Élisabeth Roudinesco: 'The identity claim denies the mixture'

The

French historian and

has managed to gain international recognition, especially from her theoretical texts and the biographies she dedicated to

and

.

An unavoidable reference for the

and formed by the great masters of

of the second half of the 20th century, Roudinesco was a student of

, impacted by the methodology of Georges Canguilhem and co-author with

.

Her intellectual work, faithful to her lineage, has revealed her vocation for public intervention, for example, in favor of the

or to argue about the treatment of

.

Lecture by Elizabeth Roudinesco at the National Library in 2017. Photos Emmanuel Fernandez.

In her new book

(Debate), the essayist addresses the problem of the growth of

from a critical, subtle and historical perspective, considering these drifts dangerous both from the left and from the right due to their political consequences. voluntary and involuntary.

The author spoke with

from Paris and via zoom about this controversial phenomenon, which has placed identity as the key to contemporary struggles.

–At the beginning of

, you affirm that the pure or perfect identity does not exist.

Where do you think this current obsession with the search for sexual, racial or national identities comes from?

–I think it comes with the fall of the

, the progress of the individualistic society and the search in itself.

All this happens after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. The disaster in which this ideal of emancipation ended and the transformation of the world after communism has made the idea of ​​revolution refocus on oneself.

It is in this sense that the greatest interest in subjectivity and minorities began, rather than with respect to society as a whole.

On the other hand, we also find movements linked to

and an idea that, even though certain countries had succeeded in this process, the old colonized nations continued to be culturally colonized.

It is true that all this started from

.

But this ideal of emancipation was pushed to the limit to such an extent that those who were not really minorities began to be included in minorities (autistic people, people of short stature, the deaf and a long etcetera), as an annex to the minority idea from

in a certain sense.

The emancipation of homosexuals has already happened in many Western countries, they have the right to marriage, adoption, surrogacy, therefore, this has been progressively done in the legal

despite the fact that there are still sectors of society that are homophobic or racist.

It is always better to have conquered the legal rights to combat these social problems and to eradicate racism, anti-Semitism, and homophobia from civil society.

If you take the case of the United States, for example, the reality for blacks is much better from laws that prohibit segregation, but that does not mean that there is still no racism.

I think that in civil society a

dominates .

Today there is more fear of the mestizo than of the ghetto.

This is the thesis of the extreme right of the “great replacement”.

I believe that what will dominate is miscegenation, that is, integration and assimilation.

There is no replacement, there is mix.

The identity claim denies the mixture and miscegenation.

– Why do you think that queer militants in the United States, who initially had a creative discourse and valued freedom of desire and transgression, have become defenders of a type of puritanism that tries to prohibit and cancel certain discourses?

–I think that the minority has been exacerbated in a society dominated by

.

The "self" has become the goal of life.

And this doesn't make sense.

If everything becomes a minority, the country is a juxtaposition of minorities.

For example, regarding the trans phenomenon, I believe that the question about identity is due to the fact that the progress of cosmetic surgery is such that one can respond to psychic problems through surgery and the body.

Long ago, transgender people were classified as transvestites, there were no means to intervene on the organs.

One could say that sexual identities have been de-medicalized and de-chiatrized as surgery and medicine have advanced.

I think that

.

That is, "I feel offended, therefore, I have the right to such a thing."

But no, this is not so.

In any case, “I have the freedom”.

In the case of abortion, which is positive, it is a right.

It is a freedom that can be exercised.

A biological fact (being small, having blue eyes, or any other) is not something of identity.

Therefore, we are in a process that denies anatomy or the biological in favor of what is constructed, that is, sexual difference or the biological is denied in favor of gender.

It's stupid.

In addition, people with mental suffering behave like censors while erasing history as if the State should suppress what they hate.

Pulling down a dictator's statue makes sense, but deciding to review the entire past anyway means there are no limits.

The demand for recognition is so limitless that at any given moment there will be a reverse reaction.

And this is disturbing:

, which support the idea of ​​the decline of the West.

In this way, humanity has not evolved.

It has evolved slowly, from new grandfathers, for example, the progress of surgery has been essential for everyone.

I believe that

, it can be one of the solutions but it can't be the general solution.

On the other hand, there is a fundamental dimension in the law that is consent.

A minimum age must be set.

In other words, consent below the legally established norm (in sexual relations, it is fifteen years in France) cannot be considered acceptable.

In the same way, I believe that in trans people a legal age must be set at which they consent to start treatment.

It is not the case of children, where parents are the ones who decide for them.

Even if a boy declares himself homosexual, he can legally have consensual sexual relations after the age of fifteen, not before.

The same should be true for trans children to begin their transition.

In the background,

.

We have a law, it prohibits racism, anti-Semitism, discrimination, therefore, one can calmly express oneself freely against something or a person, there is no need to censor someone with whom we do not agree.

Do you know that, because of my book, the homosexual associations have wanted to initiate a process against me?

It's completely crazy.

I publicly defended gay marriage.

I have been treated as a homophobe because I discussed the issue of transidentity in children.

Lecture by Elizabeth Roudinesco at the National Library in 2017. Photos Emmanuel Fernandez.

–I find the example you provide in your book illustrative in which Michel Foucault pointed out that the question “where do you speak from?”, which he was asked at the University of Vincennes, seemed to him to be police.

The paradox is that precisely Foucault, who has always been a philosopher who was suspicious of identity, is today considered a central reference point for identity movements.

–Foucault was never identitarian.

Why has this drifted this way?

They start from

.

And all the reactionary intellectuals, from the extreme right, now accuse these philosophers of the seventies, the most translated in the world, the best of my generation, of being

.

The identity drift of the left vindicates not only Foucault, Derrida or Fanon, when these were not such a thing, but the extreme right, takes the opportunity to say that everything in France is always basically Sartre's fault.

But it's not true.

Just because that generation pushed towards effervescence or radicalism does not mean that the radical identity movement is right.

In my book I put it: Derrida, Foucault, Deleuze and many of these thinkers were my teachers, I read them and they never said anything favorable to identity.

– Do you think that the word “deconstruction” by Jacques Derrida has been misunderstood by identity politics?

– The word “deconstruction” is always considered by the extreme left as something that one must do, while in the extreme right it is assimilated to destruction.

When in truth it is neither one thing nor the other.

Deconstruction is not the "self."

It means that something is undone in the past to become something new in the present.

–In the epilogue of your book, you affirm that secular republicanism is the best means to counteract the identity drifts of the left and right.

What would this model be like that would ensure freedom and coexistence of differences?

–I am a supporter, like Lévi-Strauss, of

and I reject turning

into a new religion.

Therefore, I believe that diversity is the key to progress.

However, a level of secularism is necessary so that these religious, cultural or sexual differences can be expressed.

Not all republican democracy is secular.

In the United States, presidents swear on the Bible.

In France, on the contrary, the republic and secularism were born together with the French Revolution.

I share this model of

, which is not simple because it implies maintaining a position, at the same time, of respect for cultural differences and of concrete, not abstract, universalism.

It is difficult because it requires sustaining both: the strength of French republicanism implies accepting the religious particularisms or any type of citizens, as long as it is not intended to turn them into principles of domination of others.

This type of republican secularism is what I support.

ESSENTIAL

Roudinesco is a French historian and psychoanalyst, biographer of great theorists of psychoanalysis.

Élisabeth Roudinesco

Paris, 1944. Historian and psychoanalyst.

She did her psychoanalytic training at the École Freudienne in Paris;

she is vice president of the International Society for the History of Psychiatry and Psychoanalysis and director of research at the University of Paris VII.

Author of numerous works of art on literature, cinema, politics, psychoanalysis and the history of ideas, Roudinesco is dedicated to the history of Freudianism and its relationship with three main authors: Andersson, Ellenberger and Foucault.

She wrote

;

and

, among others.

The sovereign self

Essay on identity drift, by Élisabeth Roudinesco (Debate).

The sovereign self

Essay on identity drift

Élisabeth Roudinesco

Debate

Trad.: Juan Vivanco Gefaell

256 págs.

look too

Élisabeth Roudinesco: "The top priority is not to die of this coronavirus crap"

look too

Élisabeth Roudinesco: "The Nazis passed but the hatred of Freud persists"

look too

Jacques Lacan, towards anti-philosophy