Adorno dismissed Benjamin’s stance as a psychodynamic defense mechanism.

Evidence

Adorno remained skeptical about the validity of Benjamin’s position, calling it “identification with the aggressor” in his Introduction to the Briefe, vol. 1, p. t6. “Identification with the aggressor” was one of the classic psy choanalytic defense mechanisms. See Anna Freud, The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense, rev. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 1515

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies ‘identification with the aggressor’ as Anna Freud’s psychoanalytic defense mechanism.
• XREF: Connects to Horkheimer and Adorno’s broader suspicion that working-class identification with ruling culture reflected internalized domination, as in Dialectic of Enlightenment. — connects to: Adorno’s American-written essay attacked commodified music and rebutted Benjamin’s optimism about film. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 576; Adorno rejected Benjamin’s philological method as trapped between magic and positivism. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 620; Adorno judged Benjamin’s Marxism an unwitting productive misreading, not orthodoxy — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 297 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Adorno judged Benjamin’s Marxism an unwitting productive misreading, not orthodoxy #complicates (0.78) — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 297