There is no evidence that Carl Gustav Jung was ever one of those tens of millions of fascists in Europe. Nor is there any evidence that he ever expressed support, admiration or "sympathy" for Nazism or fascism. Nor is there is any evidence that Jung ever "collaborated" in any way with fascism or Nazism.
http://egregores.blogspot.com/2011/10/c ... -nazi.html
I bring it up because "depth psychology," "transpersonal psychology" and the rest, so often celebrated in contemporary Western Buddhist writings (even roped in by Ken Jones in The New Social Face of Buddhism), is rooted in the Jungian trip. So Jung's doctrines and the political work they do is relevant. This is why our author, quoted above, is attempting to stake out a Jung that is not, in fact, a fascist. If Jungianism is a cipher for hard-right wingnuttery, then... well... someone's got some 'splainin' to do.
The trouble is that Jung was in fact a fascist, and his thinking is of a piece with fascist thought. Ernst Bloch was among the first to point this out; take a look at the first volume of The Principle of Hope (you don't have to read past page 64). Richard Wolin's book Seduction of Unreason, University of Princeton Press, dedicates a chapter to describing Jung's fascism and the usefulness of his thought to fascism (see chapter two, brilliantly titled "Prometheus Unhinged" and published earlier in the New Republic).
I think it is long past time for those who take transpersonal psychology seriously as an extension of or necessary supplement to Buddhist practice to consider carefully the historical content of this material. Does it, in fact, correspond to the aspirations one holds in Buddhist practice?