INTERGENERATIONAL TRANSMISSION OF HATE, WAR, AND VIOLENCE

Report on a conference cosponsored by the International Psychoanalytic Association Committee on the United Nations (IPA/CUN) and the UN Department of Public Information

by Leide Porcu, Ph.D.

On October 19, the International Psychoanalytic Association Committee on the United

Nations (IPA/CUN) and the UN Department of Public Information (DPI) co-sponsored a

special conference to celebrate Freud's 150th birthday and to honor the memory of Paolina

Kernberg.  Despite the serious topic, the conference was a lively event and conveyed an

optimistic view of the potential contribution of psychoanalysis to the reduction of the

intergenerational transmission of trauma.  The audience and panelists included

psychoanalysts and representatives of a variety of non-governmental organizations

(NGOs).  The interaction among these groups enhanced the work of the conference.

Psychoanalysts, “pairing people” who change one person at a time in the sheltered

environment of the consulting room, had an opportunity to interact with NGOs, who

work in groups, addressing marginalized communities, as well as global issues.    Of note

is the fact that many psychoanalysts have extended their professional horizons to work

with these larger communities.

The major topic addressed was the prevention of the intergenerational

transmission of hate and violence and the mechanisms available to process these feelings

before they develop into prejudice and destructive action.   Juan Carlos Brandt, the

director of DPI, NGO Section, mediated a panel which included Yael Danieli, the UN

consultant on trauma, Claudio Eizirik, the IPA President, and Christophe LobryBoulanger, a Red Cross official.

Dr. Eizirik considered the relationship between war and trauma and the

microcosm of the family and the inner world.  Eizirik recounted the contribution of an

adequate early upbringing in the transformation of an infant’s primitive feelings of rage

into feelings of love, consideration for others, and the development of the reality

principle.  He highlighted the role psychoanalysis can play in managing the

intergenerational transmission of trauma, specifically addressing how traumatic events,

unresolved mourning, and the inability to symbolize can be transmitted.  Eizirik made a

distinction between the transmission of trauma, which is consciously transmitted in

discourse, and the more pernicious transgenerational transmission of unconscious

processes, where unmastered, dissociated, and unsymbolized mental content may be

violently projected into another and remain encapsulated.  Prejudice, like racism, lack of

respect for immigrants, children, the elderly, and women, is often transmitted through this

process.  He suggested measures to prevent violence and trauma, including improving the

basic conditions of life by containing the excesses of the market economy.  For Eizirik, it

is imperative to recognize negative projections in order to open a dialogue for mutual

understanding.  One effort described was a project involving Israeli and Palestinian youth

who are learning to appreciate each other by listening to each other’s music.

Analysts are trained in non-judgmental listening, a style of listening that might

assist people in learning to tolerate others by appreciating their point of view.  As Eizirik

wittily remarked, the UN could become a container where people process their rage by

splurging on insults, working through their differences in words rather than actions.

Eizirik’s comments about promoting the use of a non-judgmental analytic stance

to further mutual understanding were taken up by Yael Danieli.   Danieli, who studied the

phenomenology of hope among holocaust survivors, war prisoners, and the terminally ill,

reminded the audience that that this type of listening is very difficult to maintain, even for

trained professionals.  Ideology, or one might call it, culture, always informs one’s

listening and what can be heard and processed depends on the ideological positions of

both the listener and the speaker. She refers to this language that cannot be heard as “the

conspiracy of silence:” The three groups she studied shared a feeling that nobody could

understand or listen to them, not even their friends and psychotherapists.   For these

people, the perceived indifference of the onlooker was more painful than the brutality

they suffered.  The trauma was followed by a cultural and institutional silence, or by

“noise” screening out what had happened.  This non recognition is the most powerful

transmitter of trauma, because what cannot be talked about cannot be processed and will

continue to haunt succeeding generations.  Hence, trauma must be communicated,

according to cultural codes, specifically in stories, dance, psychodrama, or music.  While

there is an idealization of culture as “healer,” culture can also be the transmitter of

trauma, by promoting a history of hate and revenge through silence.

Christophe Lobry-Boulanger provided webpages to consult for data on children

and violence (see www.redcross.org and www.icrc.org) and offered some disconcerting

statistics on the devastating effects of war on children.

The second part of the conference, which was moderated by Isaac Tylim,

employed a town hall format.  Because of the great number of participants, only a few

contributions are reported on.  This section opened the conference to experiences from

different corners of the world, and was divided into three segments: The Spectrum of

Violence, Geographical Reports, and Prevention.  Contributions ranged on a continuum

from objective to subjective views.  From the subjective perspective, Fanny Munlin and

Florence Ross reported on their subjective struggles dealing with prejudice, the former as

a woman of color and the latter as an elderly woman.

Elisabeth Young-Bruhel offered an historical overview of the study of prejudice

in the US, from anti-Semitism to sexism, homophobia, and ageism.  For Young-Bruhel,

children are also a target of prejudice.   “Childism” is a form of prejudice that goes

unacknowledged and is perpetrated by adults who do not fully consider children’s rights.

Accordingly, they may consider children property, molding them according to their

agenda, pleasure, or needs, rather than fostering their individual development.

Paul Hoeffel, the former director of DPI, NGO section, reported on the disruption

of the social fabric in Mexico due to migration to the United States, which has brought

about an intensification of violence and abuse of women and children.  Since migrants

make a large contribution to the Mexican economy (through their remittances) and to the

US workforce, politicians of both countries tend to overlook the problem, because it

would require the pursuit of ways to keep Mexicans in Mexico by offering employment.

Helen Hamlin emphasized that progress will not take place unless we address

poverty.  Discussing a project developed in Queens, NY, which brings together

adolescents and elderly citizens, she emphasized the importance of developing

partnerships among different social strata.

Susan Lazar considered how the concept of narcissism can help explain the

impasse in mutual understanding between adversarial groups, with each party focused on

their own experience and unable to entertain another point of view.  A process of

essentialism takes place in which each participant feels like a victim, while all badness is

projected into the other.  Admitting responsibility and seeing the other’s subjectivity

would promote maturation and integration, and would contribute to conflict resolution.

In a similar vein, Nadia Ramzy maintained that for a victim, rage is a reaction and

a protection against unbearable feelings and memories, and that feelings are generally

acted out rather than verbalized.  Ramzy suggested that trauma and mutual understanding

can be achieved in a group setting where safety is maintained and all points of view can

be expressed and equally acknowledged.

In counterpoint, Nina Thomas offered an example from the tribunal and war

commission, where group processing, as described above, is lacking.  Thomas described

the ambivalence that survivors felt about their testimony at the tribunal and the war

commission. They felt justice was not served since the punishment could not compensate

for the crime.  They experienced the retelling in court as re-traumatization, and felt that

the judicial system was abstract, lacked empathy, and was only interested in obtaining

testimony.  However, they still felt testifying was important, since it provided a forum

where the truth could be heard.

Leahn Nguyen reported on the long lasting effects of trauma on torture survivors

who are in long term psychoanalytic oriented therapy at Belleview Hospital.  Despite

medication and the fact that their trauma occurred more than twenty years ago, they are

still mutilated souls, who feel disconnected and empty.  While some fare well, others are

unable to find fulfillment in love and work.  A few find meaning by pursuing legalistic

battles, seeking magical repair for what they lost.  Though in therapy these survivors tend

to discount the possibility of change and the creation of new meanings, nonetheless they

pursue analytic therapy in an attempt to put their psychic wounds into words.

In conclusion, I will borrow some of the points raised by Jessica Benjamin in her

presentation, as she touched and expanded on many essential aspects raised throughout

the conference.  She revisited  sadomasochistic and narcissistic processes at work in the

impasses between adversarial groups, where there is a lack of integration of perspectives,

and no recognition of the subjectivity of the other.  In her view, each side takes the

position of the victim and sees the other as all bad and deserving annihilation.  Where

there is a lack of a containing function, such as in the Middle Eastern conflict, it is

difficult for the rest of the world not to dissociate.   However, Benjamin offered a story of

a peaceful exchange between Israeli children and Palestinian soldiers, where the children,

through mutual recognition and forgiveness, experienced a diminution of post-traumatic

symptoms, as an example of how such a split may be processed.   In sum, she indicated

that trauma may be retroactively repaired if a containing function is in place, where each

party to conflict can publicly acknowledge responsibility.