Implications of Freud’s theory expressed in Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis[1] are significant for how we think of the polis in which we dwell.  If it is accepted that we as individuals repress our desire, then it stands to reason that collectively we must also repress our desires.  It may be, to Aristotle’s point[2], that we cannot specifically describe our repressed wishes in a general sense anymore than we could ask a mathematician to give us the general answer to two plus two.

However, given a context, it is possible to identify repressed desires in any given situation.  This is the crux of Freud’s argument when he contends that dreams may be interpreted.[3]  If individually repressed desires may be interpreted in the form of dreams, then it may be assumed that collective repressed desires may be interpreted as well.  It may also be assumed that if it is good to overcome repressions within the individual that the collective would also benefit from overcoming collective repressions.

Speaking to a sense of being proactive in the habits of the advocate, it might be wise to begin developing a means for identifying collective repressed desires.  Moving from Freud’s analysis of the individual to an analysis of the collective need not be foreboding.  Freud uses the parapraxes as a means to establish the existence of repressed desires within individuals.[4]  This seemingly biological reaction to repressed desire may find a collective analogy in the collective shudder.  There are certain images- or notions- that cause collective groups to shudder.  Surrealist filmmakers elicited these types of responses to films such as Luis Bunuel’s “Un Chien Andalou” where in the opening sequence of the movie a razor slicing open an eyeball can be seen.[5]

What this shudder elicited from such an image means is left for another discussion.  The question is, why does the group shudder in roughly the same fashion at the same place and same time?  What is it that the group doesn’t know that they don’t want to see?  Is this an area where the group is in need of collective healing?

The truth of the matter is that we live in a world with just and unjust acts (at least in how we construct our stories today.)  If we imagine ourselves ethical beings, then we implicitly profess a desire to make things “better.”  As advocates- in our story today- we must pick a side and try to “better” our side of the story through a competition of sorts.  However, if we reframe the stories we tell one another; it may be possible to advocate on behalf of everyone.

Through collective repression we may be able to identify those notions that result in greed and gluttony.  Over time we may be able to identify and advocate on behalf of everyone rather than attempting to best defend one position at the expense of an-other.  It would seem that advocating for a healing of the polis would be far more efficient than advocating for the healing of individuals.