Horizontal and vertical unconscious

I came across a paper of mine on horizontal and vertical unconscious that I presented at a psychotherapy conference in Russia a year ago. In it, I presented that division and the idea that in my work with clients, I increasingly see vertical unconscious, a lack of connection in a person’s mind with what they are aware of. Reflecting on this, I realize that it is necessary to recognize and define the defense mechanisms that sustain this vertical unconscious as the lack of consciousness of the connections between the phenomena that a person is aware of. 
Let me clarify the terms first. I use the term horizontal unconscious to refer to a phenomenon that is typically defined as the unconscious in psychoanalysis. This is what has been “pushed into the basement” through repression and its auxiliary defense mechanisms, hidden from consciousness because it is unacceptable (to the person’s Superego, to society…). Between consciousness and the “basement of the unconscious” is a horizontal “barrier” established by our Ego to prevent the “criminals from the basement” from coming out into consciousness. 
Vertical unconscious is not a “basement,” but rather the unconsciousness of the connections between the phenomena we are conscious of. 

The basic defense mechanism is splitting, tearing connections, and eliminating conscious of the relationships among phenomena. Or even worse, it is a defense against connecting, against creating links in the mind between phenomena that are actually connected. When we communicate with someone whose horizontal unconscious mechanisms are at play, we have a sense that they are hiding something, repressing, or “sweeping it under the carpet.” With a person who uses vertical unconscious mechanisms, we feel that they are “blind to reality,” that we need to draw attention to some connections for them that are obvious to us. There may also be a feeling that they are “dull” or too authoritarian, that they refuse to think or connect, that they don’t see something that is “clear as bright day.” 

Earlier psychoanalysts were the “critical edge of society,” criticizing a repressive society that created neuroses. Nowadays, I have the impression that psychoanalytic “lambs” have become silent when it comes to criticizing and explaining the mechanisms of societal influence on the negative aspects of personality formation. 

What are the defense mechanisms operating in the vertical unconscious? How and why does society encourage unthinking, failing to recognize the connections between phenomena in reality? 
I will first mention some defense mechanisms I have noticed, which I do not find on the lists of common defense mechanisms in the literature. I will also give them some “working” names.

Dulling or desensitization: When faced with a large amount of intense information, we reduce our emotional reactions to it and the importance we attribute to it. This is why the media struggles to attract the attention of a desensitized audience with spectacles and headlines that start with “shocking, terrifying, unimaginable…” 

Reduction: To avoid painful thinking about the connections among phenomena, which can be complex, requiring weighing, reflection, detailed information, and effort, we reduce our knowledge about that phenomenon to a few simple sentences (which are usually served to us by the media or someone who propagates in our lives). Based on this reduced knowledge, we adopt a stance that we do not want to think about further and refuse discussions on the topic. 

 Distancing: “This doesn’t concern me, it has nothing to do with my life… I’m minding my own business.” This mechanism is quite desirable for those in power and any kind of control over people. 

Distraction: Diverting attention from uncomfortable connections in life to some activity that distracts the mind from life (scrolling through social media, games, reality shows…).

Superficiality: The “a little bit of everything, not enough of anything” strategy, flitting about, lack of depth, “mental promiscuity.” 

Degrading and mocking of thinking: “What are you philosophizing about, complicating things, theorizing some conspiracies…,” “things are simple, there’s nothing to investigate, it’s obvious…” (and then a stance or thought that has already been adopted by the mechanism of reduction or a product of someone’s propaganda). 

There are more of these defense mechanisms, but to avoid making this too long, I have to be superficial on social media. Feel free to add any in the comments. Do you also have the impression like I do, that the development of these mechanisms of dulling or defensive mechanisms, if you prefer a more academic term, is wholeheartedly encouraged by society, societal institutions, the media, education…?