English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In this response, I address five selective arguments in relation to Malherbe’s thesis on the implication of the unconscious in the structuring of our political orientations and activities, and the importance of engaging in a process of  unconsciousness-raising . First, I raise a seeming conceptual tension in his argument about the relationship between conscious and unconscious activity. Second, I highlight the challenge of occupying a range of subject positions and how their associated multiple unconscious lack(s) may compromise solidarity in political formations. Third, I suggest that surrendering individual unconscious needs to that of the group is a more troublesome process than we anticipate, as it is always ideologically contested, both consciously and unconsciously. Fourth, I argue that unconsciousness-raising is not in and of itself implicitly connected to a specific set of political goals, as the unconscious is not inherently politically partisan, and I consequently conclude with the suggestion that the very idea of solidarity is an unstable and dynamic construct and process.

(Un)consciousness-Raising, (Un)knowability, Lack and Spectrums of Solidarity: Discussion of “Unconsciousness-Raising”