{"id":6113,"date":"2010-12-22T20:03:34","date_gmt":"2010-12-23T00:03:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/?p=6113"},"modified":"2013-06-07T11:09:53","modified_gmt":"2013-06-07T16:09:53","slug":"lacan-and-the-political-pt-4","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/2010\/12\/22\/lacan-and-the-political-pt-4\/","title":{"rendered":"Stavrakakis Lacan and the Political pt 4"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sinthome<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

an identification with the symptom, a recognition in the real of our symptom of the only support of our being (Stav citing \u017di\u017eek 1989) 133<\/p>\n

Wo es war soll Ich werden: <\/em>the subject must identify with the place where the syumptom already was: ‘In its pathological particularity [it] … must recognise the element which gives consistency to [its] being’ (\u017di\u017eek 1989) 133<\/p>\n

By saying ‘We are all Jews’, ‘We all live in Chernobyl!’ or ‘We are all boat people!’ \u2014 … we elevate the symptom, the excluded truth of the social field (which has been stigmatised as an alien particularity) to the place of the universal \u2014 to the point of our common identification which was up to now, sustained by its exclusion or elimination. The same happens when we say ‘We are all gypsies!’ \u2014 … What is promoted here is an attitude consistent with identifying with the symptom of the social and traversing social fantasy<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

It is only by accepting such an impossible representation, by\u00a0 making this declaration of impossibility, that it is possible to ‘represent’ the impossible or rather to identify with the impossibility of its representation. Identification with the symptom is thus related to the traversing of the fantasy<\/strong>. Going through fantasy entails the realisation of the lack or inconsistency in the Other which is masked by fantasy, the separation between objet petit a<\/em> and the Other, a separation which is not only ethically sound but also ‘liberating’ for our political imagination.\u00a0 134<\/p>\n

What is clearly at stake here is the possibility of enacting symbolic gestures that institutionalise social lack, that is to say incorporate the ethical recognition of the impossibility of social closure.<\/p>\n

Critique of Judith Butler, Will Connolly, Simon Critchley<\/span><\/p>\n

Critchley’s Levinaisan ethics of the Other [and probably Butler’ s too]. ‘The community remains an open community in so far as it is based on the recognition of difference, of the difference of the Other’ (citing Critchley 1992).<\/p>\n

The problem with such an analysis is that it presupposes the Other as a unifed totality<\/strong> or, even if this is not always the case, it seems to be offering a positive point of identification remaining thus within the limits of traditional ethical strategies or, in any case, not undermining them in a radical way.\u00a0 What has to be highlighted is that it is precisely this relation \u2014 the identification with the Other \u2014 that attempts to bring closure to the social.<\/p>\n

In order to have a non-totalisable relation to the Other we must relate \u2014 identify \u2014 with the lack in the Other and not with the Other <\/strong>per se.<\/strong> <\/em>This is the radical innovation of Lacanian ethics.\u00a0 And this is what democracy needs today. 139
\n<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sinthome an identification with the symptom, a recognition in the real of our symptom of the only support of our being (Stav citing \u017di\u017eek 1989) 133 Wo es war soll Ich werden: the subject must identify with the place where the syumptom already was: ‘In its pathological particularity [it] … must recognise the element which … Continue reading “Stavrakakis Lacan and the Political pt 4”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[78,111,38,12,21,24,40,69,72,15,118,41],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6113","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-butler","category-desire","category-ethics","category-fantasy","category-jouissance","category-lacan","category-lack","category-laclau","category-objet-a","category-subjectivity","category-symbolic","category-the-real"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6113","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6113"}],"version-history":[{"count":13,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6113\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11219,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6113\/revisions\/11219"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6113"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6113"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6113"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}