My partner and I negate the resolution on the basis of Schizoanalyzing the meaning of US interests.

We reserve the right to clarify.

Contention 1: The Oedipal Complex is the normative process that
furnishes material yielded by the psychic impulses
(Freud, Sigmund. 1913. The Interpretation of Dreams
!ccording to my e"perience# $hich is no$ large# parents play a leading part in the infantile psychology of all later
neurotics# and falling in love $ith one member of the parental couple and hatred of the other help to ma%e
up that fateful sum of material furnished by the psychic impulses# $hich has been formed during the
infantile period# and $hich is of such great importance for the symptoms appearing in the later
neurosis. &ut I do not thin% that psychoneurotics are here sharply distinguished from normal human
beings# in that they are capable of creating something absolutely ne$ and peculiar to themselves. It is far more probable# as is sho$n also by
occasional observation upon normal children# that in their loving or hostile $ishes to$ards their parents#
psychoneurotics only sho$ in e"aggerated form feelings $hich are present less distinctly and less intensely in the
minds of most children. !nti'uity has furnished us $ith legendary material to confirm this fact# and the deep and universal effectiveness of these
legends can only be e"plained by granting a similar universal applicability to the above(mentioned assumption in infantile psychology.
Contention 2: the Mirror stage and Oedipus are formative of the
function of I
Subpoint A: (Hawaii.edu, 2013
)acan proposes that human infants pass through a stage in $hich an e"ternal image of the body*#+
(reflected in a mirror# or represented to the infant through the mother or primary caregiver*#+ produces a
psychic response that gives rise to the mental representation of an ,I,. -he infant identifies $ith the
image# $hich serves as a gestalt of the infant.s emerging perceptions of selfhood# but because the image
of a unified body does not correspond $ith the underdeveloped infant.s physical vulnerability and
$ea%ness# this imago is established as an Ideal(I to$ard $hich the sub/ect $ill perpetually strive
throughout his or her life.
!S !0 I01!0-# -23 2UM!0 )I43S I0 ! 56M7)3-3)8 9U!)IS-I5 W6:)9 61 ;669 4S.
&!9< -23 I01!0- I930-I1I3S I-S3)1 1I:S- I0 ! S3:I3S 61 !SS65I!-60S 61 ;669S
!09 &!9S# -23 1I:S- ;669 &3I0; -2!- 61 -23 M6-23:# 5:3!-I0; !0
I930-I1I5!-I60 &!S39 60 -23 639I7!) 56M7)3=.
Subpoint B> (Lacan, ?ac'ues. 1966. Ecrits: A selection. The mirror stage as formative of the function of the I
We only have to understand the mirror stage as an identification# in the full sense that analysis gives the
term> namely# the transformation that ta%es place in the sub/ect $hen he assumes an image @ $hose
predestination to this phase(effect is sufficiently indicated by the use# in analytic theory# of the ancient
term imago. -his /ubilant assumption of his specular image by the child at the infans stage# still sun% in his
motor incapacity and nursling dependence# $ould seem to e"hibit in an e"emplary situation the
symbolic matri" in $hich the I is precipitated in a primordial form# before it is ob/ectified in the
dialectic of identification $ith the other# and before language restores to it# in the universal# its function
as sub/ect. -his form $ould have to be called the Ideal(I# if $e $ished to incorporate it into our usual
register# in the sense that it $ill also be the source of secondary identifications# under $hich term I $ould place the
functions of libidinal normalization. &ut the important point is that this form situates the agency of the ego# before its social
determination# in a fictional direction# $hich $ill al$ays remain irreducible for the individual alone# or rather $hich $ill only re/oin the coming(into(being
of the sub/ect asymptotically# $hatever the success of the dialectical syntheses by $hich he must resolve as I his discordance $ith his o$n reality.
Contention 3: Oedipaliation has created led to the heterogeneity
of society and microfascism
Subpoint A> (Leary# -imothy. 2001. Your Brain is God
I $as ovulated# fertilized# and born in the ABth century. I can.t $ipe out my $hole personal bac%ground# or the fact that
almost everyone I tal% to today is brain(damaged by our education. I thin% !merican 3ducation ma%es us
hopeless symbol addicts. It.s designed to produce docile automatons.
-he religious e"perience is that ecstatic# /olting# $ondrous# a$e(struc%# life(changing mind(boggling confrontation $ith
one or all of the eight basic mysteries of e"istence. -he goal of an intelligent life# according to socrates# is
to pursue the philosophic 'uest @ to increase one.s %no$ledge of self and $orld. 0o$ there is an
important division of labor involved in the philosophic search. :eligion# being personal and private#
cannot produce ans$ers to the eight basic 'uestions.
)in% @ -he oedipal comple" being the means by $hich $e achieve our identity# transcends all social
convention. -he failings of education and religion are in fact the failings of the oedipal comple"<
Society is the entrenchment of the self# created by the oedipal comple"# through the means of
dialectics
C
. -herefore# 6edipus has crippled us as a species and made us incapable of anything other
than mediocrity and microfascism.
Subpoint B> (Unnown. 600 B!. The Tao Te !hin
"hen the "a# is lost$ there remains harmon#%
"hen harmon# is lost$ there remains love%
"hen love is lost$ there remains &ustice%
But 'hen &ustice is lost$ there remains ritual.
(itual is the end of compassion and honest#$
The )eginning of confusion%
Belief is a colourful hope or fear$
The )eginning of foll#.
The sage goes )# harmon#$ not )# hope%
*e d'ells in the fruit$ not the flo'er%
*e accepts su)stance$ and ignores a)straction.
-2US# W230 -23:3 IS ! )!5D 61 2!:M608 !09 1)6WI0; I0 639I7!)IE39#
5!7I-!)IS- S65I3-8# !09 -23 )!5D 61 -23 &698 WI-26U- 6:;!0S# 6:93: !09
560430-I60 56M3S I0-6 7)!8 5:3!-I0; MI5:61!S5ISM I0 I-S M6S- 3=-:3M3
5I:5UMS-!053S.
Contention !: "e#Oedipalie$ become the body %ithout organs
("e#eu$e# ;illes and 1eli" %uattari. 19&0. A Thousand +lateaus
Why not walk on your head, sing with your sinuses, see through your skin, breathe with your belly: the simple Thing, the
Entity, the full Body, the stationary Voyage, Anorexia, cutaneous Vision, oga, !rishna, "o#e, Experimentation$ Where
psychoanalysis says, %&top, 'nd your self again,% we should say instead, %"et(s go further
still, we ha#en(t found our Bw) yet, we ha#en(t su*ciently dismantled our self$% &ubstitute
forgetting for anamnesis, experimentation for interpretation$ +ind your body without organs$ +ind out how
to make it$ ,t(s a -uestion of life and death, youth and old age, sadness and .oy$ ,t is where e#erything is
played out$
There is an essential di/erence between the psychoanalytic interpretation of the
phantasy and the antipsychiatric experimentation of the program$ Between the phantasy,
an interpretation that must itself be interpreted, and the motor program of
experimentation$0 The Bw) is what remains when you take e#erything away$ What you
take away is precisely the phantasy, and signi'ances and sub.ecti'cations as a whole$
1sychoanalysis does the opposite: it translates e#erything into phantasies, it con#erts
e#erything into phantasy, it retains the phantasy$ ,t royally botches the real, because it
botches the Bw)$
"ink: 2& ,nterests are an expression of man(s social character, crystali3ed by dialectics and created
by )edipus$ The consideration of the 2& interests in any kind of debate 4such as this resolution5 is
an entrenchment of the oedipal complex and our furthering into microfacsism$
6lari'cation7answers, in chronological order
6lari'cation on 68:
The )edipal 6omplex is best understood by means of linguistics rather than by sexual desire$ The
mother is the primary caregi#er, and when the infant is 'rst born, the infant li#es in a world of only
pleasure or pain$ The infant associates the mother with good and the father 4the big )ther5 with
bad, for trying to take away attention from the mother on the infant$ This process is crystali3ed in
the dialectical process of )theri3ation$ The )edipal complex is often associated with a sexual
desire for the mother because of a de#eloping child(s association with e#erything pleasurable with
a .u#enile sexual pleasure that is not understood and not easily repressed at such a young age$
,ndi#iduals who do not undergo oedipali3ation in any way 4it could be with a non9maternal source:
such as the child with two father5 end up not de#eloping the proper ability to attach linguistic
meaning because of a lack of self: the result is schi3ophrenia$
6lari'cation on 6;:
The mirror stage is the process by which the infant is able to identify himself$ ,t is called such
because it is often associated with an infants ability to recogni3e itself in a mirror$ The infant(s 'rst
real mirror, the means by which an infant recogni3es itself, is in the ga3e of the mother$ <ow the
mother treats the ,nfant becomes the infant(s basis for identity$ =my mother doesn(t lo#e me: there
must be something wrong with me> or =my mother lo#es me #ery much: , must be great>$ Either
way, or e#en a splice between the two, translates to the mother(s association with the ideal9self
and thus the oedipal complex$
6lari'cation on =?icrofascism>
?icrofascism is contrasted to macrofascism$ <itler is the macrofascist: ?oussolinni is the
macrofascist$ The Third @eich itself, etc$ The macrofascist is bigger than the self: microfascism,
howe#er, is the essential character of the self$ ,t is the fascistic personalities and tendencies
inherent in all oedipali3ed people and our necessity to seek order$ To put it in the words of =Andrew
Aackson Aihad>:
=But there(s a bad man in e#eryone
Bo matter who we are
There(s a rapist and a Ba3i li#ing in our tiny hearts
6hild pornographers and cannibals, and politicians too
There(s someone in your head waiting to fucking strangle you>
6lari'cation on =Cialectics>7=otheri3ation> 4<egel5:
The crystallization of dialectic otherization
4Hegel, Deorg Wilhelm +riedrich$ 1807. =The 1henomenology of &pirit>5
Self(consciousness has before it another self(consciousness< it has come outside itself. -his has a
double significance. 1irst it has lost its o$n self# since it finds itself as an other being< secondly# it has
thereby sublated that other# for it does not regard the other as essentially real# but sees its o$n self in
the other. It must cancel this its other. -o do so is the sublation of that first double meaning# and is
therefore a second double meaning. 1irst# it must set itself to sublate the other independent being# in
order thereby to become certain of itself as true being# secondly# it thereupon proceeds to sublate its
o$n self# for this other is itself. -his sublation in a double sense of its otherness in a double sense is at
the same time a return in a double sense into its self. 1or# firstly# through sublation# it gets bac% itself#
because it becomes one $ith itself again through the cancelling of its otherness< but secondly# it
li%e$ise gives otherness bac% again to the other self(consciousness# for it $as a$are of being in the
other# it cancels this its o$n being in the other and thus lets the other again go free.
5larification on &$6>
-he &$6 is unachievable. Its essence is that is must be attempted to actualize# but never can. -his
creates a process of becoming the &$6 instead of being the &$6. &eing is an e"pression of self $hile
becoming is an e"pression of the lac% of a self and incompleteness. -he &$6 is disordered.
("e#eu$e# ;illes and 1eli" %uattari. 19&0. A Thousand +lateaus
Why not walk on your head, sing with your sinuses, see through your skin, breathe
with your belly: the simple Thing, the Entity, the full Body, the stationary Voyage,
Anorexia, cutaneous Vision, oga, !rishna, "o#e, Experimentation$