Page 1

Communitarian, Roudinesco betrays Freud’s thought1; he never showed solidarity with Zionism in Palestine (Français : Communautariste, Roudinesco trahit la pensée de Freud ; il ne s'est jamais solidarisé avec le sionisme en Palestine)

To mutilate, invade, enslave, dominate, normalize, intimidate, humiliate, domesticate, banalize,...

"As a Jew, I was ready to enter into the opposition and give up getting on with the compact majority." 2

Despite his conviction that Moses was Egyptian, Freud once pretended – in private towards a leader of the Keren Ha Yesod (Jewish resettlement foundation in Palestine) – that Palestine was the ancestral land of the Jews (*), which is no longer believable since the works of the Egyptologists Joseph Davidovits 3 and Messod and Roger Sabbah4: "I want to assure you that I know very well how your foundation is an effective, powerful and beneficial instrument for the installation of our people on the land of their ancestors." 5

But, in spite of Roudinesco who long pretended that the Shoah would justify Zionism and that the first of the below four stands by Freud would only be an opinion without ideological nature, his epistolary sympathy to the Keren Ha Yesod (Jewish resettlement foundation in Palestine) remained merely diplomatic. On the one hand, it never spread to solidarity; he never made a gift to the foundation. On the other hand, the above empathic discourse is ambiguous; Freud has only contempt for nationalism and religion and we are going to see that he clearly disapproved a Zionism that intends to invade Palestine. He only shows compassion towards it and sticks to good words. His repeated stands testify to that:

Roudinesco E. À propos d'une lettre inédite de Freud sur le sionisme et la question des lieux saints . Cliniques méditerranéennes 2004/2 (no 70), pages 5 à 17. 2 Freud S. lettre du 6 mai 1926, Correspondance 1873-1939, Paris, Gallimard, 1967. (*)(*) On that topic, see Bertaux-Navoiseau M. The birth of Judaism, between exegesis and Egyptology. 3 Davidovits J. La Bible avait raison. Paris: Jean-Cyrille Godefroy; 2005. 4 Sabbah M. et R. Les secrets de l’Exode. Paris : Jean-Cyrille Godefroy ; 2000. 5 Freud S. Lettre du 20 juin 1935 à Leib Jaffé, citée par Jacquy Chemouny, Freud et le sionisme, Paris, Solin, 1988, p. 127 et 266. 1

1/ In 1930, he denounces the racism of Zionism in Palestine in a letter in which he refuses to publicly approve it. That letter will remain secret during forty-three years. Here is a significant excerpt of it: "It seems to me that it would have been more reasonable to create a Jewish home on a historically non-mortgaged soil, but I know that for such a rational aim, the enthusiasm of the masses and cooperation of the rich could never have been created. I find with regret that the unrealistic fanaticism of our people is partly responsible for the awakening of the mistrust of the Arabs. I can not find in me any sympathy for this misguided piety that makes a national religion with the remains of the wall Herod, hurting the sensitivity of the natives."6 7

Contrary to Roudinesco's title, that letter was published in 1973 by the review Freudiana (cf. note 5). 2/ On the same day, he sends a similar letter to Einstein who had made him the same claim: "I cannot find in myself a shadow of sympathy for this misguided piety which makes up a national religion from the wall of Herod, and which, for the love of a few stones, is not afraid to hurt the feelings of the natives. "8

Five years later, Einstein was convinced to the point of reproducing Freud's terms: "In my opinion, it would be more reasonable to reach an agreement with the Arabs based on a peaceful common life than to create a Jewish state... My awareness of the essential nature of Judaism runs up against the idea of a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a project of temporal power, no matter how modest. I fear the internal damage that Judaism will suffer because of the development of our ranks, of a narrow nationalism... We are no longer the Jews of the Maccabean period. Becoming a nation in the political sense of the word would amount to turn away from the spiritualization of our community that we owe to the genius of our prophets." Quoted by Moshe Menuhin, The Decadence of Judaism In Our Time, 1969, p. 324.

3/ In 1934, in a significant way since in the Hebrew translation of Totem and taboo, he declares himself: "unable to participate in its (of the Jewish people) nationalist ideals" 9

6 Freud S. Lettre du 26 février février 1930 à Chaim Koffler (membre viennois du Keren Ha Yesod). Freudiana 1973: 19. 7 Roudinesco E. À propos d'une lettre inédite de Freud sur le sionisme et la question des lieux saints. See the article on the net. 8 Freud S. Extrait d'une lettre à Albert Einstein du 26 février 1930, citée par Peter Gay, Freud, une vie, Paris Hachette, 1991, p. 688. 9 Introduction to the Hebrew translation of Totem and taboo. 1934. Quoted by Gay P. in Freud, a life of our time. London - Melbourne: J. M. Dent & sons ltd.; 1988. p. 599.

4/ Roudinesco tells us: "… upon his arrival in London in 1938, when the English representative of Keren Ha Yesod asked him again for a letter of support, Freud replied again negatively. The anti-Semitic persecutions that had forced him to leave Vienna had not changed his opinion. He still felt solidarity with his people, but he continued to hate all forms of religion, including Judaism. He accepted with difficulty the idea that a Jewish state could be viable precisely because such a state, claiming to be a kind of "Jewish being," could in no way, in its view, become secular.": "Although I am a good Jew who has never renounced Judaism, I cannot ignore my totally negative attitude towards all religions, including Judaism, which differentiates me from my fellow Jews and makes me unfit for the role you would like to assign to me." 10

Freud does deny Judaism; he denies all religions. The letter to Leib Jaffé here above quoted was not any more than the others accompanied with a check. Freud is diplomatic and warm towards the neurotics his possible customers, but without ever doing anything concrete in their way, according to the psychoanalytic rule. Resolutely ideological – and prophetical – those stands severely criticize the Zionist fanaticism, colonialism, and racism. With exemplary compassion, Freud did his utmost to spare the sensitivities of Zionists but he never showed solidarity with them, quite the contrary, he vigorously criticized them, all the more firmly opposing their nationalism that it is of religious nature. First, he reproves the invasion of Palestine narrowly linked with Judaism and the circumcision, a return for the gift of the land of Canaan (Genesis 17). Second, as an atheist, he totally opposes the idea of a state that would put at its principle the only religion utterly racist since based upon a physical discrimination. He had prophesized the hatred we are the witnesses of. An adamant opponent of religions, and very particularly of the circumcising ones 11, Freud is a community man proud of his Jewishness. If he did not make the analysis of sexual mutilation as the worst racism 12, we may not suspect him of belonging to the obese communitarianism that states that wanting to forbid circumcision amounts to wanting to chase the Jews.

10 Freud S. cité par Jacquy Chemouny, Freud et le sionisme, Paris : Solin ; 1988, p. 127 et 266. 11 Bertaux-Navoiseau M. Freud and circumcision, a chronicle of an unconscious trauma. 12 Bertaux-Navoiseau M. Between barbarity and exclusion, circumcision, an artificial racism masked

behind religion, tradition, culture and folklore and the greatest crime against humanity, a catalyst of fanaticism, terrorism, war, genocide and feminicide

Profile for Bertaux-Navoiseau Michel

Communitarian, Roudinesco betrays Freud who never showed solidarity with Zionism in Palestine  

Communitarian, Roudinesco betrays Freud who never showed solidarity with Zionism in Palestine