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.
Clarissa's Blog 
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
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-02/oliver-stones-new-movie-ukraine-cia-coup-coming-theater-near-you
Coercive is right.
LikeLike
I don’t have a huge appreciation for freaks. But I know they exist. There is no need to remind me.
LikeLike
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
““One should respect one’s elders and not be heedlessly rebellious.””
LikeLiked by 1 person
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
“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
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
“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.”
“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”
“If psychoanalysis were about encouraging healthy rebellion, Bataille would be much better understood in academic circles and Nietzsche not so much disregarded.”
LikeLike
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
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
“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