Why traditional psychoanalysis might be a tool for suppressing human desire and capitalism

Ideas & Philosophy · Published 3 October 2026 Swipe more like this →

In short: In their 1972 work Anti-Oedipus, Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari argued that the Freudian focus on the family unit serves to control human desire and reinforce capitalist structures. By replacing the ego-driven subject with the concept of desiring-machines, they proposed a radical new way to understand social and political life.

Published in 1972, Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia emerged from the collaboration between French philosopher Gilles Deleuze and psychiatrist Félix Guattari. The text serves as a blistering critique of traditional psychoanalysis, particularly the Lacanian and Freudian frameworks that prioritize the family—the Oedipal triangle—as the primary lens for understanding human personality. Deleuze and Guattari argued that these models function as mechanisms of social control, effectively domesticating desire to ensure it remains compatible with the requirements of the capitalist state.

Central to their project is the development of 'schizoanalysis,' a practice that rejects the idea of the ego-driven subject. Instead, they view individuals as 'desiring machines'—libidinally diffuse entities that interact with the social, historical, and economic world. Unlike classical Marxism, which often treats desire as part of the ideological 'superstructure,' Deleuze and Guattari insist that desire is part of the economic 'base.' They argue that social and political formations, such as banks, armies, and nations, are directly invested with libidinal energy, capable of arousing individuals independently of their personal interests.

The authors categorize these social libidinal investments into two poles: a paranoiac, reactionary pole and a schizoid, revolutionary pole. By framing schizophrenia as a form of rebellion against the system's tyrannical imperatives, they seek to 'deterritorialize' identity and undermine fixed truths. This approach aligns with the 'micropolitics of desire,' focusing on the struggles of marginalized groups rather than the 'total social revolution' sought by traditional Marxist intellectuals. Ultimately, the work encourages a functional evaluation of how desire is invested in the world, suggesting that the most potent political forces are those that bypass familial metaphors entirely.

General information, not professional advice. Spotted an error? Flag the card or see corrections and complaints.

Intellect Plus is a visual educational discovery platform for exploring fascinating facts and ideas. Brain Food, Not Brain Rot. What is Intellect Plus?

Related

• Why Félix Guattari believed traditional psychoanalysis was a tool for capitalist social control
• Why your deepest desires are not actually your own, according to René Girard
• Why did the father of psychoanalysis believe our dreams hold the keys to our psyche?
• How post-war leaders weaponized Freud to engineer social consent
• Why Otto Rank argued that birth trauma is the true origin of human anxiety
• Antiochus of Ascalon sought to rescue Platonism by blending it with Stoic certainty.
• Is anti-Americanism a consistent political stance or just a collection of historical prejudices?
• The Stoic philosopher who coined the term misogyny while defending the sanctity of marriage
• Was this Jesuit priest a bridge between Eastern mysticism and Western Christian tradition?
• Did the founder of Cynicism actually meet the man who made it famous?
• Can reason replace revelation? The provocative philosophy of England’s most notorious eighteenth-century freethinker.
• Why did the most learned man of the seventeenth century spend his life hiding?

More in Philosophers · More in Ideas & Philosophy · Latest · A–Z · All topics