- Does anyone take Jung or Freud seriously any more?
- OnlySky’s Bruce Ledewitz on the contemporary idea of “evil”;
- Robert Reich on “the worst bill in history” and fact-checking claims about tax cuts;
- How local communities fight back against ICE;
- Republicans about cuts to services: “They’ll get over it”;
- Paul Krugman on Republicans’ racist claims about Zohran Mamdani;
- Springsteen’s “Down in the Hole”.
I saw a Fb post a day or two ago — here it is, but it’s not public — that began:
My sister, who has a somewhat sentimental attachment to Jung, sent me a youtube video of a Jungian therapist explaining the rise of MAGA as a collective embrace of the American Shadow and trump as an expression of the archetype of The Fool. It makes sense, but I don’t consider it particularly useful. …
Setting aside the Trump angle, my thought was, Jung? Does anyone take his archetypes any more seriously than they do Freud’s psychoanalytic theories (id, ego, superego)? I took a psych course at UCLA and these things were discussed, but that was 50 years ago.











