Over the past weekend, I've been able to continue my research into the connections/relationships between civilization, the state, and psychoanalysis
I found something I think is interesting in an abstract for a chapter in a book.
Lacan distinguished between totalitarian revolutionary movements — in which he included Maoism — and the truly revolutionary movement of Freudianism (at least as refracted by Lacan). The key issue here was that of the ‘pas-tout (not-whole)’: the Freudian revolution is that which has no ambitions to total knowledge, but allows for the fallen, divided subject. Without this pas-tout, there will always be demand for a master.
The chapter is titled Everyone Longs for a Master: Lacan and 1968, and it was written by Stephen Frosh.
I plan to get a copy of this chapter (maybe the whole book) from my library ASAP.