<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <P>This is taking things a bit far...</P> <P>Personally, I would gravitate towards accepting Rudolph Rocker's [a famous anarchist from Germany known for his anti-nazi work and comitment to anarcho-syndicalist organising] analysis of Nationalism and Culture, which is best exemplified in modern psychological texts by Fromm's work [Fromm basically lifts his perception of sociological currents vis a vis politics from Rocker, and even givse him credits in works like "The Sane Society"].</P> <P><EM>>"Originally the ego includes everything, later it separates off an external </EM></P> <DIV></DIV><EM>>world from itself. Our present ego-feeling is, therefore, only a shrunken </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>residue of a much more inclusive-indeed an all embracing-feeling which </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>corresponded to a more intimate bond between the ego and the world about it." </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> Nations" exists in order to enable us to restore a more inclusive, "all </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>embracing" ego feeling. Countries provide the experience of a grandiose, </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>narcissistic ego that contains and encompasses everything: "Oh beautiful for </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>spacious skies, For amber waves of grain." </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> The idea of the nation persuades us that we are at one with a gigantic </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>body of territory: "From the mountains, To the prairies, To the ocean white </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>with foam. God bless America, My home sweet home." </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> Ordinarily the word "home" refers to something intimate and cozy. The </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>song cited above generates the feeling that we are in our home, at home NO </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>MATTER WHERE WE ARE. More precisely, we are instructed that we may feel at </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>home within a vast space AS LONG AS THIS SPACE IS OUR OWN NATION. </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> Freud stated in CIVILIZATION AND ITS DISCONTENTS that, "The ego appears </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>to us as something autonomous and unitary, marked off distinctly from </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>everything else." He said that, "Toward the outside, at any rate, the ego </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>seems to maintain clear and sharp lines of demarcation." </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> On the one hand, the ego seeks to be gigantic--to be everything and </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>everywhere. Freud used the term primary narcissism to describe this human </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>tendency toward omnipotence. On the other hand, the ego seeks clearly </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>demarcated boundaries between self and non-self. </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> Montreal is not far from New York. Yet, New Yorkers rarely pay </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>attention to what is going on there. Indeed, Americans have little feeling </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>for Canada, though this country touches our borders. On the other hand, New </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>Yorkers have strong feelings toward places like Los Angeles, San Francisco </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>and Seattle that are located over 3000 miles away. </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> Our ego expands only to contain or encompass that which exists within </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>the boundaries of "our nation." The national boundary is like an ego </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>boundary. Nations tend to demarcate themselves against other nations. They </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>ward off or exclude that which is "foreign" or not self. </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> In THE EGO AND THE ID, Freud said that "The ego is first and foremost a </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>bodily ego." He stated that the ego is "ultimately derived from bodily </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>sensations, chiefly from those springing from the surface of the body. It may </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>thus be regarded as a mental projection of the surface of the body." </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> This is why I speak of the "body politic." The nation--a projection of </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>an omnipotent, narcissistic ego--is experienced as if a GIGANTIC BODY BOUND </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>TO OUR OWN BODY. This is why we defend nations so virulently. We equate them </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>with own bodies. We imagine that we exist in a state of fusion with a "body </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>of territory" whose boundaries could be penetrated and punctured. </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> This is why I speak of the "immune response" in relation to nations. In </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>identifying our body with the body politic, imagining that our personal body </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>IS this body, we react to repel "invaders" and "internal enemies." The </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>reaction of the body to the fear of penetration is called paranoia. National </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>violence is paranoid violence. </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> Rudolf Hess often said, "Hitler is Germany, just as Germany is Hitler." </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>Hitler equated his body with the German body politic. Therefore, he existed </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>in a constant state of vigilance, lest his body (politic) be penetrated. </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> Hitler said: </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>"If Germany wanted to defend herself against England, then she first had to </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>seek to cover her rear with Russia." </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>"Germany could develop a maritime policy only when Germany's rear was </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>completely covered by Russia." </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>"The covering of the rear was thought of primarily against Austria." </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> Advanced psychoanalytic training is not required to interpret the </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>meaning of these metaphors. It may seem humorous to imagine that Hitler's </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>foreign policy originated in his need to "cover the rear." However, Hitler's </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>anxiety led to the loss of nearly 30 million lives. </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> Historians ask why Hitler attacked Russia when he was in the midst of a </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>battle with Britain. They discuss the issue of whether Hitler could have </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>"won" the war if he had not attacked Russia. </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> Hitler himself had a better understanding of his motivation. In his </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>statement to the Croation puppet, Marshall Kvaternik on July 21, 1941, he </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>called Jews the "scourge of mankind" and said that they had become a "plague </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>for mankind." Even if only one state was to tolerate a Jewish family in it, </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>this would become the "bacillus for renewed decay." In his SECRET BOOK, </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>Hitler stated that it was necessary to wage war on the Eastern Front in order </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>to confront the danger of an "inundation by disease bacilli, which at the </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>moment have their breeding ground in Russia." </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> In the movie, DR. STRANGELOVE, General Jack T. Ripper explained to </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>Mandrake that he launched the attack against the communists because a </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>"foreign substance" was being "introduced into our precious bodily fluids." </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>Like Hitler, he hoped to stem the tide of Bolshevism through a preemptive </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>attack against an infectious agent that threatened to penetrate into and </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>destroy his body (politic). </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>With regards, </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>Richard Koenigsberg </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>> </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>Richard Koenigsberg, Ph. D. </EM> <DIV></DIV><EM>>Director, Library of Social Science </EM> <DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr> <a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMPEN/2015">get 2 months FREE*</a> </html>