The chapter engages the traumatic voraciousness of the State. The traumatic confusion between life and death is not reserved to individuals and groups, but it extends to institutions, to state structures, and to the State. At times, the State itself ‘eats’ political symbols. The reader meets a voracious State, with an appetite for violence. This State is marked by a traumatic insistence on violence. Importantly, the State is theorised as ‘identified with the aggressor’ and the traumatic quality of its actions are understood psychosocially.
- Adorno, T. W. (1959). Was bedeutet: Aufarbeitung der Vergangenheit. In R. Tiedemann et al. (Eds.), Gesammelte Schriften, Vol. 10.2 (pp. 555–572). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1977.Google Scholar
- Anzieu, D. (1984). The group and the unconscious (trans: Kilborne, B.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
- Butler, J. (2015). Notes toward a performative theory of assembly. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Ferenczi, S. (1915a). The analysis of comparisons. Further contributions to the theory and technique of psycho-analysis (trans: Suttie, J. I., pp. 397–407). London: Karnac, 1994.Google Scholar
- Ferenczi, S. (1930c). Fantasies on a biological model of super-ego formation. Final contributions to the problems and methods of psycho-analysis (trans: Mosbacher, E., pp. 227–230). London: Karnac, 1994.Google Scholar
- Soreanu, R. (2017). Something was lost in Freud’s Beyond the pleasure principle: A Ferenczian reading. American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 77(3), 223–238.Google Scholar