Search results

Abstract
Psychoanalysis is often wrongly perceived to be uninterested in history. Yet, as the most comprehensive and sophisticated basis for the exploration of human consciousness, the field of psychoanalysis, from its inception to the present, has continued to offer unprecedented insights into how we perceive, record, and share the complexities of temporality. The aim of this article is to demonstrate, with the help of various works by Walter Benjamin—works in which his attunement with psychoanalytic concepts is of special interest—that all historical writing must yield, in one way or another, to the post-Freudian description of the unconscious and its role in elaborating historians' interest in the historical as such.

Ever since Canada failed to be elected to the United Nations Security Council as a non-permanent member in June 2020, there have been calls for Ottawa to realign Canadian foreign policy with the national interest. It is hardly the first time that such a plea has been made: critics advocated similarly in the 1870s, the 1930s, the 1960s, and the 2000s. Yet, in each case, they recommended a different policy solution. Having reviewed these episodes, this essay concludes that the real debate in Canadian foreign policy has never been about the national interest, per se. To borrow from the language of strategy, Ottawa's critics have merely privileged different "ways" of achieving the same "ends," while everyone yearns for the "means" to do more.

Establishing the need for improvement -- Uplifting begins: the War of 1898 -- Money doctors, democracy doctors, and marines -- Latin American opposition and the retreat from protectorates -- Pledging to be a good neighbor -- Breaking new ground: uplifting institutions -- To improve or not to improve? The Cold War question --Cuba determines the answer -- Losing Panache, entrenching institutions -- The evolution from economic to political improvement -- Promoting good governance.

.

Yair Mintzker's book on Jew Süss raises a series of provocative questions about German history and history itself, which this forum aims to address. Specifically, it presents four reflections on Mintzker's book that cover the following range of topics: Jay Howard Geller situates Mintzker's work within the historiography on Jewish biographies and antisemitic trials; Sarah Maza explores whether Mintzker pursues the venerable task of getting to the "truth" of who Joseph Oppeinhemer was, despite his claims to the contrary; Jesse Spohnholz considers Mintzker's book as a model of microhistory; and my essay takes a broader approach by confronting the central issue of self-interest in history.