The Scapegoat of an Entire Continent: the Case of Novak Djoković’s Deportation from Australia in 2022
This article, which is only a part of a longer paper, attempts to give a glimpse of the illustration of the fourth basic assumption of Incohesion: Aggregation / Massification ((ba) I:A/M), presented at the recent Belgrade GASi Symposium in August 2023. The illustration used as an example the global event of deportation of Novak Djoković, the Serbian tennis player, from Australia in January 2022. The audience at the presentation was offered with some food for thought on how the symbolic figure of Djoković, representing inter alia individualism, stirred up unconscious fantasies of traumatised continent offering the stage for life-theatre drama depicting the (ba) I:A/M.
PROLOGUE – Setting the scene: unprecedented social trauma, fear of annihilation / profound helplessness and failed dependency
The theory of the fourth basic assumption of Incohesion: Aggregation / Massification, highlights that incohesion is a manifestation within the “external” world of the fear of annihilation which, in turn, is a product of traumatic experience (Hopper, 2003). This means that it is present in traumatised social systems such as the one we all experienced during the pandemic – when the whole world almost stopped. Central to this trauma was the fear of literal annihilation by a virus[1]which is spread through contacts. Unconsciously, fears of disintegration, helplessness, abandonment and slow death must have been magma-dense beneath the surface.
During the pandemic, the role of dependency on ‘parental figures’ was mainly embodied by hospitals and healthcare systems, which were not ready for this new social role. Therefore, population worldwide was experiencing consciously and unconsciously failed dependency from one of the major ‘parental figures’ i.e. healthcare system.
According to Hopper, phenomenology of failed dependency reflects itself in psychic paralysis and death of psychic vitality, and he argues that the psychic paralysis is characterised by fission and fragmentation (Hopper, 2014). Therefore, to save the health of individual citizens as well as the health system, during the first phase of the pandemic, the governments resorted to an organised actual fragmentation process through advice given to citizens to remain at their homes, which included very stringent lockdowns. According to the theory of (ba) I:A/M, fragmentation is the first step towards breaking down of the social tissue in a society which experiences failed dependency. In the second stage of the pandemic, once the vaccines were developed, all governmental efforts were invested in mass vaccination.
This was global context setting the scene for the drama of Novak Djoković’s deportation from Australia. But before we dive into that event, for those who may not know much about Djoković, here are some basic information about our illustration story’s main character.
At the time of presentation, Djoković held 23 Grand Slam titles, and he has been number one tennis player in the world for seven years. He was born in Belgrade and he is an ethnic Serb. Djoković has been a long-time rival of Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal – usually referred to as the Big Three in tennis. Djoković earned the respect of his tennis colleagues due to his demonstrated mental strength.
Part I: (ba) I:A/M – Oscillation between the states of aggregation and massification
In Australia, where our scapegoating story develops, the governmental requests towards citizens to adhere to strict social isolation was extremely demanding, and especially towards the citizens of Melbourne – the host of the 2022 Australian Open (AO). Melbourne underwent a series of the strictest lockdowns in the world. The feelings of helplessness and abandonment must have been extraordinarily high. All hopes for relief were put into vaccination programme, which was especially efficient and successful in Australia. Therefore, much needed social rallying was implemented through mass vaccination, clinging to vaccine as the object of hope and protection as Australia was conditionally opening up its borders for the Australian Open. This event could have been seen in the social unconscious of the Australians as a transitional space (Winnicott, 1971) where through playing tennis within this “intermediate area” renewal of national and international connectedness could happen.
The measures introduced by the Australian government oscillated between the aggregation (represented through social distancing, lockdown and, at times, enforced physical isolation) and the massification (represented through mass vaccination programme and the absolutistic policies on vaccination). So, a citizen who was in an aggregate/isolated physical state was at the same time requested to psychologically participate in mass pro-vaccination attitude and hold the inner tension between the two.
Part II: (ba) I:A/M – Manifestations of aggregates and masses
According to Hopper, aggregates and masses, like all social formations, are manifest in typical patterns of interaction, normation, and communication, as well as styles of thinking and feeling, and leadership and followership (Hopper, 2003). For this illustration, we can propose a few examples. Regarding patterns of interaction, there were subgroups and contra-groups with regards to vaccination status. Those vaccinated were allowed to commute, work and have more social interaction as compared to those who were in the contra-group of vaccine hesitant. As regards normation, those who were unvaccinated were regarded as ignorant and conflicting. Additionally, when we think of normation, there were government calls for total uniformity of beliefs in vaccine as the source of protection. Regarding communication styles, those who refused the vaccination, communicated in euphemisms such as “this virus is just like a flu”, expressing relativization of the danger and avoidance of responsibility. Communication style of the authorities, had the feature of impersonality easily felt in the vocabulary such as “essential worker”, “flattening the curve”, “herd immunity”, etc.
Part III: (ba) I:A/M – regulation of aggression
Hopper underlines within his theory of the (ba) I:A/M that the aggressive feelings and aggression within aggregates and masses warrant special attention, and that one should especially distinguish targets, functions and forms of aggressive feelings (Hopper, 2003). In this illustration, the obvious target of displacement of aggressive feelings is Novak Djoković, as he was seen as vaccine hesitant. The function of this particular aggression targeting, entirely supporting Hopper’s theoretical position, is to “maintain pressure on people and sub-groups to comply with and conform to various moral norms which are felt to be important to identity of the group, especially when the survival of the group is threatened” (Hopper, 2003). The third aspect of aggressive feelings to distinguish is their form (Hopper, 2003); and in the case of Djoković the aggressive feelings took the form of both verbal and non-verbal attack. Verbal attacks on Djoković were practiced by Australian politicians, media and social media comments, echoing traumatofilic venting of difficult stories connected to hardships of strict lockdowns. As regards non-verbal attacks, they manifested through keeping Novak in the isolation in Melbourne Airport immediately upon his arrival, and then by ordering his detention.
Through the Djoković case, we could observe four aspects of how aggressive feelings and aggression become essential to the maintenance of massification. In the mentioned aspect of the pandemic when mass vaccination pressure had to be secured, there was development and maintenance of ‘moral superiority’ by those who are at the core of the group (vaccinated) towards those who are at the periphery of it (Hopper, 1981). In line with (ba) I:AM, this is mainly done through manipulation of judgement norm. We can say that the main norm was – in order to preserve life, one should get vaccinated. The norm is further operationalised in policy that all foreigners that enter Australia need to be fully vaccinated or will be denied entry – so, fairly simple “no jab – no entry”. This must have been the wide-held belief among citizens of Australia, until the moment that Djoković tweeted he was coming to Australia on medical exemption permission. He was the “whistle-blower”, announcing to the Australian public that there is another way of entering the continent other than what they were publically led to believe. This was the case for at least two participants of the AO, who entered Australia prior to Djoković[2]. So, citizens were led to believe that all will be treated equally, but through the case of Djoković and the other two AO participants, it became apparent that the Australian authorities exercise also some other rules in addition to those they publically proclaimed.
This further fuelled aggressive feelings, and in line with the (ba) I:AM, we could observe this particular target defined as immoral and criminal, through global media tornado following Djoković’s arrival to Australia. Additionally, we could also observe another element of the (ba) I:AM – the process of anonymisation, which in essence is an attack on personal identity and confidence (Hopper, 2003). Only in few days, Novak was turned from the number one in the world of tennis to just Novaxx. The next form of aggression according to (ba) I:A/M is shunning. In our illustration, this was exemplified in keeping Djoković in the detention centre for refugees and asylum seekers.
Part IV: (ba) I:A/M – scapegoating
As the ultimate expression of social and cultural purification (Hopper, 2003), the fourth form of aggression according to (ba) I:A/M i.e. banishment was implemented in Djoković’s case through deportation. During the presentation we asked ourselves why Djoković had a valence for this particular role suction (Fritz; Bion) of a scapegoat. Very often media have wondered why he was such a polarising figure. In the presentation it was suggested that Djoković was not the one who was generating polarisation, but that he was on the receiving end of polarising worldviews, reflecting oscillation between the aggregation and massification processes that is so present in today’s world, due to unconscious envy. Arguments were given that he was envied because he actually has the capacity to keep the tension of opposites within himself. During the presentation, special attention was given to the second feature of those who are scapegoated according to (ba) I:A/M. This relates to the topic of younger siblings in sibling rivalry, recognisable in the fierce rivalry between ‘older’ siblings – Nadal and Federer – and ‘younger’ sibling Djoković.
Hopper’s online lecture “The Return of the Scapegoat” was recalled, because it underlined that people who are despised can be often envied, and some of Djoković’s capacities that could be universally envied were described. So, what is being done with those objects of envy who have capacity to get away with their behaviour? Hopper suggests that those are the people who are sent away, and not only sent away, but they are sent away to the East. In the case of Djoković, this was true in both metaphorical and literal sense.
Part V: (ba) I:A/M – characteristic roles and personifications
In the presentation a number of roles and personifications characteristic to appear in the context of (ba) I:A/M were described, such as “lone wolf”, “cheerleaders”, “jester/fool”, “stable cleaner” and “peacemaker” (Hopper, 2014). In this snippet of the presentation, let’s recall the role of Nick Kyrgios,[3] the Australian tennis player, who during the event behaved from two roles – of a “lone wolf” and a “jester/fool”. He was the only one who stood up to the mass opinion of criticizing Djoković and publically stated the following: “I feel quite embarrassed as an Australian athlete that’s seen what this guy has done for us and the sport.”[4] At the same time, the majority of players were taking the roles of “cheerleaders”, some even mocking Djoković in public.
EPILOGUE – G.O.A.T.[5] who refused to remain a SCAPEGOAT
Following the described “purification” of Australian continent that enabled the release of COVID-generated societal aggression and ventilation of trauma stories through deportation of Novak Djoković, many were wondering if he would ever come back to Australia. Not only that Djoković returned to Australia in 2023, but he majestically won his 10th AO Grand Slam title in January 2023, proving his undisputable mental resilience and strength. He has risen above traumatic experience, potentially due to the existence of “Tesla transformers” in the Serbian social unconscious (Mojović and Satarić, 2023) that have the potential to turn helplessness to hopefulness and transcend the sates of incohesion to the states of more cohesion, through genuine hope and faith in oneself by being true to one’s own identity.
This brings me to proposal for some future theoretical consideration of looking into a phenomena I dare naming ‘the Djoković effect’, meaning the quality of mental resilience and inner-leadership necessary to break the triangle trauma-victim-perpetrator and emerge victoriously from the state of incohesion.
In closing, it is important to note that I am fully aware that there are many elements of this particular story of deportation of Djoković that were not encompassed. The primary focus of this article was to try to illustrate the theory of (ba) I:/A/Musing a recent global event in an attempt to show how a theory can play out vividly as a drama in front of eyes. My hope remains that this brief illustration serves as an appreciation for having (ba) I:/A/M as a theory framework, as it certainly helped me as a trainee in group analysis to understand complex group and societal phenomena and read with enthusiasm theoretical contributions that are further developing group analytic thinking.
References
- Hopper, E. (2003); “Traumatic Experience in the Unconscious Life of Groups: The Fourth Basic Assumption: Incohesion: Aggregation/Massification or (ba) I:A/M”. International Library of Group Analysis. London.
- Hopper, E. (2014) “The theory of Incohesion: Aggregation/Massification as the fourth basic assumption in the unconscious life of groups and group-like social systems”. Nationalism and the Body Politic: Psychoanalysis and the Rise of Ethnocentrism and Xenophobia by Lene Auestad. The New International Library of Group Analysis; Routledge.
- Hopper, E. (2021) “The Return of the Scapegoat”. Online lecture organized by IL CERCHIO Associazione Italiana di Gruppoanalisi, on 4 June 2021:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IE_vvYRqv3k&ab_channel=ILCERCHIOAssociazioneItalianadiGruppoanalisi(accessed January, 2023)
- Kalmar, I. (2022) “White but not quite: Race and illiberalism in Central Europe”. The Bristol University Press website.
https://www.transformingsociety.co.uk/2022/04/20/white-but-not-quite-race-and-illiberralism-in-central-europe/ (accessed August 2023)
- Mojović, M. (2023) Tesla transformers in the analytic fields in Serbia. Developments in Field Theory for Psychotherapists, Psychoanalysts and Counsellors. Edited By Robert Snell, Richard Morgan-Jones, Del Loewenthal.London: Routledge.
- Mojović, M. & Satarić, J. (2023). Nikola Tesla and the Social Unconscious of Serbs: The Dance of Science with Poetry, and of the Earthly with the Heavenly. The Tripartite matrix in the developing theory and expanding practice of group analysis: The Social Unconscious in Persons, Groups and Societies: Vol 4 ed. Earl Hopper. London: Routledge.
- Nitzgen, D. and Hopper, E. (2017) “The concepts of the social unconscious and of the matrix in the work of S. H. Foulkes”. The Social Unconscious in Persons, Groups, and Societies Volume 3: The Foundation Matrix Extended and Re-configured, edited by Earl Hopper and Haim Weinberg. Karnac Books Ltd. London.
- Winnicott, D. W. (1971, 2005) “Transitional Objects and Transitional Phenomena”. Playing and Reality. London and New York.
[1] https://www.anu.edu.au/news/all-news/fear-of-covid-19-infection-at-all-time-high
[2] Please see: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-01-14/two-more-tennis-players-depart-australia/100756828
[3] Nicholas Kyrgios is an Australian professional tennis player, please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Kyrgios
[4] https://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/33038703/novak-djokovic-australian-open-nick-kyrgios-embarrassed-visa-saga
[5] GOAT is abbreviation used to describe the Greatest-Of-All-Time
Branka Bakić, Trainee of the Group Analytic Society Belgrade, Serbia