy they are effectively promoting is the extremely isolationist one.

* My theory is that it’s so Oedipal because it’s a society of immigrants.

Rate this:

12 responses to “The Future of Foreign Policy”

J. Otto Pohl

January 2, 2015

Sure, but it is a lot more honest and managable to just note the real reasons. Justifying every use of military force as promoting “democracy” is tiresome. The worst part of it would be if it were true. It the US actually did intervene in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Libya to promote democracy than we have a lot more problems than I thought.

LikeLike

Reply
truthbetold

January 2, 2015

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-02/oliver-stones-new-movie-ukraine-cia-coup-coming-theater-near-you

2014: The Year Russia-Bashing Got Ugly… and Dangerous

Coercive is right.

LikeLike

Reply
1. Clarissa
  
  January 2, 2015
  
  I don’t have a huge appreciation for freaks. But I know they exist. There is no need to remind me.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
musteryou

January 2, 2015

On the subject of the Oedipus complex itself, it seems to be a very weak motif in some regards, which has the format of a moral truism: “One should respect one’s elders and not be heedlessly rebellious.”

But I actually find something much more sinister in the conservative’s interpretation of this thing, because the psyschology of respect ought not to apply in some instances.

See this:

LikeLike

Reply
1. Clarissa
  
  January 2, 2015
  ““One should respect one’s elders and not be heedlessly rebellious.””
  
  The belief that old people should be worshipped simply for having managed to live that long is one of the most bizarre quirks of the patriarchy.
  
  LikeLiked by 1 person
  Reply
  1. musteryou
    
    January 2, 2015
    
    I don’t understand the patriarchy at all. But what I was wondering is, as children receive their oedipal domination from their parents, which happens when they are very young, why must one make the assumption that this is proper and good and that one must by no means go about trying to “rebel” against parental domination? Of course there can be futile and flamboyant rebellion for the sake of it, but sometimes the decision to rebel is an absolute requisite for psychological health. Nothing in Freudianism seems to address this.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
    1. Clarissa
      
      January 2, 2015
      
      “Of course there can be futile and flamboyant rebellion for the sake of it, but sometimes the decision to rebel is an absolute requisite for psychological health.”
      
      Not sometimes. Always.
      
      “Nothing in Freudianism seems to address this.”
      
      There is nothing but this in psychoanalysis. 🙂
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
      1. musteryou
        
        January 2, 2015
        
        My reading of psychoanalysis is that it maps and reinforces patriarchal mores. The parent MUST impose the patriarchal character and the child who rebels against this is by definition dysfunctional.
        
        Anyway, I guess we have spoken about this before. But as you would know by now, I am interested in mapping out systems to work out how they are engineered and this has been my finding.
        
        One can gain a further indication of how much evidence there is for my view that Freudianism has an agenda, which tends to be patriarchal and monotheistic (or is so overtly if we are talking about Freud himself) by the degree to which there is a strong antagonism by those of Jewish persuasion, who pride themselves on having good psychological hygiene, against the Nietzschean-shamanic axis of training and psychological thought. If psychoanalysis were about encouraging healthy rebellion, Bataille would be much better understood in academic circles and Nietzsche not so much disregarded.
        
        LikeLike
        
        Reply
        
        Clarissa
        
        January 2, 2015
        
        “My reading of psychoanalysis is that it maps and reinforces patriarchal mores. The parent MUST impose the patriarchal character and the child who rebels against this is by definition dysfunctional.”
        
        ??????? Every psychoanalytic treatment begins with placing parents under critical scrutiny. What do you think I do in my psychoanalysis during every session? Try to figure out how to beat back my parents assaults. There is literally nothing else that happens in analysis.
        
        “One can gain a further indication of how much evidence there is for my view that Freudianism has an agenda, which tends to be patriarchal and monotheistic”
        
        It’s like you are making fun of me. Psychoanalysis arose specifically to undo the damage done by monotheism and patriarchy.
        
        “If psychoanalysis were about encouraging healthy rebellion, Bataille would be much better understood in academic circles and Nietzsche not so much disregarded.”
        
        Psychoanalysis is like cardiology or dermatology. It has no place in “academic circles.” It is not a system of thought. It is a therapeutic practice.
        
        LikeLike
        
        Reply
        
        musteryou
        
        January 2, 2015
        
        You ought to read Civilisation and its Discontents some time and try to work out which side Freud is on. It’s fairly black and white.
        
        LikeLike
Z

January 3, 2015

True about Civilization and its Discontents but isn’t current psychoanalysis way beyond that? Mainstream / commercial psychotherapy is conservative, normative, patriarchal, yes, and considers rebellion dysfunctional, and doesn’t want you to “blame your parents,” etc., but things look rather different when you get into the psychoanalytic journals.

LikeLike

Reply
1. Clarissa
  
  January 3, 2015
  “Mainstream / commercial psychotherapy is conservative, normative, patriarchal, yes, and considers rebellion dysfunctional, and doesn’t want you to “blame your parents,” etc., but things look rather different when you get into the psychoanalytic journals.”
  
  Exactly. There can be no psychoanalysis if you are not prepared to admit the way your parents fucked you up. I already know that when the analyst asks me a question and I don’t know what to answer, I’ve got to start with, “When I was little. . . my father. . .” and that already means I’m going in the right direction.
  
  LikeLike
  Reply