From 'take care' to 'neglect' of the presidential photo: the psychoanalytic look

Irene Hartmann

08/13/2021 4:13 PM

• Clarín.com

• Society

Updated 08/13/2021 4:36 PM

On July 14, 2020

Clarín

reported several important things.

1) Former President Mauricio Macri asked to suspend the quarantine by Covid.

2) Judge Canicoba Corral had decided to retire.

3) President Alberto Fernández had mocked - already the night before - the repercussions after his speech to Vicentín.

"I thought everyone was going to go out and celebrate," he launched, perhaps advancing a plan from his own agenda.

What does the

psychology

of Fabiola Yañez's controversial birthday

read

in full ASPO?

Clarín

spoke with two psychoanalyst professors from the Faculty of Psychology of the UBA to recover some lines of meaning emerging from the disconcerting group photo that at this time brings together national attention. 

Verónica Llull Casado

is a specialist in forensic psychology and adjunct professor of the subject “Crime and delinquent psychology”.

The talk focused on understanding if we are facing a classic example of "proper legality", a common feature of certain perversion cadres.

The expert said no.

The celebration of Fabiola Yañez's birthday, on July 14, 2020 in the fifth of Olivos, when the strict quarantine by Covid was in force.

"One thing is the own legality that is revealed in the perversion and another is the

cynicism

.

The Olivos episode reveals that the story of the pandemic was an argument to support a position of concern about the pandemic, but that

the concern, in reality, was another,

"he said.

Since the controversial photo revealed the breach of quarantine by the highest-ranking national official, cynicism was symbolized in the word "

beware

."

"One of the most used signifiers in these months was to encourage us to 'take care' of the Covid, with the '

stay at home

'.

Now that people talk about 'carelessness'

It says something of the little value that term has, and of the particularities of the authority that enunciates it ”, he affirmed.

It is not an authority of any kind.

For Llull Casado, “

contemporary leaders disbelieve the authority that they themselves embody

and represent.

It is part of a fall, a general delegitimization of the principle of authority ”.

It sounds good, but

Pablo Muñoz

, psychoanalyst, also, and secretary of University Extension of the Faculty of Psychology of the UBA, gave another twist to the matter: he raised an

identification between the leader and the ideal

that he himself should represent.

Pulling the thread of that explanation, very repeated terms come out this Friday:

omnipotence, narcissism, impunity

.

The chosen one

“Beyond the political speculations that come out of the photo, the problem is the conception of power and the type of leadership.

The leader is the voice of a group;

it is the one chosen because it better represents the values ​​of the set.

Sigmund Freud

said that the leader keeps the group united. 

And it unites it from an ideal

”.

The President, Alberto Fernández, and the Vice President, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner.

So far it seems simple: there is a leader who earned his place by representing us better than others.

It "unites" or links us.

But for that to happen there must be, in the background (on the horizon), an ideal.

In the pandemic, the ideal was health

, sanitary, life.

Beat the coronavirus.

The leader stood up representing that message as a promise. 

The difficult part of this explanation includes a couple of concepts from Freudian theory.

According to Muñoz, in order for “the ideal to be installed, it is necessary to overcome an initial phase, called '

primary narcissism

'”.

Anyone who has come into contact with young children will understand: it is the phase in which

children believe that they are the greatest there is

.

Alberto Fernández and Fabiola Yañez on October 27, 2019, in the last presidential elections.

/ AFP

Later, precisely when the ideal is projected through the relationship with parents and peers, the child's primary narcissism is lost.

Then, Muñoz reviewed, "the ideal begins to assume a

different

place

than the self

."

However, the expert evaluated, "in these situations it seems that the leader, instead of leading us towards the ideal, fully identifies with it."

As if that "separation" had not occurred.

As if the leader perceived himself as

ideal

. 

Why is this happening?

“It is difficult to say.

Perhaps there is a

narcissistic conception of power

, as an end in itself.

Perhaps it is the

realization of old dreams of omnipotence

.

But what ends up happening is that responsibility is blurred, "said Muñoz.

In short, "it ends up being an

egocentric power

. It closes itself on itself, in

privileges and impunity

."

The responsibility, thus, is avoided.

The leader walks away from everything.

The mad king

Freud spoke of

a leader who goes mad

when confused with the aforementioned ideal.

Of course, it is not a premise to read literally.

"The expression alludes to the 

excessive fascination

with the ideal that is held," Muñoz on track.

President Alberto Fernández with his dogs Dylan and Prócer.

Photo: dylanferdezok

Undoubtedly, the focus should be on the consequences of these episodes: “In a country like ours, fragmented, with diffuse ideals,

without stable moral frameworks

, 'drivers' with integrity are required.

This does not mean 'flawless'.

Drivers can always make mistakes, but you need moral and ethical integrity ... to

lead us from an ideal

”.

In July 2020, “the ideal was '

the State takes care of your health

'.

Society was ingrained with allowing oneself to be cared for.

The leader was driving with a clear idea behind ”.

However, situations like this come to "devalue the word of the leader and the ideal it represents. An ideal for which we all renounce many things."

And, therefore, the clear feeling of having been

disappointed

.

$

Look also

Same photo: even today, Argentina has the highest daily death rate from Covid in the region

The photo in Olivos: a prosecutor gave the government five days to explain the visits and their legal justification