Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - forbitals

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 16
121
News, Politics, and General / Re: Replies To Steve
« on: August 08, 2019, 04:51:43 pm »
https://www.madinamerica.com/2019/08/toward-critical-self-reflective-psychiatry-interview-pat-bracken/?unapproved=159370&moderation-hash=5520504dee905933904aafd5481dead8#comment-159370

Steve just because you say that Psychotherapy made you feel good, that does mean that I or anyone else have to go along with it.

Personal experience narratives are always interpretations. Evangelical Religion generates them. The Recovery Movement generates them. Psychotherapy generates them, as do lots of other things.

I say people learn more and grow more then they are actively involved and placing themselves at risk in the fight for justice and restored social and civil standing. In the vast majority of cases, psychotherapy steers people away from such. But publicly vanquishing worthy foes is always going to be the central pillar of public honor.

The therapist of course believes that the problem and the solutions lie between the client’s ears, and some people will go along with this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9FN1LMdhic

122
News, Politics, and General / Shreya
« on: August 08, 2019, 04:20:57 pm »
 Shreya,

Psychotherapy works by talking people out and by talking people down.  It is a Recovery cliché that the only person you can change is yourself.  I helped three girls put their father into our state prison.  So the cliché has no truth.

But it does hide a truth, and that is that your psychotherapist can only mess with the person who is in his or her office.

And your therapist pays a huge office rent.  He or she is never going to place themselves at risk, helping you to vanquish foes to restore your public honor.  Your therapist has signed onto a world view which says that public honor and vanquishing foes are not only unimportant, but that the ideas are morally retrograde.

The HERO'S JOURNEY - Joseph Campbell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNPcefZKmZ0

Joseph Campbell wrote of an ordeal which people need to go through.  And when this pertains to actual systemic injustice, it will mean vanquishing foes, real people who are going to try and fight back.

Well fortunately none of these hero's every walked into the office of a Psychotherapist, or they would have been talked out of it.

When you meet a psychotherapist, ask them to show you their flattened knuckles, and their knife and bullet scars.  As them how much money they have recovered for their clients.

Of course they will have done nothing, nothing which benefits their clients, except letting them talk themselves out until they give up on the idea of honor.

Shari Karney fought long and hard, to benefit survivors.  But your psychotherapist could not be a psychotherapist, if they even believed in anything like this.
https://sharikarney.com/

Were it not for Shari, the US Roman Catholic church would not have had the $2 Billion in sexual abuse judgements against it, and only because of such costs is anything changing.

"The practice of psychotherapy is wrong because it is profiting from another person's misery."
https://www.amazon.com/Against-Therapy-J-Moussaieff-Masson/dp/1567510221

123
News, Politics, and General / Stohlmann-Rainey
« on: August 08, 2019, 03:50:08 pm »
Jess Stohlmann-Rainey, not seen your name before, excellent article.

" I believed wholeheartedly that suicide “prevention” was about creating a world worth living in, and thought that the field shared that belief."

Well, nothing of the Mental Health System works like that, not the drugs, not the psychotherapy.  Its always about getting you to accept a so called life which is without honor.  The very idea of "healing" is to get you to turn the accusatory finger back on yourself and to exonerate perpetrators.  "Recovery" is more of the same.

"Suicide prevention constructs a reality in which the problems of suicide lie within suicidal people. "

Everything of ~Mental Health~ ~Psychotherapy~ and ~Recovery~ works that way.

We shouldn't be wasting money putting survivors on drugs or sending them to therapists, we should be sending them to law school, so that we can obtain compensatory justice.

I say that the most important right now should be talking a hard line stance, No Drugs, No Therapy, No Recovery Programs.

And then fight to get laws changed, get the drugs off of the market, and start putting some psychotherapists out of business, and then move forward from there.

One of the promising things I see is that some people are now suing their psychotherapists for "Transference Abuse".

Excellent Article!  Excellent insights!  I am so glad that you have been able to resist!


Emergency Doctor to Trump: You Are Wrong, Mental Illness Is Not to Blame for Gun Violence Epidemic
https://www.democracynow.org/2019/8/8/mental_illness_gun_violence_suicide_risk#transcript

124
News, Politics, and General / Replies to Robert W.
« on: August 08, 2019, 03:34:18 pm »
Yes, blaming the ~mentally ill~ and the ~unmedicated mentally ill~ is hate speech.

I first learned this decades ago, visiting a book store in a posh suburban retail area.  I heard a male voice yelling very loudly.  I looked outside to see what was up.  I saw a man across the street, didn't really see anything else going on.  Then a few minutes later someone came in and announced, "Off his medication".

At first I accepted that interpretation.  But then later I thought more, no, that guy has no obligation to stay medicated to please everyone else.

And when you see someone who is angry, yelling, talking to himself, for no apparent reason, most people will call that ~mental illness~.  But there is another more basic interpretation, simply that the person is angry, and with good reason.

We might not know why they are angry, and the party might not want to tell us or might not even be able to.  But if they are angry, then I say that it must be for good reason.  When someone has a nullified social and civil standing, the probably will not be able to redress wrongs.

But this matter is further compounded by things like Mind Freedom, making an unequivocal pledge to non-violence as a way of life.  It is appeasement.  Knowing when and how to use physical violence is a part of life.

And then likewise psychotherapists always see one of their main jobs, as required by law, being to talk people down, to make sure that they are disclosing all of their affairs, while at the same time always pledging non-violence.  This is belittling and humiliating, and no one should ever go along with it.

125
News, Politics, and General / Re: Replies To Steve
« on: August 06, 2019, 08:36:35 pm »
Well Steve, suppose we had a man who was angry because he was living in a state of slavery. Because of his obvious anger he might get directed to a psychotherapist. After all, most people see it as angry people are not really enjoying mental health. This is the basis of the questionnaires used to write the articles on this forum.

So he might end up with some of the Mad Italy people who want to promote this psychotherapy and recovery model, without labels or diagnosis.

Or he might end up with some of the people who use this new PTMF manual.

So hopefully he will get a therapist who is good at listening. I think most aren’t. But there will be so some who are. I am not a therapist and I have no interest in ever being a therapist. But there will be some who are good listeners.

So the therapist listens to his story and this takes a number of sessions.

The therapist shows especial interest when he talks about his childhood. Its because this deals with things which happened so long ago that redress is usually impractical. So the therapist always wants to steer the focus here.

But what about the fact that he is a slave? Well the therapist can’t really do anything about that. That is a matter of law. We all have to learn to live with the lot life has handed us. The therapist learned this when he was in therapy, and this is why he became a therapist.

If the client really believes that slavery is wrong, then the therapist, though they may listen, they couldn’t possibly agree with the client. If they really agreed then they would not be paying rent on their consulting office, they would be out trying to start a slave revolt like John Brown had.

Originally no one sided with Brown. But as time passed and VA executed him, views changed.

Lincoln had said that Brown’s actions were “misguided”. But fearing that he would lose the 1864 election he called Frederick Douglas to the White House and offered him troops if he could make raids into the Upper Confederacy and free as many slaves as possible. He wanted Douglas to become John Brown.

Harriet Tubman had always counseled non-violence. But she still helped Brown recruit. Than after the raid had failed, but so spectacularly, she rescued a suspected fugitive slave from the court house, twice in the same day, and getting him safely off to Canada.

Then,


It’s May 1863. Outgeneraled and outgunned, a demoralized Union Army has pulled back with massive losses at the Battle of Chancellorsville. Fort Sumter, hated symbol of the Rebellion, taunts the American navy with its artillery and underwater mines.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/194892434X/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i2

Tubman plans and leads a masterful raid, behind enemy lines, Combahee River South Carolina, liberating hundreds and hundred of slaves, and turning around the army’s malaise.

People are changed when they are offered the chance, and they decide to get involved.

I was offered the chance, completely out of the blue. I was known as someone who sides with criminal defendants. Social circumstances had brought me into contact with a fundamentalist Pentecostal man.

He decided to confide in me. He explained in a broad brush manner the felony charges which he had pending. He then started getting more and more agitated, explaining that it was all because of his eldest daughter, and then jumping up and down and making wild arm gestures, he explained that “Its all because of the problems she has with Alcohol, with Drugs, and with Sex”. And then pointing at bushes in a park, “She even had sex in the bushes”.

Well, as it would unfold, in each communication to the Prosecution and the Court, I would always lead saying that he never said anything to me which directly indicated guilt. But right off I could see that he had a huge amount of emotional energy invested in scapegoating his eldest daughter. He would say other things about her too. And so as I explained, to me this indicated that this girl had lived a long time being made the scapegoat. Usually things like sexual and physical abuse are coming out of a context of emotional abuse.

See, this guy was saying that the police had blown this out of proportion, and they were denouncing all efforts to protect children. This is after all at the central evangelical core of their religion, an anti-government position.

But I knew right off, I stand with Alice Miller, and she always stands with the child.

So I only needed to hear his emotional performance once, and I was involved.

I read the case file, abusing children is not a private matter, and I saw that the sentence he could get could well exceed his life expectancy.

I believe that our system is too harsh, and I have seen how criminal cases have spun out of control.

And then, do I really want the state doing my bidding, doing what I would not do myself?

Well as I worked into it, I decided that yes, if we lived in that kind of a society, then I would follow the example of John Brown in Kansas, dragging this guy out of his home and hacking him to pieces with a broad sword.

But as it went, I am very happy with the results because it educated police, prosecutors, and judges. Don’t know how many cases like this get prosecuted, when the accused parents are still married and still financially solvent.

They had tried to send the girls to Psychotherapy, “so that they wouldn’t have to be carrying these false memories around with them.”

They tried to send them to Eye Movement Reprocessing Therapy. And I would go on to make much of this with the Prosecution and the Court.

And the mother tried to get the eldest daughter to agree to a dinner, to settle the whole thing. But she refused, saying, “This isn’t the sort of thing which gets settled with a dinner.”

Well I could say more, but that guy is locked up for a long long time and I am very happy about it. I had expected my role to be very small, but in fact it turned out to be huge.

Hey, you do not turn your back on the Burning Bush. There was no reason that I should have been given the chance to get involved in this. But there it was. I knew that what kinds of things I would be offered in the future, depended entirely on how I handled that opportunity.

I have seen how we have a huge huge underclass of Family Scapegoats. And where to they end up? In Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Recovery, and Salvation Seeking.

Really it comes down to what can be lawfully gotten away with, and with how hard people are willing to push for civil remedies.

The mother is still going around saying that the conviction was wrong and that the girls were liars. Their church is like that, everyone has a scapegoat child, and usually a scapegoat sibling too.

To Be Continued

126
Living and Ascended Masters and Shadow Governments




Henry A. Wallace and Theosophy


Century of the Common Man (May 8, 1942)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBWula5GyAc


Reference Time line:  Battle of Midway June 1942, North Africa Landings Nov 1942, Battle of Stalingrad Aug 1942 thru Feb 1943, Sicily Landings July 1943.


Wallace was appointed Secretary of Agriculture on Roosevelt's Inauguration day, serving March 4, 1933 – September 4, 1940


1940 Electoral Map, couldn't carry his home state of Iowa, but carried most everything else.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ElectoralCollege1940.svg


He (Wallace) made foreign affairs the main focus of his campaigning, telling one audience that "the replacement of Roosevelt ... would cause [Adolf] Hitler to rejoice." Although both campaigns predicted a close election, Roosevelt won 449 of the 531 electoral votes and won the popular vote by a margin of nearly ten points.


Religious explorations and Roerich controversy


Wallace was raised in the Calvinist branch of Protestant Christianity, but showed an interest in other religious teachings during his life.[66] He was deeply interested in religion from a young age, reading works by authors like Ralph Waldo Emerson, Ralph Waldo Trine, and William James, whose The Varieties of Religious Experience had a particularly strong impact on Wallace.[169] After his grandfather's death in 1916, he left the Presbyterian Church and became increasingly interested in mysticism. He later said, "I know I am often called a mystic, and in the years following my leaving the United Presbyterian Church I was probably a practical mystic ... I'd say I was a mystic in the sense that George Washington Carver was – who believed God was in everything and therefore, if you went to God, you could find the answers." Wallace began regularly attending meetings of the pantheistic Theosophical Society, and, in 1925, he helped organize the Des Moines parish of the Liberal Catholic Church.[170] Wallace left the Liberal Catholic Church in 1930 and joined the Episcopal Church, but he continued to be interested in various mystic groups and individuals.[171]


Among those who Wallace corresponded with were author George William Russell,[172] astrologer L. Edward Johndro, and Edward Roos, who took on the persona of a Native American medicine man.[173] In the early 1930s, Wallace began corresponding with Nicholas Roerich, a prominent Russian émigré, artist, peace activist, and Theosophist.[174] With Wallace's support, Roerich was appointed to lead a federal expedition to the Gobi Desert to collect drought-resistant grasses.[175] Roerich's expedition ended in a public fiasco, and Roerich fled to India after the Internal Revenue Service launched a tax investigation.[176]


The letters that Wallace wrote to Roerich from 1933 to 1934 were eventually acquired by Republican newspaper publisher Paul Block.[177] The Republicans threatened to reveal to the public what they characterized as Wallace's bizarre religious beliefs prior to the November 1940 elections but were deterred when the Democrats countered by threatening to release information about Republican candidate Wendell Willkie's rumored extramarital affair with the writer Irita Van Doren.[178] The contents of the letters did become public seven years later, in the winter of 1947, when right-wing columnist Westbrook Pegler published what were purported to be extracts from them as evidence that Wallace was a "messianic fumbler", and "off-center mentally". During the 1948 campaign Pegler and other hostile reporters, including H. L. Mencken, aggressively confronted Wallace on the subject at a public meeting in Philadelphia in July. Wallace declined to comment, accusing the reporters of being Pegler's stooges.[179] Many press outlets were critical of Wallace's association with Roerich; one newspaper mockingly wrote that if Wallace became president "we shall get in tune with the Infinite, vibrate in the correct plane, outstare the Evil Eye, reform the witches, overcome all malicious spells and ascend the high road to health and happiness."[180]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_A._Wallace#Religious_explorations_and_Roerich_controversy


Nicholas Roerich (October 9, 1874 – December 13, 1947)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Roerich


Helena Ivanovna Roerich (wife, February 12, 1879 – October 5, 1955) was a Russian theosophist.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helena_Roerich


Roerichism


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roerichism


The movement centers on the Neo-Theosophical religious doctrine of Agni Yoga, or the Living Ethics


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roerichism#Agni_Yoga_as_the_spiritual_foundation_of_Roerichism


Agni Yoga Society, New York New York


http://agniyoga.org/index.php


http://agniyoga.org/ay_en/Agni-Yoga-Glossary.php


Alice Ann Bailey (June 16, 1880 – December 15, 1949) was a writer of more than twenty-four books on theosophical subjects, and was one of the first writers to use the term New Age.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Bailey

A lot of these types of groups and movements postulate some cadre of living and ascended masters.  They also want to bring about some kind of unseen krypto government, and they are inherently anti-Democratic and anti-Socialist.  And I am including as one of these groups the German Nazi Party.

127
News, Politics, and General / Re: Reply to Bonnie B., about honor
« on: August 05, 2019, 05:25:33 pm »
Denouncing Nick Walker and his Radical Neurodiversity Stuff






Yep!


So that is where I want to go.  I want a theory which will give a way of opposing Psychiatry and the drugging, and also the con that is Psychotherapy.  And I want to go after the nonsense which is the Recovery Movement.  To me they all seem to have the same intent, to create an underclass, so that we don't need to question the Self-Reliance Ethic in an advanced industrial and information economy.  We don't need the extra workers, but we have the people, so what do we do with them?


So Foucault wrote the stuff about BioPower and BioPolitics in the late 70's, a series of lectures.


Then people seem to see Alain Badiou as the successor to both Foucault and to Deleuze and Guattari.  He wrote The Subject in 1982.  Might be a book which shows how to oppose BioPower and BioPolitics.


And then Judith Butler at UC Berkeley, I think she has written about ways to oppose BioPower and BioPolitics, and it is difficult.  Sounds like she sees it as something which cannot be direct.


And Butler is a partner of Wendy Brown, one of our major theorists of Neo-Liberalism, and the author of "Undoing the Demos".


I think these are the things we should be looking at, not debating with Psychotherapists and with people who want to add street drugs into the mix of chemicals used to keep people tranquilized.


And I also want to go after this ~Autism Asperger's Neurological Difference~ sham.


As I know, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, includes a provision of protection from labeling.


I consider this very important, essential.  And it is where I break with all the Autism and Neurodiversity advocates, and even with this Nick Walker and his Radical Neurodiversity.


People have Cognitive Liberty today.  People can think anyway they want.


Now if you say it, that is a different matter.  Say the wrong things, and especially to your psychotherapist, and you will likely end up handcuffed to a table in a police interrogation cell.


So I see this protection from labeling as far more important that this idea of Cognitive Liberty.  End the labeling and then everybody is just who they are.  Problem solved.


I read the stuff the Autism advocates write, and I can understand and identify with much of it.  But I interpret it totally differently.  I do not see there as being any objective reality to Autism, Asperger's, or to this Neurological Difference.  I just see that we have a cruel world which uses bullying to socialize, and that most people have little refuge from this.


I also notice one thing though, though they do not say it, I see in the writings of these self identifying autistics, that most of the time things start to look better for them, once they no longer live with their parents.


So Nick Walker pushes this idea of Radical Neurodivergence as far as possible, so that it does not seem to mean anything.


But of these courses he has, he also says"


"The instructor must be autistic."


"The Instructor Must Be a Participant


 in Autistic Culture, Community, and Resistance"


"At least 80% of the assigned readings should be by autistic authors."


http://neurocosmopolitanism.com/


So I see his work as being completely misguided.  He is propagating the myth of Autism, and he is trafficking in the labels.  I do not see any reason that the labels cannot just be dumped immediately.


Sami Timimi says that with the label, people buy in to a fantasy, "Now someone is going to really figure out what is going on."  And yes I see this, too, in the writings of these self proclaimed autistics.  But I see that the purpose it serves for them has to do with the Self-Reliance Ethic, and with the need to exonerate perpetrators.


I also notice something else, besides Nick Walker being involved in this thing about giving MDMA to ~Autistics~ to alleviate ~social anxiety~, I see that this California Institute of Integral Studies has lots of stuff about using street drugs, ~Psychedelics~, as an expansion of the psychiatric drugging travesty.


I have looked over many years at their web site for various reasons.  I never saw any stuff like this.  But today I have to say that what this Nick Walker is doing, propagating the myth that there is some neurological difference behind the popular phenomenon of Autistic Identity, is just plain wrong and it needs to be ended.


And then of CIIS, I now consider it suspect.

I feel that the protection from labeling and the ending of these identities formed in a context of abuse, are far more important, than worrying about how people think, or about what curious mannerisms they might have.





128
News, Politics, and General / Re: Replies To Steve
« on: August 05, 2019, 04:28:40 pm »
Denouncing Psychotherapy:

Fiachra wrote, "but that psychological method does"

The psychological method does work?  Work to do what?

All it does is let people talk themselves out, and eventually get them to accept the premise that they should not try to redress wrongs.  Its just talking them down.  Its exactly what police do, except that they will keep you handcuffed to a table in an interrogation cell for the talk down.

And you wrote of recovery from ~schizophrenia~, "Its mostly about dealing with Anxiety and coming off drugs safely."

Well then why do you want to call it ~schizophrenia~?  Why not just call it anxiety and drug addiction?

~Recovery~ is just a way of further invalidating survivors, making it look like they are the problem.

Steve wrote, "Most therapists have been coopted by the psychiatric industry and the DSM."

But even if the psychiatric industry and DSM did not exist, I have never seen any evidence the psychotherapy has anything good about it.

If you have been in the mental health system, or in psychotherapy, then you do not have a biography anymore, because the course of you life has been disrupted by something which is considered invalid and worthless.  So you cannot present your biography in an honorable way.

And isn't this correct, the way it should be?  If you have been in psychotherapy, what is honorable about that?  And how could psychotherapy ever do anything to remedy objective issues?

Your psychotherapist is not going to place themselves at risk to vanquish foes.  Yet vanquishing foes is the gold standard for restoring your public honor.

Great Book:
https://www.amazon.com/Path-Everyday-Hero-Important-Challenges/dp/0976220202

Parceval vanquishes foes on a continual basis.  But the most important is the Red Knight.  The first time Parceval approached him, unarmored, unarmed, untrained, he told him to surrender.  He didn't and kept terrorizing the countryside.  So the next time Parceval approach him, he put a javelin into his helmeted forehead.

While I realize that I do not know every last therapist, and so I cannot rule out the possibility of their being one exception, it seems that the whole premise of psychotherapy is that it happens in the therapist's office, because it pertains to what is going on between the client's ears.

So I say, psychotherapy is a horrible sham, a con.  And I think everyone really knows this, and has always known this, certainly going back to Freud.  So if I say that I am in psychotherapy I am telling people that I can be easily conned, I can be convinced that my problems lie between my ears, and I do not care about restoring my public honor.  And that is how people will hear it, they will see me as a neurotic.

And then psychotherapy is using a horribly discredited model of cognition.  Maybe only the Criminal Justice System, Religion, and Psychotherapy still use this Representational or Cartesian Model.  Its the model that tells us that somewhere in your dog's head, there is a representation of the dog's name.

People know that it does not work this way.  Cognition is embodied.

https://www.amazon.com/Tree-Knowledge-Biological-Roots-Understanding/dp/0877736421/ref=sr_1_1?crid=32XJNSKD1V14X&keywords=tree+of+knowledge+book&qid=1565037385&s=gateway&sprefix=tree+of+knowl%2Caps%2C185&sr=8-1

^^^  best introductory explanation around.

An often used idea from this school of thought, Autopoeisis, is:

"All knowing is doing" and "All doing is knowing."

http://www.enolagaia.com/AT.html

This is very compatible with Martin Heiddeger's 1927 "Being In Time".

He showed us that the Cartesian kind of detached thinking is not everyday consciousness.  Rather what Heidegger called everyday consciousness was what he called being, "Always Already Thrown" to language, or more commonly "Being In The World".

What Psychotherapy operates on, Cartesian ideas, with Freud's addition of the Unconscious, IS A DISTRACTION.  It does not get to your actual life experience, it is merely an abstracted reflection.  It is a ruse, it is a type of Witch Doctoring.

So if I say, "I know that there is widespread abuse which creates an underclass of marginalized people, and I know that we must put a stop to this", then the proper question is, "What are you doing about it"?

If my answer is "nothing" or "I am talking with my therapist about it", then the proper conclusion is that I do not really know what I claimed to know.

If I did know, I would be acting.  When you see someone trying to stop the abuses that are the middle-class family, and that are psychiatry and drugging, and that are the con game that is psychotherapy, then they are actually someone who knows.

http://icpla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dreyfus-HL-Alternative-Philosophical-Conceptualizations-of-Psychopathology.pdf

129
News, Politics, and General / Re: Replies To Steve
« on: August 05, 2019, 04:24:26 pm »
Denouncing Psychotherapy:

Fiachra wrote, "but that psychological method does"

The psychological method does work?  Work to do what?

All it does is let people talk themselves out, and eventually get them to accept the premise that they should not try to redress wrongs.  Its just talking them down.  Its exactly what police do, except that they will keep you handcuffed to a table in an interrogation cell for the talk down.

And you wrote of recovery from ~schizophrenia~, "Its mostly about dealing with Anxiety and coming off drugs safely."

Well then why do you want to call it ~schizophrenia~?  Why not just call it anxiety and drug addiction?

~Recovery~ is just a way of further invalidating survivors, making it look like they are the problem.

Steve wrote, "Most therapists have been coopted by the psychiatric industry and the DSM."

But even if the psychiatric industry and DSM did not exist, I have never seen any evidence the psychotherapy has anything good about it.

If you have been in the mental health system, or in psychotherapy, then you do not have a biography anymore, because the course of you life has been disrupted by something which is considered invalid and worthless.  So you cannot present your biography in an honorable way.

And isn't this correct, the way it should be?  If you have been in psychotherapy, what is honorable about that?  And how could psychotherapy ever do anything to remedy objective issues?

Your psychotherapist is not going to place themselves at risk to vanquish foes.  Yet vanquishing foes is the gold standard for restoring your public honor.

Great Book:
https://www.amazon.com/Path-Everyday-Hero-Important-Challenges/dp/0976220202

Parceval vanquishes foes on a continual basis.  But the most important is the Red Knight.  The first time Parceval approached him, unarmored, unarmed, untrained, he told him to surrender.  He didn't and kept terrorizing the countryside.  So the next time Parceval approach him, he put a javelin into his helmeted forehead.

While I realize that I do not know every last therapist, and so I cannot rule out the possibility of their being one exception, it seems that the whole premise of psychotherapy is that it happens in the therapist's office, because it pertains to what is going on between the client's ears.

So I say, psychotherapy is a horrible sham, a con.  And I think everyone really knows this, and has always known this, certainly going back to Freud.  So if I say that I am in psychotherapy I am telling people that I can be easily conned, I can be convinced that my problems lie between my ears, and I do not care about restoring my public honor.  And that is how people will hear it, they will see me as a neurotic.

And then psychotherapy is using a horribly discredited model of cognition.  Maybe only the Criminal Justice System, Religion, and Psychotherapy still use this Representational or Cartesian Model.  Its the model that tells us that somewhere in your dog's head, there is a representation of the dog's name.

People know that it does not work this way.  Cognition is embodied.

https://www.amazon.com/Tree-Knowledge-Biological-Roots-Understanding/dp/0877736421/ref=sr_1_1?crid=32XJNSKD1V14X&keywords=tree+of+knowledge+book&qid=1565037385&s=gateway&sprefix=tree+of+knowl%2Caps%2C185&sr=8-1

^^^  best introductory explanation around.

An often used idea from this school of thought, Autopoeisis, is:

"All knowing is doing" and "All doing is knowing."

http://www.enolagaia.com/AT.html

This is very compatible with Martin Heiddeger's 1927 "Being In Time".

He showed us that the Cartesian kind of detached thinking is not everyday consciousness.  Rather what Heidegger called everyday consciousness was what he called being, "Always Already Thrown" to language, or more commonly "Being In The World".

What Psychotherapy operates on, Cartesian ideas, with Freud's addition of the Unconscious, IS A DISTRACTION.  It does not get to your actual life experience, it is merely an abstracted reflection.  It is a ruse, it is a type of Witch Doctoring.

So if I say, "I know that there is widespread abuse which creates an underclass of marginalized people, and I know that we must put a stop to this", then the proper question is, "What are you doing about it"?

If my answer is "nothing" or "I am talking with my therapist about it", then the proper conclusion is that I do not really know what I claimed to know.

If I did know, I would be acting.  When you see someone trying to stop the abuses that are the middle-class family, and that are psychiatry and drugging, and that are the con game that is psychotherapy, then they are actually someone who knows.

http://icpla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dreyfus-HL-Alternative-Philosophical-Conceptualizations-of-Psychopathology.pdf

130
News, Politics, and General / Re: Reply to Bonnie B., about honor
« on: August 02, 2019, 06:23:38 pm »
from above:

Shari Karney was able to get laws changed, and as she explained, this is the reason why there are now $2 Billion in judgments against the US Roman Catholic Church.

Julie Gregory is fighting to get prosecution for Muchausen's perpetrators, and her book with medical records showing her own saga is compelling.

I don't believe that either of these survivors has received financial reparations, but no one would ever accuse either of them of life without honor, as their aggressiveness in acting against perpetrators is commendable.

But if someone takes a Mad Pride or Radical Neurodiversity approach to abuses, how does that do anything to restore their public honor?

131
News, Politics, and General / Re: Reply to Bonnie B., about honor
« on: August 02, 2019, 06:17:12 pm »
~Mental illness~ is abuse.  The concept is abusive, the so called treatments are abusive, the stigmatizing and often an original othering, are abusive.  None of us should ever go along with this.  Instead, it should be penalties for perpetrators and reparations for survivors, as these are about the only way of restoring public honor.

And we should never support anything which propagates the idea of mental illness.

This makes mental illness into a joke, and so it is not about penalties for perpetrators and reparations for survivors.

http://www.torontomadpride.com/what-is-mp/

Bonnie wrote, "...there is a profound difference between the radical neurodiversity movement and the more mainstream one. That in the radical one, no one sees the differences in question as innate or as casual in any way. Moreover, no one in the neurodiversity movement would see any of the differences alluded to as the least bit “pathologoical”–an issue that came up i a few responses to this blog. As I have come to understand it, Why people in the movement championed the concept of diversity is precisely because it links them up with other types of diveristy–sexual diversity, for example, and racial diversity–and totally rules out the concept of pathology."


~Autism~ is abuse.  The concept is abusive, the so called treatments are abusive, the stigmatizing and often an original othering, are abusive.  None of us should ever go along with this.  Instead, it should be penalties for perpetrators and reparations for survivors, as these are about the only way of restoring public honor.

And we should never support anything which propagates the idea of Autism or Asperger's.

But this "radical neurodiverstiy", rather like the emergence of a science fiction super human race, makes ~autism~ into a joke, and so it is not about penalties for perpetrators and reparations for survivors.

We must oppose this movement.


Penalties for perpetrators and reparations for survivors is not a difficult concept.  It is the way survivors of abuse can restore their public honor, so that they can again have the socio-public identity with which it is necessary to function.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYywl-KF4MQ

Radical Neurodiversity and Mad Pride do not constitute resistance to a Biomedical and Eugenic paradigm, they constitute subservience to it by making it into a joke.  It does not show that the whole thing is abuse to start with, and it is not about obtaining redress for abuse.

132
News, Politics, and General / Re: Replies To Steve
« on: August 01, 2019, 05:46:00 pm »
The presumption though is that matters should be handled in the therapist's office.  Otherwise the client would not be there, and the therapist would not even have an office.

And so the presumption is that anyone who is angry or disgruntled, "Needs Therapy".  And so our population is thus kept in check, and it is very hard to change laws because survivor exist without public honor..  And the middle-class family and the self-reliance ethic continue.

This is so similar to how Psychiatry and the Mental Health System have worked, keeping survivors marginalized.

"Unconsious feelings" and a need to "process them" is a huge distraction.  It very rarely leads to action, so a reasonable person could assume that it is another denial strategy.

Cognition does not work that way.  The distresses which you have experienced become part of the light by which you see new experiences.  They are not primarily things which can be remembered or recalled, that is just a pale reflection of what you have experienced.  You want to know your experiences, look at the entire course of your life and look at who and what you are.  This is very difficult, way beyond the scope of anything the therapist can help with.

If you look at how hard it is to challenge the Self-Reliance Ethic, then one sees how deep the denial systems run in our society, and how deep the scars created by the middle-class family.

Psychotherapists do not challenge this, runs too deep, and too close to their own denied experience.

"It certainly did involve confronting family members about how I had been treated,"

Settlement sums?  Incarcerations?  Or just go along to get along and keep it private?  Therapist may not say so openly, but this is how they want things settled, as it exonerates the perpetrators. 

Confronting a habitual abuser without a law suit or other consequence behind it, is just an exercise in self abuse.

I helped three girls put their father into the state prison.

Writing to the court, I made it clear that if we want survivors to defy their church and their parents in coming forward, then they must expect to be vindicated.  So there must be a long sentence.

Penalties for Perpetrators, Reparations for Survivors.  This is what Shari Karney did, and this is what Julie Gregory is working on.

"She most definitely helped me move from being angry at myself to being angry about social injustice, not because she told me to feel that way, but because she helped me find and connect with my own sense of righteous indignation. And as I said before, without this experience, I would never have gotten to advocacy as a career and life path. "

Again, penalties for perpetrators and reparations for survivors, not just moving away from personal anger to righteous indignation.

We live in a war zone, and it is a being perpetrated against children in the name of the self-reliance ethic.  And as it stands, it is very rare that a perpetrator gets any penalty.

But here is one example:
http://www.vachss.com/guest_dispatches/excerpt_battle_11.html

So Steve, if knowing all of this about you, a client came for psychotherapy and tried to talk about familial abuse issues, they should expect to be delegitimated and humiliated, because you don't seem to see redress as important.

Say a woman goes to a police station to report that she has been ****.  Should she be told about psychotherapy, and about how she can confront the perpetrator?

No, this would amount to what activists have long identified as "second ****".

Shari Karney tried confronting the perpetrators, but they went ballistic.  Then though she turned to the law books, and finally to getting laws changed.  No one would ever accuse Shari Karney of living a life without public honor.

"
So my therapist did not fit your model of “teach you to adjust to injustice” or “accept your lot in life.” It was much more about, “If you have an issue, what are you going to DO about it?” Which certainly fits into your framework of encouraging people to take action against their oppressors.
"

Your words say one thing, but what they indicate is the opposite.

Penalities for perpetrators, reparations for survivors.  This is how you restore your public honor.  Otherwise you are just continuing to eat and **** in the very small space which the abusers have left, and making the mistake of calling that "life".

Jeff Anderson has recovered hundreds of millions on behalf or survivors.  He has driven Catholic dioceses into bankruptcy.

We need people who have the same zeal for going after the middle-class family, and after Psychiatry, and after Psychotherapy, that Jeff Anderson has for going after the Catholic Church.  And he  has gotten laws changed and is getting all the records and taking it down diocese by diocese.

"But to pretend that there is some generalized agreement among therapists that their job is to prevent people from holding their oppressors accountable is to me simplistic and not supported by the fact. "

But if they are not in favor of the denial system known as "Live and Let Live", then why are they therapists?  How could someone be a therapist if they did not believe in that?

"Therapists are not lawyers"

Then why are they getting people to take the huge risk of disclosing their personal affairs?

"but there’s nothing to prevent a therapist from making referrals to lawyers for class action suits and the like, and I certainly have done that with many a person in my social worker days. "

But this is going to be after the fact, after the client has severely compromised themselves by disclosing affairs to someone who is not their attorney.  And most actions which attack the middle-class family are going to be cutting edge law, practiced by those who want to extend the envelop of civil accountability.  This is going to be a special breed.  And why would one want to talk with a therapist, instead of an attorney, in the first place?

Here a survivor can talk safely, knowing that their claim to reparations will not be written off, that they will not be subjected to anything like "second ****".

"
Today in Manhattan, survivors, advocates and the law firm of Jeff Anderson & Associates are: · Releasing The Anderson Report on Sexual Abuse in the Archdiocese of New York containing the identities, histories, photographs and information on 310 clerics accused of child sexual abuse in the Archdiocese of New York; · Demanding full disclosure by the Archdiocese of New York, Archbishop Timothy Dolan, and the religious orders, of the identities, histories, and current whereabouts of all clergy accused of child sexual abuse who worked in the Archdiocese; · Discussing a new law, the New York Child Victims Act, which opens a one-year “window” in mid-August for survivors of child sexual abuse to take legal action against the perpetrator and the institution that may have protected the perpetrator, regardless of when the abuse occurred.
"
https://www.andersonadvocates.com/

Psychotherapy is Con Artistry, making people believe that it is in their interests to disclose their personal affairs to someone who is not able to do anything to help them with the affairs of their lives.

Some seem to see it as the alternative to psychiatry, but this is a ruse.  The proper response to psychiatry is simply FU.

Why do people believe that their is some benefit in talking with the psychotherapist?  Why not some peer level grouping, and something which is overtly political and legal action focused?

Churches have been a total failure.  And this was the vacuum which Freud stepped into.  But there are still other kinds of things like esoteric, occult, humanist, and eastern oriented groups.

Finding one's way in life is usually difficult.  But why would anyone think that the non-peer and highly regulation influenced relationship with a Psychotherapist is a productive use of their time, or a worthwhile risk to operational security.

To be a psychotherapist, doesn't one have to agree that anger is not okay, and that it is morally superior not to try and hold perpetrators accountable?

Progress often does depend upon being able to discern universal truths.

133
News, Politics, and General / Re: Replies To Steve
« on: July 31, 2019, 07:35:20 pm »
Well some have said that Psychotherapy works well when the therapist lives in more non-conformist ways than the client.

But this is usually not the case though because the clients tend to be more socially marginalized, whereas the therapist enjoys a good degree of wealth and legitimation.

I imagine that when David Smale did therapy sessions that they were more like Philosophical Counseling, and that this new Diagnostic Manual is intended to steer it more that way.

Please tell me if I am correct.

Okay, but do we really want people making appointments with counselors of any type?  How about peer relationships and political activism?

If John Brown had consulted with a therapist, would he have raided Harper's Ferry?

If Huey Newton and Bobby Seale had consulted with therapists, would they have founded the Black Panther Party for Self Defense, and then approached Oakland Police while carrying fire arms?

Would suffragettes in jail have gone on hunger strike and had to endure the feeding tube, if they had first consulted with therapists?

Would Michel Foucault have gone on to be what he was, if he had submitted to the national renowned psychoanalyst his parents had sent him to in the 30's?

Here Shari Karney, she did see a therapist, but only for a while.  Then she committed herself and worked tirelessly to find a way around SOL's, finally just having to get the laws changed.  This took about 10 years and involved much conflict.  But as she said on her web page, this is why the US Roman Catholic Church has had $2 billion in judgments against it.

Excellent made for TV movie:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108110/

I believe that if she stayed in therapy, or was the sort of person who would stay in therapy, then her legal fight never would have proceeded.

Karney is a survivor of early childhood familial sexual molestation.  And she never was able to sue her own parents.  But she opened the door to all such suits, though most have been against large institutions.  Seems to me that people are still not ready to deal with abuse within The Family.

But no one would ever accuse Karney of just doing nothing, or of aiding the perpetrators.  She is ferocious.

So I put this forward as a question, and please tell me if I am wrong or right.  Seems to me that a universal among therapists is that they are not interested in political fights over anything other than therapy.  They are certainly not interested in revolutionary activities.  Their view is that the issues and the solutions exist between the client's two ears.  While they won't anymore do like Freud and call the client's liars, they still see the client's basic complaints as being unimportant.  Rather, their objective is to help the client learn to live with things as they are.

So I ask this as a question, and it is the basis of my claim that all forms of Psychotherapy revolve around something like Original Sin.

Other's knowing more than me have said this about Freud, that it is all based on a religious world view, and that it comes down the client being the one who is wrong.

I see Life Coaching as wrong or foolish for the same reasons.  But Life Coaching is likely to be shorter term and of more narrow focus, and it is not government endorsed.

In the 70's feminist groups would meet and discuss things like Incest, ****, and other horrors of a life restricted to domesticity.  They saw these rightly so as political issues.

But in the 80's concern of these issues spread to a broader and hence more conservative portion of the populace.

Hence, it all became fodder for Therapy and Recovery.

Susan Faludi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIC4uKSFpL0

https://www.amazon.com/Rocking-Cradle-Sexual-Politics-Happened/dp/0201624710

Today I read that psychotherapists say that the number one concern of millennials is that they will not be able to save enough money to retire.

Okay, so is their therapist going to change anything about this?

Why are they not at political meetings and in political protests and writing political articles, to try and bring this country to Social Democracy, and to end this politics of private wealth accumulation and of inflating the stock and real estate markets?

When one emerges from the office of their therapist, what objective circumstance of their life has changed?

I say, only if you believe in Original Sin, would you say that something has changed.

Yes, the clients are part of the problem, they seem to always be attached to reactionary social and political views, and to me this is the real source of their problems.

But you don't find therapy clients leading the charge for legal redress.  In a civilized society wrongs are redressed by law suits.  And most other industrialized countries do not even allow disinheritance.  But try to talk about this with therapy clients and they are mortified.  They don't want to even look at such ideas, because that would mean breaking out of the fantasy which therapy has created with its bad models of cognition, and seeing just how abusive this world really is.

I talk online to people who believe in therapy, from other countries, and they talk about how their parents abused them.  I ask them about their country's more favorable inheritance laws, and they have zero knowledge of such.  And I am talking here about even civil law countries where the client will not even need a lawyer to collect.  Therapy has put them into this film representation type world, created by reflected memories made into a story line, and this is not how cognition works.

Where you find people who want to fight, its in those like Shari Karney and in those like the Munchausen's Survivor Julie Gregory, people who very early on excused themselves from Psychotherapy and Recovery.

Gregory ends her book, not in therapy, but dialing Montana CPS, because her mother has got a foster child, and a whole new pile of medical books, and she seems to be doing the same stuff all over again.

So I feel that the basic premise of therapy is that it is better to keep it within the therapist's office.  If this were not true, then therapists would have vast experience and knowledge about legal and political fights.

We want people hooking up with political comrades, people who are willing to take to the barricades.

What does the therapist think their sessions do, unless they believe in Original Sin or otherwise have a low opinion of the client?

Jeffrey Masson says that virtually all of the stuff discussed with a therapist would be better discussed in some other venue.  I have yet to see anything myself which contradicts this.

Deleuze and Guattari say that Psychoanalysis, but meaning Psychotherapy too, have been created by Captialism and that they are completely parasitic.

There is this 4 hour BBC documentary, Century of Self.  It is a deep and cutting critique of all forms of Psychoanalysis, Psychotherapy, and Psychology, and its effect on politics.

They start by showing this Psychoanalysts Ball held annually in Vienna.  People say that because of Psychoanalysis, people can speak freely.  Example, say someone is a maid.  If they tried to complain about this they would be rebuked for not accepting their social position.

Whereas with Psychoanalysis they are free to say what they feel.

Well, is this really true?  A most basic area will be the exploitation and abuses which are the middle-class family.  So the client starts to speak.  But does the therapist really side with them?  Usually the therapist will say things which tend to exonerate the parents, and which tend to excuse what happened as being of the past, the old pedagogy manuals.

And Jeffrey Masson writes that it is part of the training to at a certain point stop listening and shift to trying to get the client to accept what has happened and to forgive.

And isn't it true that Psychotherapy is just Pedagogy Round 2?  It promotes the ideology of the family.

Try to get the client to kneel down and worship the Holy Family, while acknowledging that there have been mistakes and errors, and that the old pedagogy manuals were worse than the new ones.

But the client must not see that the entire system is rotten, and all Pedagogy Manuals are just lessons in how to abuse children and get away with it.  The angry client is to be turned into a helpless neurotic.

In D and G's Anti-Oedipus they have a very funny little skit which Jacques Lacan had published, making fun of psychoanalysis over this.

And they quote Antonin Artaud saying something which shows the neuroticism which Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy are predicated on.

D and G call this "Oedipalizing".  And the schizo is someone like Artaud, who cannot be Oedipalized.  So of course this is where the mental health system would really bear down.

Alice Miller writes about artistic representations of the Sacrifice of Isaac.  Why is Isaac always mute and compliant?

She says that if Isaac were to raise his hand against Abraham, then "that would start the war that we all fear."

Well this is where we see the limitations of Alice Miller.  Its her Psychoanalytic training, its the effects of religion, and I say that also she was weakened by her experiences in the Warsaw Ghetto.

She finally wants Isaac to just ask "Why?"

I say that we have to strike back, we have to bring on a revolution, whether we fear it or not.  I do not fear it in any way at all.

Paul Mones says that most of what we know about familial child abuse comes from the Richard Janeke  patricide case from Cheyenne Wyoming.

People learn when thing happen, and they happen regularly.  And we all learn when we act.  I learned a huge amount from being intensely involved in a child sexual molestation prosecution.

I say that it never will be like this in the therapist's office, and that someone is a therapist because they have committed themselves to the view that it is better to keep it in the therapist's office.  And I see this as being a universal truth.

134
News, Politics, and General / Re: Replies To Steve
« on: July 31, 2019, 07:11:51 pm »
Well some have said that Psychotherapy works well when the therapist lives in more non-conformist ways than the client.

But this is usually not the case though because the clients tend to be more socially marginalized, whereas the therapist enjoys a good degree of wealth and legitimation.

I imagine that when David Smale did therapy sessions that they were more like Philosophical Counseling, and that this new Diagnostic Manual is intended to steer it more that way.

Please tell me if I am correct.

Okay, but do we really want people making appointments with counselors of any type?  How about peer relationships and political activism?

If John Brown had consulted with a therapist, would he have raided Harper's Ferry?

If Huey Newton and Bobby Seale had consulted with a therapist, would they have founded the Black Panther Party for Self Defense and then approached Oakland Police while carrying fire arms?

Would suffragettes in jail have gone on hunger strike and had to endure the feeding tube, if they had first consulted with a therapist?

Here Shari Karney, she did see a therapist, but only for a while.  Then she committed herself and worked tirelessly to find a way around SOL's, finally just having to get the laws changed.  This took about 10 years and involved much conflict.  But as she said on her web page, this is why the US Roman Catholic Church has had $2 billion in judgments against it.

Excellent made for TV movie:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108110/

I believe that if she stayed in therapy, or was the sort of person who would stay in therapy, then her legal fight never would have proceeded.

Karney is a survivor of early childhood familial sexual molestation.  And she never was able to sue her own parents.  But she opened the door to all such suits, though most have been against large institutions.  Seems to me that people are still not ready to deal with abuse within The Family.

But no one would ever accuse Karney of just doing nothing, or of aiding the perpetrators.  She is ferocious.

So I put this forward as a question, and please tell me if I am wrong or right.  Seems to me that a universal among therapists is that they are not interested in political fights over anything other than therapy.  They are certainly not interested in revolutionary activities.  Their view is that the issues and the solutions exist between the client's two ears.  While they won't anymore do like Freud and call the client's liars, they still see the client's basic complaints as being unimportant.  Rather their objective is to help the client learn to live with things as they are.

So I ask this as a question, and it is the basis of my claim that all forms of Psychotherapy revolve around something like Original Sin.

Other's knowing more than me have said this about Freud, that it is all based on a religious world view, and that it comes down the client being the one who is wrong.

I see Life Coaching as wrong or foolish for the same reasons.  But Life Coaching is likely to be shorter term and of more narrow focus, and it is not government endorsed.

In the 70's feminist groups would meet and discuss things like Incest, ****, and other horrors of a life restricted to domesticity.  They saw these rightly so as political issues.

But in the 80's concern of these issues spread to a broader and hence more conservative portion of the populace.

Hence, it all became fodder for Therapy and Recovery.

Susan Faludi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIC4uKSFpL0

https://www.amazon.com/Rocking-Cradle-Sexual-Politics-Happened/dp/0201624710

Today I read that psychotherapists say that the number one concern of millennials is that they will not be able to save enough money to retire.

Okay, so is their therapist going to change anything about this?

Why are they not at political meetings and in political protests and writing political articles, to try and bring this country to Social Democracy, and to end this politics of private wealth accumulation and of inflating the stock and real estate markets?

When one emerges from the office of their therapist, what objective circumstance of their life has changed?

I say, only if you believe in Original Sin, would you say that something has changed.

Yes, the clients are part of the problem, they seem to always be attached to reactionary social and political views, and to me this is the real source of their problems.

But you don't find therapy clients leading the charge for legal redress.  In a civilized society wrongs are redressed by law suits.  And most other industrialized countries do not even allow disinheritance.  But try to talk about this with therapy clients and they are mortified.  They don't want to even look at such ideas, because that would mean breaking out of the fantasy which therapy has created with its bad models of cognition, and seeing just how abusive this world really is.

I talk online to people who believe in therapy from other countries, and they talk about how their parents abused them.  I ask them about their country's more favorable inheritance laws, and they have zero knowledge of such.  And I am talking here about even civil law countries where the client will not even need a lawyer to collect.  Therapy has put them into this film representation type world, created by reflected memories made into a story line, and this is not how cognition works.

Where you find people who want to fight, its in those like Shari Karney and in those like the Munchausen's Survivor Julie Gregory, people who very early on excused themselves from Psychotherapy and Recovery.

Gregory ends her book, not in therapy, but dialing Montana CPS, because her mother has got a foster child, and a whole new pile of medical books, and she seems to be doing the same stuff all over again.

So I feel that the basic premise of therapy is that it is better to keep it within the therapist's office.  If this were not true, then therapists would have vast experience and knowledge about legal and political fights.

We want people hooking up with political comrades, people who are willing to take to the barricades.

What does the therapist think their sessions do, unless they believe in Original Sin or otherwise have a low opinion of the client?

Jeffrey Masson says that virtually all of the stuff discussed with a therapist would be better discussed in some other venue.  I have yet to see anything myself which contradicts this.

Deleuze and Guattari say that Psychoanalysis, but meaning Psychotherapy too, have been created by Captialism and that they are completely parasitic.

There is this 4 hour BBC documentary, Century of Self.  It is a deep and cutting critique of all forms of Psychoanalysis, Psychotherapy, and Psychology, and its effect on politics.

They start by showing this Psychoanalysts Ball held annually in Vienna.  People say that because of Psychoanalysis, people can speak freely.  Example, say someone is a maid.  If they tried to complain about this they would be rebuked for not accepting their social position.

Whereas with Psychoanalysis they are free to say what they feel.

Well, is this really true?  A most basic area will be the exploitation and abuses which are the middle-class family.  So the client starts to speak.  But does the therapist really side with them?  Usually the therapist will say things which tend to exonerate the parents, and which tend to excuse what happened as being of the past, the old pedagogy manuals.

And Jeffrey Masson writes that it is part of the training to at a certain point stop listening and shift to trying to get the client to accept what has happened and to forgive.

And isn't it true that Psychotherapy is just Pedagogy Round 2?

Try to get the client to kneel down and worship the Holy Family, while acknowledging that there have been mistakes and errors, and that the old pedagogy manuals were worse than the new ones.

But the client must not see that the entire system is rotten, and all Pedagogy Manuals are just lessons in how to abuse children and get away with it.  The angry client is to be turned into a helpless neurotic.

Alice Miller writes about artistic representations of the Sacrifice of Isaac.  Why is Isaac mute and compliant.

She says that if Isaac were to raise his hand against Abraham, then "that would start the war that we all fear."

Well this is where we see the limitations of Alice Miller.  Its her Psychoanalytic training, its the effects of religion, and I say that also she was weakened by her experiences in the Warsaw Ghetto.

She finally wants Isaac to just ask "Why?"

I say that we have to strike back, we have to bring on a revolution, whether we fear it or not.  I do not fear it.

Paul Mones says that most of what we know about familial child abuse comes from the Richard Janeke  patricide case from Cheyenne Wyoming.

People learn when thing happen, and they happen regularly.  And we all learn when we act.  I learned a huge amount from being intensely involved in a child sexual molestation prosecution.

I say that it never will be like this in the therapist's office, and that someone is a therapist because they have committed themselves to the view that it is better to keep it in the therapist's office.  And I see this as being a universal truth.

135
News, Politics, and General / Re: Replies To Steve
« on: July 31, 2019, 07:11:30 pm »
Well some have said that Psychotherapy works well when the therapist lives in more non-conformist ways than the client.

But this is usually not the case though because the clients tend to be more socially marginalized, whereas the therapist enjoys a good degree of wealth and legitimation.

I imagine that when David Smale did therapy sessions that they were more like Philosophical Counseling, and that this new Diagnostic Manual is intended to steer it more that way.

Please tell me if I am correct.

Okay, but do we really want people making appointments with counselors of any type?  How about peer relationships and political activism?

If John Brown had consulted with a therapist, would he have raided Harper's Ferry?

If Huey Newton and Bobby Seale had consulted with a therapist, would they have founded the Black Panther Party for Self Defense and then approached Oakland Police while carrying fire arms?

Would suffragettes in jail have gone on hunger strike, if they had first consulted with a therapist?

Here Shari Karney, she did see a therapist, but only for a while.  Then she committed herself and worked tirelessly to find a way around SOL's, finally just having to get the laws changed.  This took about 10 years and involved much conflict.  But as she said on her web page, this is why the US Roman Catholic Church has had $2 billion in judgments against it.

Excellent made for TV movie:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108110/

I believe that if she stayed in therapy, or was the sort of person who would stay in therapy, then her legal fight never would have proceeded.

Karney is a survivor of early childhood familial sexual molestation.  And she never was able to sue her own parents.  But she opened the door to all such suits, though most have been against large institutions.  Seems to me that people are still not ready to deal with abuse within The Family.

But no one would ever accuse Karney of just doing nothing, or of aiding the perpetrators.  She is ferocious.

So I put this forward as a question, and please tell me if I am wrong or right.  Seems to me that a universal among therapists is that they are not interested in political fights over anything other than therapy.  They are certainly not interested in revolutionary activities.  Their view is that the issues and the solutions exist between the client's two ears.  While they won't anymore do like Freud and call the client's liars, they still see the client's basic complaints as being unimportant.  Rather their objective is to help the client learn to live with things as they are.

So I ask this as a question, and it is the basis of my claim that all forms of Psychotherapy revolve around something like Original Sin.

Other's knowing more than me have said this about Freud, that it is all based on a religious world view, and that it comes down the client being the one who is wrong.

I see Life Coaching as wrong or foolish for the same reasons.  But Life Coaching is likely to be shorter term and of more narrow focus, and it is not government endorsed.

In the 70's feminist groups would meet and discuss things like Incest, ****, and other horrors of a life restricted to domesticity.  They saw these rightly so as political issues.

But in the 80's concern of these issues spread to a broader and hence more conservative portion of the populace.

Hence, it all became fodder for Therapy and Recovery.

Susan Faludi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIC4uKSFpL0

https://www.amazon.com/Rocking-Cradle-Sexual-Politics-Happened/dp/0201624710

Today I read that psychotherapists say that the number one concern of millennials is that they will not be able to save enough money to retire.

Okay, so is their therapist going to change anything about this?

Why are they not at political meetings and in political protests and writing political articles, to try and bring this country to Social Democracy, and to end this politics of private wealth accumulation and of inflating the stock and real estate markets?

When one emerges from the office of their therapist, what objective circumstance of their life has changed?

I say, only if you believe in Original Sin, would you say that something has changed.

Yes, the clients are part of the problem, they seem to always be attached to reactionary social and political views, and to me this is the real source of their problem.

But you don't find therapy clients leading the charge for legal redress.  In a civilized society wrongs are redressed by law suits.  And most other industrialized countries do not even allow disinheritance.  But try to talk about this with therapy clients and they are mortified.  They don't want to even look at such ideas, because that would mean breaking out of the fantasy which therapy has created with its bad models of cognition, and seeing just how abusive this world really is.

I talk online to people from other countries and they talk about how their parents abused them.  I ask them about their country's inheritance laws, and they have zero knowledge of such.  And I am talking here about even civil law countries where the client will not even need a lawyer to collect.  Therapy has put them into this world, created by reflected memories made into a story line, and this is not how cognition works.

Where you find people who want to fight, its in those like Shari Karney and in those like the Munchausen's Survivor Julie Gregory, people who very early on excused themselves from Psychotherapy and Recovery.

Gregory ends her book, not in therapy, but dialing Montana CPS, because her mother has got a foster child, and a whole new pile of medical books, and she seems to be doing the same stuff all over again.

So I feel that the basic premise of therapy is that it is better to keep it within the therapist's office.  If this were not true, then therapists would have vast experience and knowledge about legal and political fights.

We want people hooking up with political comrades, people who are willing to take to the barricades.

What does the therapist think their sessions do, unless they believe in Original Sin or otherwise have a low opinion of the client?

Jeffrey Masson says that virtually all of the stuff discussed with a therapist would be better discussed in some other venue.  I have yet to see anything myself which contradicts this.

Deleuze and Guattari say that Psychoanalysis, but meaning Psychotherapy too, have been created by Captialism and that they are completely parasitic.

There is this 4 hour BBC documentary, Century of Self.  It is a deep and cutting critique of all forms of Psychoanalysis, Psychotherapy, and Psychology, and its effect on politics.

They start by showing this Psychoanalysts Ball held annually in Vienna.  People say that because of Psychoanalysis, people can speak freely.  Example, say someone is a maid.  If they tried to complain about this they would be rebuked for not accepting their social position.

Whereas with Psychoanalysis they are free to say what they feel.

Well, is this really true?  A most basic area will be the exploitation and abuses which are the middle-class family.  So the client starts to speak.  But does the therapist really side with them?  Usually the therapist will say things which tend to exonerate the parents, and which tend to excuse what happened as being of the past, the old pedagogy manuals.

And Jeffrey Masson writes that it is part of the training to at a certain point stop listening and shift to drying to get the client to accept what has happened and to forgive.

And isn't it true that Psychotherapy is just Pedagogy Round 2?

Try to get the client to kneel down and worship the Holy Family, while acknowledging that there have been mistakes and errors, and that the old pedagogy manuals were worse than the new ones.

But the client must not see that the entire system is rotten, and all Pedagogy Manuals are just lessons in how to abuse children and get away with it.  The angry client is to be turned into a helpless neurotic.

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 16