No description available.

Comment ce qui s'est produit à une génération précédente est fondateur de l'identité subjective à la génération suivante ? Plus spécifiquement, comment la guerre du Liban (1975-1990/91), vécue par les parents, peut être constructive ou désorganisatrice du sujet (enfant) dans sa singularité ? La transmission psychique est inévitable et fondatrice de l'identité subjective. L'étude des éléments psychiques, relevant de cette expérience violente passée, vécue par la génération précédente, permet de comprendre la participation des processus psychiques générationnels à la formation de l'identité singulière, facilitant ou entravant le travail psychique à la génération suivante. Nos hypothèses envisagent la transmission dans la relation entre le père et le fils, à partir de l'exploration des processus d'identification et de conflictualité dans le lien père-fils, de la part négative (voire traumatique) du contenu transmis et des investissements narcissiques établis entre le père et le fils. Des entretiens de recherche ont été réalisés auprès de dix familles, dont le père était un combattant pendant la guerre, ayant des enfants (garçons, adolescents). L'objectif principal est d'interroger les effets psychiques de la guerre sur le père combattant et le vécu subjectif de l'enfant, examinant les traces de l'expérience violente vécue par le père chez l'enfant. L'analyse des processus en jeu dans le lien père-fils montre des caractéristiques de transmission différentes relatives à chaque lien étudié, et des mouvements généraux de transmission. Une étude plus approfondie de trois cas accentue, principalement, trois aspects de transmission : la violence, l'énigmatique et le narcissique. Ce travail rend compte : - de la part active et créative de l'individu dans l'élaboration de ce qui est transmis à partir de la guerre du Liban ; - des fonctions intrusive et aliénante de la transmission, par rapport à des fonctions constructive et créatrice ; - de la fonction fondatrice du collectif au niveau individuel. Dans le contexte du Liban, il s'agit, principalement, d'une transmission idéologique violente de la guerre, qui paraît être un détournement de la conflictualité oedipienne et intrapsychique. / How is it that the experiences of a preceding generation are foundational to the subjective identity of the following generation? More specifically, how can the Lebanese civil war, witnessed by parents, be constructive or destructive to the subject (child) in his/her singularity? The psychological transmission is inevitable and foundational to the subject's identity. Studies on psychological elements related to that violent experience could help us comprehend the influence of generational psychological processes on singular identity formation. This facilitates or hinders the psychological development of the second generation. The principal objective of this research is to explore the effects of the war on the father (combatant) and the subjective experiences of the child through intergenerational psychological transmission. This study examines the psychological transmission through analysis of the identification process and the ensuing rivalry between father and son. This study also seeks to analyze the negative part (traumatic) of the transmitted heritage and the narcissistic investment between parent and child. Our research interviews were conducted with ten families in which the father was a combatant during the war and have adolescent children. The analysis of these processes between father and son has revealed some common characteristics among the subjects. A more detailed study of three of those cases accentuated three aspects of the transmission process: Violent, Enigmatic and Narcissistic. The study has revealed an active and innovational role by the subject in the transmission process. The results have also revealed the function of a collective component among the individuals studied. The transmission process had an intrusive and alienating function as well as a constructive and creative function. In the Lebanese context, there's a violent ideological transmission related to the war, which seems to be a diversion of the Oedipian and intrapsychic conflict.

This study investigates Hizb'allah's successful but competing dual development as an extra-institutional Shi'a social movement and an institutional political party. Hizb'allah has traditionally been studied from the perspective of one of its many natures, such as a social movement, Islamic movement, resistance, or political party, each perspective bringing with it limitations and differing interpretations of its identity, motivations, and success. The motivation behind this research was to seek an interpretation of the movement's development and success that would encompass these multiple natures. Through an interpretation of social movement ‘life-cycles', a social movement ‘development model' is proposed that accounts for contradicting theories on the ‘success' of social movements, interpreting success instead as an ability to exhibit simultaneous institutional and extra-institutional natures. The hypothesis provided in this work is that it is an ability to simultaneously exhibit institutional and extra-institutional natures that can be a source of strength and success for a movement, drawing capital from both while avoiding accountability that typically accompanies institutional politics. This challenges traditional theoretical approaches in terms of linear life-cycles with few paths for the social movement to choose from. In turn, questions arise regarding notions of social movement life-cycles being uni-directional, continuously progressing towards ‘institutionalization' or demise. Ideas of an ‘end-date' or ‘inevitable outcome' of social movements are also confronted. This interdisciplinary study is conducted by means of media, archival, and empirical research (participant observation, interviews, and surveys), focusing on changing constituent perceptions of the movement between 1985 and 2013. It is also argued that Hizb'allah's strength is its ability to draw from both extra-institutional and institutional resources while simultaneously avoiding accountability. However, it was also found that, by forming the 2011 governing coalition, the movement upset this balance by subjecting itself to accountability inherent in governance, in turn leading to ‘schizophrenic behaviour' as Hizb'allah sought to serve conflicting constituent and state interests. The significance of this research is that it not only provides an explanation for Hizb'allah's success, but also provides an interpretation of social movement development that accounts for multi-natured movements.