Social stability is maintained by libidinal ties between classes, not just coercion
Evidence
Psychoanalysis will assist sociology significantly here, since the coherence and stability of a society is not merely formed and guaranteed by mechanical or rational factors (compulsion by the authority of the state, shared self-interest, etc.) but also by a series of libido relations within society, and in particular between members of the various different classes (cf. the infantile ties which link the petty bourgeoisie with the ruling class, and the intellectual intimidation resulting from this). — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 232
Categorization
- XREF: This is the embryo of the Frankfurt School’s analysis of working-class submission to authority later developed in Studies in Prejudice and Marcuse’s work on authoritarian character. — connects to: Erotic drives adapt to social conditions while self-preservation drives resist them — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 330; Social change outpacing libidinal adjustment creates explosive political conditions — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 331; Social hierarchy is maintained by dominants and subordinates cooperatively — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 3212 (+2 more)
- ADDENDUM: Extends the ‘On Sacrifice’ essay’s theme of how stratified societies sustain themselves by non-economic bonds — here libidinal/psychological cement, there ritual/religious cement.
Broader Connections
- Cooperation rests on coercion, interests, values, and personal bonds
#expands(0.82) — Diego Gambetta, Trust - Making and Breaking Cooperative…, 2202 - Erotic drives adapt to social conditions while self-preservation drives resist them
#expands(0.80) — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 330 - Social change outpacing libidinal adjustment creates explosive political conditions
#expands(0.80) — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 331 - Social hierarchy is maintained by dominants and subordinates cooperatively
#corroborates(0.75) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 3212