French neuropsychiatrist Boris Cyrulnik, one of the leading figures associated with the development of the concept of resilience, has warned that societies facing prolonged uncertainty risk turning towards authoritarian leaders who promise security rather than pursuing social renewal. In an interview with El País, Cyrulnik argued that the aftermath of major crises can lead societies in very different directions, depending on how they respond to trauma, insecurity and social disruption.
Cyrulnik, born in Bordeaux in 1937, has drawn heavily on his own childhood experience in developing his understanding of trauma and recovery. At the age of six, four armed German officers detained him because he was Jewish. He subsequently spent years hiding from the Gestapo and survived, while his parents were deported to Auschwitz and never returned. “Many investigations, like mine, begin from one’s own experience,” he told El País.
An ethologist and neuropsychiatrist, Cyrulnik has also served as an adviser to French President Emmanuel Macron and chaired the Commission on the first 1,000 days established by Macron after arriving at the Élysée. The commission examined how the earliest period of life influences children’s development, including their ability to communicate and form relationships. His latest book, Cuando el amor se vuelve apego, published by Paidós in 2026, explores the distinction between love and attachment.
Cyrulnik explained that resilience originally described what happened after catastrophes such as floods and fires, when another form of life emerged. Psychologist Emmy E. Werner later transferred the concept into psychology to explain how traumatised children could develop a different way of living after suffering severe shocks. For Cyrulnik, resilience remains fundamentally the process of beginning a new development after trauma.
He argued that major historical transformations often follow catastrophes. Citing the Italian Renaissance, which followed a plague epidemic, he said societies can eventually change after devastating events, although meaningful evolution can take decades. He compared this with the development and eventual acceptance of the contraceptive pill, which was discovered in 1929 but authorised in 1967, requiring decades of philosophical debate before becoming accepted.
Yet Cyrulnik warned that societies emerging from catastrophe have three possible paths: continuing as before, turning towards an authoritarian leader who promises security, or pursuing a form of renewal. He expressed concern that more countries are becoming authoritarian as socially disorganised and violent societies struggle to determine what to do next.
He pointed to Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro as examples of leaders who have benefited from such conditions and warned of the political risks facing France as Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella gain greater prominence. According to Cyrulnik, political movements can exploit social disorder by claiming to identify the source of society’s problems and promising simple solutions, including targeting foreigners or minorities.
The neuropsychiatrist also linked growing anxiety among young people to political attitudes. He argued that excessive pressure at school can turn education into a source of fear, while prolonged stress and disrupted sleep can contribute to wider social problems. He said greater time spent by parents with children during the earliest stages of life could help establish greater confidence and reduce depression and violence.
Cyrulnik also raised concerns about excessive screen use. While describing digital devices as powerful communication tools, he argued that they should not replace human relationships. He said more than three hours of screen use a day for an adult was associated with a fourfold increase in the risk of depression, while excessive exposure among preverbal children could contribute to language delays.
He stressed that parents should provide an example by limiting their own use of phones and screens and encouraging activities such as theatre and sport. Screens, he said, are useful instruments but carry secondary effects, including isolation and altered relationships.
His understanding of attachment also feeds into his political analysis. Cyrulnik distinguishes love, which he describes as an intense and immediate emotional experience, from attachment, which develops through prolonged emotional stability and becomes associated with memory and reassurance. A secure network of family members and companions, he argues, can reduce the desire for authoritarian leadership because people feel less threatened by uncertainty.
Asked about France’s next elections, Cyrulnik said he was worried because the political right was well positioned. He argued that it is difficult to debate with political, religious or economic fanatics because of the strength of their convictions. Referring to Trump, he said: “If you do not think like him, you are an idiot.”
Cyrulnik rejected the idea that greater female political leadership would necessarily make societies less violent, noting that women can also be attracted to leaders such as Trump and citing Margaret Thatcher, Catherine of Russia and Margaret of France as examples of women who exercised power violently. The difference, he argued, is that women have historically reached positions of power less frequently.
The interview with El País presents Cyrulnik’s central argument as a warning about the political consequences of insecurity: societies that fail to rebuild social bonds after catastrophe may seek certainty in authoritarian leadership, while stronger relationships and greater social security can create the conditions for a different path — one based on renewal rather than fear.
