Israeli Society at a Crossroads: The Inability to Mourn
Translated & summarized from Local Call by baba
Clinical psychologist Dana Amir uses the concept of "inability to mourn" from post-Nazi Germany to analyze Israel's current societal state following the October 7th attacks. She argues that Israel faces a choice between acknowledging the destruction caused and its own role in it, or succumbing to denial and revenge, urging a confrontation with grief that includes responsibility and maintains humanity.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Israeli society is at a critical juncture regarding collective mourning after October 7th.
- The author draws parallels to post-Nazi Germany's "inability to mourn" through denial and repression.
- Israel must choose between acknowledging destruction and its role, or succumbing to denial.
- True mourning involves internal dialogue, responsibility, and maintaining human boundaries.
- Confronting the suffering of others is presented as the path to confronting one's own grief.
Israeli society is currently facing a critical juncture, prompting reflection on collective mourning and the potential consequences of its absence. Drawing parallels to Alexander and Margarete Mitscherlich's 1967 book "The Inability to Mourn," which analyzed post-Nazi Germany's response to its past, the author suggests Israel is grappling with a similar challenge.
The Mitscherlichs argued that Germany, instead of genuine mourning after Nazism, engaged in denial, emotional detachment, and repression, focusing intensely on reconstruction and economic success. This outward adaptation, they posited, was a defense mechanism to avoid confronting guilt and responsibility. The author applies this framework to Israel's current situation, asserting that the nation must acknowledge the profound destruction caused since October 7, 2023, not only to others but also by its own actions.
This acknowledgment, the author contends, is a crucial choice, distinct from political affiliations. It involves confronting the potential for denial, which can manifest as an insistence on the necessity of war in Gaza or an unwavering self-perception as the sole victim, ignoring the fine line between self-defense and a desire for ultimate revenge.
Mourning processes, the author explains, involve both releasing a lost object (person, idea, or ideal) and engaging in an ongoing internal dialogue with it. True mourning requires looking not only at what was lost but also at what was lost within oneself, a loss of humanity, a collapse of ethical boundaries, and sorrow that fuels destruction. The author questions whether Israelis are ready to engage in a dialogue with their grief that moves beyond passive victimhood to acknowledge their active role in the ongoing continuum of violence.
The opposite of refusing to mourn, the author concludes, is not the successful end of mourning and return to life, but the ability to maintain human boundaries amidst unending loss. This involves transforming sorrow from a barrier to thought into a capacity for thought, and from a blockage of vision into an expanded ability to see, including the suffering of others. Citing Kafka, the author suggests that turning away from the world's suffering is a form of suffering that could be prevented, and that confronting the other's pain is the path to confronting one's own.
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.
