Breaking the cycles of polarization, fragmentation, and alienation

Robert Caper’s A Mind of One’s Own (1999) remains profoundly relevant today as we grapple with increasing polarization, social fragmentation, and alienation in contemporary society. Caper uses psychoanalysis to show how cultivating an independent mind can handle life’s complexities without being swayed by others or rigid beliefs. His work helps to explains the relationship between individual psychology, personal alienation and society, making it relevant to today’s sociopolitical landscape.

Following the tradition of Melanie Klein and Wilfred Bion, Caper highlights the fundamental tension between the desire for an independent, reality-oriented self and the regressive pull toward defensive splitting - where we divide the world into rigid binaries of good and bad, right and wrong. This dynamic is painfully visible in the current climate of social and political polarization, where people, rather than tolerating ambiguity and complexity, retreat into echo chambers and ideological camps. We see these complex trends not only in the US, where studies show the reinforcing dynamics of political affiliations (e.g. See Grossmann & Hopkins, 2024).

Caper’s discussion of projective identification is particularly illuminating. He explains how individuals and groups project their own insecurities and anger onto others. Failure to contain conflicting viewpoints results in societal breakdown and hostility. Thus, fault-lines increase between rich and poor, North and South, the political left and right.

At the heart of the issue is a profound difficulty in acknowledging the coexistence of good and bad within the self and others. Instead of allowing for mature, reparative thought processes, public discourse is increasingly dominated by destructive splitting. Social movements, political debates, and even personal interactions are often governed by an “all-or-nothing” mentality. This mentality treats dissent as betrayal and eliminates nuance. What we need is more self-reflection, empathy, and the tolerance of difference.

Caper emphasizes individual psychic integration for psychological maturity, not reliance on external authorities. This challenge is particularly pressing in the digital age, where algorithms reinforce cognitive biases and discourage independent thought. His insights push us toward cultivating a capacity for negative capability. This term, borrowed from the English poet John Keats, denotes the capacity to withstand uncertainty and ambiguity, without rushing topremature conclusions.

For organizations, Caper’s ideas suggest the importance of holding environments—spaces where individuals can process anxieties without resorting to defensive polarizations. This has direct implications for workplace well-being, educational institutions, and community initiatives.

How can we create environments where conflicting ideas can be engaged with constructively, rather than reflexively dismissed or pathologized? This requires individuals and groups to contain and hold their anxieties, instead of splitting and projecting. Thus, people would have to take on a meditative, receptive state of equanimity, enabling negative capability.

Examples of such approaches include Herbert Kelman’s interactive problem solving and peace process in the Middle East (Kelman, 2005). We also see the managed tensions described in a study “Bringing Together” by Linda Jakob Sadeh and Tammar B. Zilber (Sadeh & Zilber, 2019). Finally, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa offers yet another model. While none of these are perfect solutions, they take a reparative stance, moving from blame to reclaiming self and breaking the vicious cycles of hatred.

Ultimately, “A Mind of One’s Own” provides a lens to critique societal hyperactivity, dogmatism, and reactionary movements, that characterize much of contemporary society. In today’s world, where both progressive and conservative factions often mobilize through emotionally charged outrage rather than reflective discourse, Caper’s work suggests the need for a more grounded, reparative approach to social change. Only by fostering independent thoughts and emotional containment can we reclaim a sense of unity without erasing the richness of human experience.

INSEAD The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations OPUS - An Organisation Promoting Understanding of Society SingHealth #systems psychodynamics #PoliticsandSociety #EMC

Selected resources:

Caper, R. A. (1999). A mind of one’s own: A Kleinian view of self and object (Vol. 32). Routledge. http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=none&isbn=9781134638291

Grossmann, M., & Hopkins, D. A. (2024). Polarized by Degrees: How the Diploma Divide and the Culture War Transformed American Politics (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009057141

Kelman, H. C. (2005). Interactive problem solving in the Isreali-Palestinian Case (R. Fisher, Ed.; pp. 2–28). Lexington Books.

Sadeh, L. J., & Zilber, T. B. (2019). Bringing “Together”: Emotions and Power in Organizational Responses to Institutional Complexity. Academy of Management Journal, 62(5), 1413–1443. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.1200