Bibliographic record
Abstract
Psychoanalytic thinking has tended to bring together aggression and loss, trauma and violence. However, such a bringing together has, in the case of Israel and Palestine, become not only ethically questionable and politically futile, but purposely occlusive as to what is really, or what else, might be happening. We want to agitate those proposals that the trauma of the Holocaust has led to the violence, that loss has produced aggression—proposals that continue to grasp our discourse and our thinking, proposals that foreclose the entry of other possibilities and lead us to fatalistic ends. We aim to create ruptures and highlight gaps in the central relation of ontological violence required to construct colonial power, drawing on Franz Fanon’s radicalisation of the collective unconscious. Through this, we hope to speculate a different psychoanalysis of violence that takes seriously Fanon’s case studies (with particular attention to Series A, Case 5), not only as a political intervention but also as a profoundly psychoanalytic one. Our article first traces the historically liberal and secular psychoanalytic positions on Israel and Palestine that ultimately, we argue, fall short and indeed reinforce the colonial Zionist order, in part because their psychoanalytic analysis relies on a concept of a liberal humanist modernity which is always already a colonial formation. Indeed, psychoanalysis is not immune to the segregated order (Fanon, 1967) but is complicit in and constituted through it. We further theorise Fanon’s contestatory and marginal position in psychoanalysis and the ways in which this contestation is essential for reproducing the current colonial orders. We then think with anti-colonial political theorist Aimé Césaire to propose a critical refinement of existing and emerging psychoanalytic insights, one that is attuned to ethico-political responsibilities. We argue for a psychoanalytic conception of colonial violence that begins from the psyche of ‘the wretched’ and moves from confinement to liberation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".