Psychosemiotic Imperative

Psychosemiotic Imperative: the Enright Affair

I. A New strain of latent violence,has arisen in America, springing from young ideologue's patriotic desire to kill Muslims. The following is an attempt to put into words some thoughts it arouses, which I suppose many or most have, but hardly ever get articulated. Everyone "just knows them", maybe winks, nods or sighs; moves on.

A more abominable manifestation of the human soul could hardly be imagined. Young American male's passion to join ranks with those killing and dying in fights against those of the Muslim religion. Drunken rage psychosis let it out. But there must be many, many similarly deluded kids out there. One recalls the (John.. ?) Al Quida sympathizer kid from California. I'm sure what they did to him on TV did much to dissuade overt show of support for that p/o/v. Same with Enright, mutatis mutandis. Make a Muslim hating criminal punk like that your hero? With justification of the war in Afghanistan becoming increasingly focused on the search for an exit-ideology, hence to matters of theology, passion and patriotism, the need* for such a wildly repellant instance suggests some PR scripting was going on, somewhere. .


The psychosemiotic necessity to reverse just this motivating dream-thought is what drove Mayor Bloomberg and others, to eloquently condemn the act in categorical collective terms. Any attractiveness of Enright's act must be totally expunged. He categorically cannot be seen as acting on behalf of inational-minded, quasi-religious, self-delegated zealous young men. A new add on to the boundary of what "we" are. Any such thought must be made absolutely incompatible with civilized self-approval, aka the 'super-ego', in Freud's terms. It iis a moral imperative for officials at all levels of national discourse to categorically condemn it. Not to do so shows weakness of commitment to high principle.

Another Freudian touch is this: this act, now become common content of public communication, whose moral character is so existentially incompatible with civilized behavior, evokes the mechanism of "reaction-formation". This is the instinctual gut response "NO! NO!" to the given content. It first arises in response to the dream thought "kill the father!" (as Oedipus did his). Whether deliberately scripted to do so or not, one psychosemiotic result of the Enright affair has been to deposit a new reaction-formation token. .


. -Who benefits from this? ZIONIST superego (=>potentiates): NAZI

-A 3rd Freudianism: displacement (from...onto ...) fillin the blanks