The Capitalist Unconscious: Marx and Lacan

by Samo Tomšič

A major systematic study of the connection between Marx and Lacan’s workFinalist for the American Board and Academy of Psychoanalysis Book PrizeDespite a resurgence of interest in Lacanian psychoanalysis, particularly in terms of the light it casts on capitalist ideology—as witnessed by the work of Slavoj Žižek—there remain remarkably few systematic accounts of the role of Marx in Lacan’s work. A major, comprehensive study of the connection between their work, The Capitalist Unconscious resituates Marx in the broader context of Lacan’s teaching and insists on the capacity of psychoanalysis to reaffirm dialectical and materialist thought. Lacan’s unorthodox reading of Marx refigured such crucial concepts as alienation, jouissance and the Freudian ‘labour theory of the unconscious’. Tracing these developments, Tomšič maintains that psychoanalysis, structuralism and the critique of political economy participate in the same movement of thought; his book shows how to follow this movement through to some of its most important conclusions.

Genres: Psychoanalysis, Philosophy, Theory, Psychology, Politics, Nonfiction, 21st Century

248 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 2013

Reviews

[Roberto Yoed · Rating 1 out of 5]

As some reviews have already pointed out, this is useless for a marxist.

Samo misunderstands the following concepts: ideology, class consciousness, labour, labour power, surplus, the eleventh thesis on Feuerbach, commodity fetishism, etc.

Also the author thinks Stalin was a positivist which should be enough proof to demonstrate that Samo didn't read nor comprehend marxism.

[Grace · Rating 1 out of 5]

maybe interesting if youre interested in the development of lacan's thought but has very little interest for someone interested in how marxism and lacanian psychoanalysis can converge and supplement each other

[Göker Makaskıran · Rating 4 out of 5]

Yazarla yapılmış bir söyleşiyi iki parça halinde şuradan okuyabilirsiniz : https://www.e-skop.com/skopyazar/samo...

[Chris · Rating 3 out of 5]

While I ultimately agree with Tomšič's conclusion, the book felt like a huge waste of time. I can see the relevance to those who are familiar with one discipline and not the other, those being political economy and psychoanalysis. Tomšič spends a lot of time demonstrating Marx's influence on Lacan, while seemingly reducing psychoanalysis as a supplement to the Marxist project of critiquing political economy.

The conclusion of the book is the need to reintroduce a theory of the subject in order to progress a revolutionary and emancipatory project. As this is the conclusion, it seems to me that a follow up book is necessary. The real potential for psychoanalysis is its application to revolutionary politics. Understanding how psychoanalytic interventions work is crucial to disrupting the cycles of crisis caused by capitalism, but most importantly, constituting the revolutionary subject. This requires a more clinical approach to psychoanalysis. The role of the analyst's discourse applied to agitation and propaganda. The epistemological role of psychoanalytic experience and revolutionary organizing, what Lenin claimed in 'What is to be done?' "Revolutionary experience and organisational skill are things that can be acquired, provided the desire is there to acquire them, provided the shortcomings are recognised, which in revolutionary activity is more than half-way towards their removal" should be the most point of departure culminating with Mao's imperative of "Two principles must be observed: (1) Say all you know and say it without reserve; (2) don't blame the speaker but take his words as a warning."

Tomšič's book is a labor of theory which doesn't really address any practical deadlocks. But as stated, it's not a bad place to start for those interested in a bridge between Lacan and Marx. This book is definitely scholarship, which is its highlight. Tomšič draws on a lot of work by Lacan yet to be translated into English publication. But to repeat myself, it's psychoanalysis outside of its clinical settings in service of Marx's critique of political economy.

Oh and Tomšič completely botched the graph of Sexual Difference by leaving out the "a".

[Uğur · Rating 5 out of 5]

The main topic is Karl Marx's labor capital contradiction, but let me explain the topic starting from here; Freud, when he reveals the unconscious field, finds out how much this field affects consciousness, he is treated as crazy. But today, scientists are trying to determine how much of this area we use, let alone talk about the existence of an unconscious forehead. The unconscious field is the field of data and influence for man. Emotional states, thoughts, that is, the psychological state, which is completely formed by data received from the outside, are the subject of the unconscious. So, what is the most important resource that causes a person to transform through external influence and data?

Of course, the answer to this is labor. The work you give determines your psychological state in everything. By discovering this in Freud, he creates a labor-centered theory of the unconscious. Although it is a field used by the system, psychoanalysis, Freud and psychoanalysis are on a completely different level.

At this point, the author Tomsic describes our capitalist unconscious within the scope of desire, libido and jouissance (this is a more accurate concept) by considering how the unconscious space caused by labor is occupied by the system and the psychological state and orientations in which a person who will become alienated even to himself is reduced.

The author has discussed Lacan at this point because Lacan is a name with great definitions related to this field. It is also one of the rare names that process the phenomenon of labor in psychology. While Lacan explained the unconscious field with a unique set of concepts, mainly jouissance, he was constantly moving from a name; Karl Marx. Because he was able to put forward the only anti-system theory and Karl Marx was able to say the only tangible word. It would be a big mistake to omit Marx when Freud and Lacan explained the unconscious with labor.

He has shown us our unconscious area formed by the phenomenon of labor, which is considered in the light of many realistic determinations from working hours, work conditions, rest time, alienation, and writes to us. It is a very productive book, but I will also have criticism. It has hardly happened to pass by without mentioning the mass media that affect the unconscious field so much. It is impossible to skip this part because Marx did not mention it. Other than that, I quite liked it.

[Marginalia Σημειώσεις στο περιθώριο]

Αναλυτική κριτική του Δημήτρη Παπαζαχαρία για το βιβλίο στο περιοδικό μας: https://marginalia.gr/arthro/i-omolog...

[Alistar Flofsky · Rating 5 out of 5]

“ For Marx, science could and should amount to the liberation of the labourer from labour, which means the liberation of the subject from the commodity form. For Freud, science could and should suspend human narcissism, which means detaching the subject from the ego and politics from private interest. Science is one of the central terrains of political struggle precisely because it became the main tool of capitalism against the realisation of political modernity. A materialist reading of modern science necessarily includes the question of its subject, as Lacan’s critical appropriation of epistemological questions constantly demonstrates. The second unrealised aspect of modernity is directly related to the first one and concerns the actualisation of the third term that drove the French Revolution, fraternité, the enigmatic signifier of communism, which is only possible under the condition that a materialist theory of the subject replaces idealist theories, through which the capitalist economy managed to take politics and the entirety of social reality as its hostage. Only then will politics be consistently in sync with modern science and inhabit the same universe.”

[Shruti Buddhavarapu · Rating 2 out of 5]

No thanks.

Also, caught myself telling a friend "the book's published by Verso, aka is unedited".

[Yiz County]

this book goes way over my hairspray

[Phillip · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is really smart (4-5 stars smart), but really difficult (hence the 3 stars). I've read a good amount of philosophy, Lacanian psychoanalysis, and Marxist theory, and much of this book went over my head. A big part of the reason is that Tomsic has really in-depth analyses of Lacan's linguistic focus, which is something I tend to struggle with.

That being said, the main thrust of this book (as I understand it) argues that psychoanalysis and Marxism (specifically as theorized by Freud and Lacan on the one side, and Marx himself on the other) effectively present many of the same insights, only they talk about things in different ways. A big focus here is on the psychoanalytic and Marxist theories of the subject, which both revolve around issues of fantasy/fetishism, misrecognition of the object of desire, and the role that the Big Other (either the Lacanian Big Other or capital as an ideology) plays in structuring desire and subjectivity. Tomsic shows that both theories begin from similar arguments that misrecognition is at the heart of contemporary subjectivity, and that the categories we typically use to define our roles within capitalist society actually reflect both our commitment to and indebtedness to the ideological systems that structure both social relations and the individual sense of identity.

[J Earl · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Capitalist Unconscious by Samo Tomsic fills a gap in English scholarship on Lacan's use of Marx in formulating his own ideas. Many of the ideas presented are not so much new as that they are brought together in a less common manner.

For readers of Marx and/or Lacan this work will largely serve to juxtapose their thought, as well as Freud's, primarily through the lens of Lacan's teaching and theorizing. While action or practice is certainly where actual change takes place, without theory there is no practice, so lamenting a lack of "clinical" application is what is actually pointless for theory must come first.

To some extent, this book continues the discussion which Tomsic himself mentions in an earlier essay: The indebtedness of Lacan’s theory to Marx’s critique reveals that the psychoanalytic engagement with social reality, too, necessarily amounts to a structural theory of crisis. (in "Psychoanalysis, Capitalism and Critique of Political Economy") It is the structuralist nature of both discourses which bring them into sync.

I would recommend this to those interested in Marx, Lacan or any form of critique of capitalism. Like any good work of scholarship there are as many questions raised as answered and there are many directions in which to take the critique.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.