Criticism of identity fundamentalisms: Comments to the “I Sovereign” from Roudinesco

Abstract

Roudinesco, a very renowned French psychoanalyst, analyzes exacerbated ethnic or similar identities – hence the provocative expression “I Sovereign” – that demands an autonomy that is already incapable of coexisting with other autonomies. They stand as a fundamentalist reference, in the sense of not admitting contestation or even dialogue, preventing coexistence in society. The basic thesis suggests that, in order to live in society, it is necessary not to be fundamentalist, that is, to know how to live with diversity, a current fundamental theme of the most open democracies. France is in the backdrop of an Enlightenment European experience that adopted the secularity of the State, the “Lights” (Enlightenment) in scientific-cultural terms, democracy, and the republic. The book still aligns with some supremacist Eurocentric expectations, such as that some universalism of Human Rights is possible, while today it is argued that validity can only be relative, although not relativistic: historical and evolutionary dynamics are always valid, but in a relative way, not by default, but because it is its own way of asserting itself. While the Author's critical analysis of fundamentalist identity experiences is very vehement and well documented, there are still some colonialist remnants of a civilization that likes to be used as a model. Fundamentalist, or even terrorist, identity struggles are not acceptable, but one cannot forget that they react to European colonialism and the like, which also needs to be challenged.