Reclaiming Humanity

114
255

Now that biological psychiatry has been discredited, I am championing a pro-suffering cultural shift.  It is time to stop pretending that, with the assistance of hoped-for medical “miracles,” we can eliminate everything we are afraid of.  It is time that we get over ourselves and appreciate that a full existence as humans is fleeting and full of pain, suffering . . . and beauty.

It is time we stop stigmatizing suffering and engage in our daily lives.  It is time we get up and get on with being human.  It is time to work as a community on things that actually matter. Poverty, public spaces conducive to congregation, art and play, et cetera. We need places where people can pass through, heal from, overcome and learn from intense experiences.  Drug-based psychiatric “treatment” is evidence that our social fabric is fraying because our communities are not engaged in much of anything.  We are not engaged in collective purpose or shared values, and the psych-industry’s presentation of “treatment” becomes something people go along with, out of a lack of choice, rather than face suffering in isolation.

Psychiatric disease-model “treatment” isn’t destroying the bodies of our children and eroding the potential of our communities because people believe in it.  We know it doesn’t make a lot of sense to consume drugs daily. We know that disease-model “treatment” for so-called “mental illness” is to be avoided.

Why, then, do we accept a reliance on drugs that lower white blood cell counts, cause diabetes, contribute to violent behavior, cause arrhythmia, and cause sexual dysfunction?  Why – when research has failed to find it and the supposed treatments don’t work – do we accept that a person “might have a chemical imbalance” when their experience of the world, or their behavior, is inconvenient?

On August 28, 2013 Thomas Insel, the director of the National Institute of Mental Health, dealt what should have been a fatal blow to the underpinnings of biological psychiatry when he wrote;

“Recently, results from several studies suggested that these medications may be less effective for the outcomes that matter most to people . . .  antipsychotic medication, which seemed so important in the early phase of psychosis, appeared to worsen prospects for recovery over the long-term.” (Insel, Thomas.  “Director’s Blog: Antipsychotics: Taking the Long View).

Bio-psychiatry is dead and has been intellectually dead ever since its widespread adoption as a medical discipline.  Biological psychiatrists are admitting what psych survivors have long been saying.  Society ought to lend an ear.  The conceptual underpinnings of psychiatry lack validity.  After one hundred years we have failed to root out the biological causality of hypothesized “mental illness,” and drug-based “services” have been found to have tragic outcomes by the very people whose purview the “services” are under.

If we do nothing differently, in one hundred years people will wonder why we stood by while kids developed diabetes.  People will be dismayed that we allowed the exponential growth of a system whose very promoters, practitioners, and directors conceded is based on an unproven theory and whose validated outcomes include a twenty-five year loss of lifespan for its customers. So, with psychiatry so fully discredited, why is it still with us?

My mind has been to harrowing places, where loneliness, fear, and the bewildering intensity of it all brought me to my knees.  Since then, on both voluntary and paid bases I’ve sat with people in the midst of comparable experiences, either not encouraging or actively discouraging intervention with psych drugs.  I’m glad I did it; if you can sit with and through terror – your own or someone else’s – you can do just about anything.

But I have to admit that over the past few months my need for self-preservation required me to avoid these types of interactions.  It is hard for me to admit this, but honesty compels me to acknowledge that this avoidance is related to the force which drives biological psychiatry.  It would be hard for me to blame others’ failures to confront these challenges, knowing that I have gone to the limit of my ability to do it.
Do we need to continue giving power to a phony industry by fighting it through the lens of it being so sad that so many have been brainwashed into believing in it?  No one believes in biological psychiatry.  There is a powerful distinction between accepting or going along with a practice, and believing in it.

Assignment of blame will not lift us from our profound cultural crisis. This is a conversation about fearing death and loneliness.  This is about the self-contempt I feel when I live as a tourist in the ghettos of Connecticut.  It is about needing to be loved and needed by others.  This is a conversation about life’s fragility and the reality that being human can be horrible.  A conversation about doing something as a civilization that has never been done consistently on a large scale.  A collective commitment to the well-being of each and every member of society.

It is about not seeing suffering and struggle as signs of deficiency and aberrance, but rather as part of life fully lived.  It is about reclaiming the right to be human, and celebrating the experience.

If I blame psychiatry now it is for enabling me to avoid grappling with the scary aspects of life.  If I blame psychiatry it is for approving my lack of optimism, and encouraging me to replace inner torment with psych-drugged malaise.  I blame psychiatry for shielding me from self-responsibility, when I asked to be shielded from self-responsibility.

This conversation is, ultimately, about not knowing, and a willingness to not know; not knowing what the future has in store or what the answer to all the things we’re afraid of is. It is about being willing to carry on the adventure together.  Indeed, history is full of such stories of triumph; a triumph we currently cede to the failed promises of a discredited profession.

***

Mad in America hosts blogs by a diverse group of writers. These posts are designed to serve as a public forum for a discussion—broadly speaking—of psychiatry and its treatments. The opinions expressed are the writers’ own.

***

Mad in America has made some changes to the commenting process. You no longer need to login or create an account on our site to comment. The only information needed is your name, email and comment text. Comments made with an account prior to this change will remain visible on the site.

114 COMMENTS

      • Thank you for reading.

        That line in particular is a bit of discursive jest in the name of pragmatically elliciting – via oversimplified means – community action.

        Bio-psychiatry does to some extent control and manipulate people into “believers” and the industry does exploit other societal mechanisism of mariginalization, repression, and oppression.

        I wrote that line hoping we can question whether or not we sometimes concede power to bio-psychiatry by assuming that the disease paradigm unless publicly dismantled – will always continue to grow (which it currently is in an insidious way granted)and continue to sucessfully manipulate more and more people.

        Maybe bio-psychiatry can be made obsolete without multibillion dollar corporations being dismantled?

        Report comment

        • I know what you mean, though. Most people have a gut-level suspicion of the idea that their brains are broken and they need drugs to fix them. They can be persuaded by the authority of psychiatrists and the primacy of “science” or more properly of “scientism” (the believe that “science” is the all-powerful supreme being that should guide our lives, and that questioning the dictates of its “priesthood” is akin to blasphemy), but deep down, there is still this little voice that says, “Yeah, but my life IS depressing. I SHOULD be depressed! There is really nothing wrong with my brain.” Most of the “true believers” act more like they are hypnotized or indoctrinated and haven’t really thought about whether they believe what they’re saying or not. And of course, there are a number of the big psychiatry bosses who are well aware that they are spewing nonsense with the purpose of controlling market share. But I’d say most people’s belief in biopsychiatry, while it may be fervent, has very shallow roots.

          — Steve

          Report comment

          • Thanks Steve.

            I really appreciate you broaching the issue of our society’s over zealous faith in science.

            On some level everybody already knows that drugging a metaphorical brain disorder in response to peoples’ struggles has terrible consequences. A growing number of psych survivors know this in a visceral way, having been on daily psych drugs, and now living drug-free. Parents know this seeing the bodies of their children deteriorate and witnessing the evaporation of their kids’ ability to acknowledge and connect to their emotions and the emotions of others. School teachers know this. And yes, biological psychiatrists and pharma salespeople already know and openly state this. Just listen to or read the legally required list of “side-effects” accompanying any psych-drug ad.

            Everybody already knows that psychiatric “services” suck. Whether you believe that “mental illness” is a myth and we’ve been lied to, you believe that after one hundred years of unsuccessful hunting it still makes sense to try to scientifically understand for the first time – biological causality of distressing human experience, or you believe that biological reduction of human distress is proven science – you already know that drugging the soul out of one’s self is less than ideal.

            Report comment

        • Greg,

          RE: “No one believes in biological psychiatry.”

          I mentioned to you, that line seems questionable; and, so you’ve explained,

          I wrote that line hoping we can question whether or not we sometimes concede power to bio-psychiatry by assuming that the disease paradigm unless publicly dismantled – will always continue to grow (which it currently is in an insidious way granted) and continue to successfully manipulate more and more people.

          Maybe bio-psychiatry can be made obsolete without multibillion dollar corporations being dismantled?

          That’s a wonderful response.

          Surely, it’s true, we can — at least, individually — come to the conclusion that psychiatry’s disease paradigm is a lie.

          From that point of view, we can conclude that bio-psychiatry is obsolete.

          However, I believe that bio-psychiatry — such as it is — exists largely as a product of medical-coercive psychiatry.

          And, medical-coercive psychiatry is the ultimate evil, in psychiatry.

          Were it not for the existence of medical-coercive psychiatry, bio-psychiatry would be a completely different ‘medical’ discipline, than what we now know it to be.

          It would be far more holistic in its approaches, to human suffering.

          That psychiatric ‘medical treatments’ can be (and frequently are) imposed on “patients” against their will, leads to a total distortion of facts — such that, in countless ways, bio-psychiatry, as we know it, becomes a promoter of bald-faced lies — primarily because the objections of it’s most deeply dissatisfied “patients” are not taken seriously by society… and, because those “patients” are, quite understandably, intimidated by the power of their psychiatrists.

          In fact, the truth is, most “patients” of psychiatry are deeply intimidated by their psychiatrists, even “patients” who visit their psychiatrists on an entirely voluntary basis.

          The power of psychiatrists, to forcibly ‘treat’ so-called “patients” who are viewed as ‘crazy’ is entirely well known, by one and all; and, there is terrible stigma attached to anyone for being known as a “patient” of psychiatry.

          So, relatively few people will stand up, and let it be known, how their lives have been more or less destroyed by psychiatrists.

          Relatively few will publicly declare, that they know their lives are made exponentially worse by the psychiatric ‘care’ they’ve been subjected to; such individuals tend to live quietly with their iatrogenic (medically caused) sufferings.

          They receive little or no validation from the public, at large.

          Many of these people go on utilizing psychiatric ‘care’ only because they are addicted to psychiatric drugs.

          Fortunately, most people have access to the Internet, these days.

          Most “patients” of psychiatry who research their own so-called “diagnoses” online will, soon enough, discover that many others are out there, who have been similarly “diagnosed,” who have realized that psychiatric “diagnosis” is based on B.S. science (psuedo-science, really).

          Also, they can research ways of tapering off ‘meds’ without the consent of psychiatrists.

          But, let’s not ever forget, some people cannot rid their lives of psychiatry, without very serious consequences, because of court-orders.

          Also, many cannot make bio-psychiatry obsolete, in their own lives, currently, because they are being “hospitalized” against their will.

          Many people do believe in bio-psychiatry.

          Many consider it anything but obsolete.

          Many consider it vitally essential — especially, many who find they cannot fathom or tolerate the expressed anger of a loved one.

          They believe it must be contained ‘medically’ — which means, by bio-psychiatry.

          Hence, bio-psychiatry is being coercively shoved down the throats of countless individuals, daily… and/or forced into their veins, by psych-techs, psych nurses — and even by some ‘counselors’ and ‘therapists’ working in psychiatric “hospitals” …all who dutifully wield their neuroleptic-loaded hypodermic needles.

          But, yes, many people are, in fact, finding that bio-psychiatry is obsolete.

          I’m glad to better understand your use of that expression, “No one believes in biological psychiatry.”

          Respectfully,

          Jonah

          Report comment

          • You raise a very important consideration – the fight against force and coercion needs to go on.

            When I say Psychiatry is dead it’s a bit of a rhetorical trope. It’s not that it actually is, but it is rhetorically, in that the debate is over, and we won.

            Insel acknowledged it, so we best just start talking as if it’s true, because it is true. It’s not an argument any more. The only question is why we’re still even talking about it, which is about much deeper issues than whether or not there is a mental illness boogieman or not; there isn’t.

            You are absolutely correct though – the fight against force and coercion in many contexts including psychiatry – must be intensified.

            Report comment

          • Well said, Jonah. And the United Nations is correct, forced psychiatric treatment is torture.

            I’m at least pleased one of those who tortured me has finally been arrested by the FBI. But one has to wonder how many patients he killed in total, hopefully the FBI is looking into it still.

            But I do hope for more complete justice, for myself and the millions harmed by psychiatry, after they promised to “first and foremost do no harm.” The massive societal injustice, especially against helpless children, is what is so hard for me to come to grips with. I came across this story of psychiatric child abuse today:

            http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/2002/june02/drug-induced.shtml

            Today’s psychiatrists have tortured and killed more than the holocaust doctors at this point. It’s simply sickening.

            I hope “no one believes in biological psychiatry” soon at least. Their crimes against humanity are so massive in scale it’s almost unfathomable.

            Report comment

          • Greg Benson writes,

            “…the fight against force and coercion in many contexts including psychiatry – must be intensified.”

            I agree. Thank you for your reply Greg.

            And, thank you also to ‘Someone Else’ for the acknowledgements and for that link.

            I did read through that web page, and it’s certainly a compelling story; unfortunately, that sort of drugging, of kids, continues these days (especially, in many foster homes); fortunately, that particular story does not end too badly.

            But, in any case, that’s the kind of story that should be shared amongst parents, as it provides a good sense of the extraordinary dangers of psych labeling kids (how those labels can rapidly become a school systems’ supposed justification for pushing parents into accepting that their kids should be put on a regimen of psych drugs).

            That particular story, at the Url you offered, though a very harrowing story in so many ways, does have a good ending, fortunately…

            (I emphasize that, for the sake of MIA readers who may be interested; the ending makes that story somewhat easier to digest, than would be any more entirely tragic story.)

            Respectfully,

            Jonah

            Report comment

      • The general public is mislead by a multi billion-dollar a year child drugging industry that a diagnoses of “mental disorder” (ADHD, Bi-Polar, Social Anxiety Disorder) are medical diseases or illnesses.

        We know this is a fraud. That no child has a brain scan, blood test, X-Ray or any evidence of physical abnormality to verify they are “ill” or “diseased.”

        Talk to someone on the street, ask them what causes depression, most everyone will say low serotonin.

        Report comment

        • “Talk to someone on the street, ask them what causes depression, most everyone will say low serotonin.”

          Really? So that’s what psychiatry did with all it’s propaganda power.

          Things have changed – when I was a kid people got depressed from bad things happening in their life. I guess now you have to shoot up some anti-serotonin to get depressed according to the shrinks.
          ..
          When I was still suffering from a schizophrenic condition , I occasionally got depressed, I remember it a s a very nice protective feeling sort of helped to insulate me and soothe me for a while, once in a while.
          Some people used to say “Have yourself a depression day!” I agree – it’s good for you.

          I really hope people here will begin to understand what “a pro-suffering cultural shift” really means.

          Report comment

  1. Direct, clear, passionate…overall, terrific! Yes, moving forward into the unknown, scary and exciting, our opportunity to create just as we prefer.

    I especially love this:

    “If I blame psychiatry now it is for enabling me to avoid grappling with the scary aspects of life. If I blame psychiatry it is for approving my lack of optimism, and encouraging me to replace inner torment with psych-drugged malaise. I blame psychiatry for shielding me from self-responsibility, when I asked to be shielded from self-responsibility.”

    Spot on. Time to face life head-on, on our own terms. Now it’s our turn to create a more honest and understanding society, from our authentic humanity. Let’s see what happens. You have strengthened my optimism and brightened the vision. Thank you.

    Report comment

    • Thank you. I want to be a part of creating. Just as dismantling can contribute to creating, creating can contribute to dismantling or making obsolete.

      Creating more coming off groups which a few awesome people are doing around the country.

      Creating things that are fun ends in themselves – wiffle ball leagues etcetera – no sarcasm, I’m serious, I want to be a part of this sort of thing.

      We don’t have to fuel a powerless consciousness.

      Report comment

  2. Greg- great post! Really insightful and honest. Thank you.
    Your points about stigmatizing suffering and shielding people from self-responsibility are profoundly important.
    I would suggest that your statements re: the death of bio-psych are greatly exaggerated (perhaps hopeful?). The bio-psych narrative, suffering & responsibility avoidant, “take this pill to be happy and lose weight now” is deeply ingrained in our culture.

    Report comment

    • Thanks.

      Yes, on some level this post is hopeful hyperbole.

      On another level though I do believe that declaring the death of bio-psychiatry and shouting that a defeated industry is no longer to blame for our 2014 cultural crisis – is a serious vein of thought which can contribute to constructive change.

      Report comment

  3. Greg, I think you have identified the problem very well. I agree with everything you say, and I think the ideas you put out there are insightful and true.

    But we have to work on the solutions too. I know, I know, I always sound so critical, but it just doesn’t make sense that talking to one another, preaching to the choir, is going to make much difference. We have to be out in the world, bringing our message to ordinary people. We have to make those people see that they too are threatened by psychiatric power.

    If we don’t, nothing will change.

    Report comment

    • I’ve got a story that will make that clear. It points out how even the daughter of the head of the investment committee of the board of pensions for a major US religion can run into wealthy child molesters and a psychopathic pastor, who wants to aid and abet his wealthy alleged child molester friends in covering up their child molestation hobby, or maybe the pastor was the abuser? I only know at whose home the abuse took place, not who was the actual molester. Maybe my child will remember some day?

      Oh, I was in denial of the abuse initially, but now the medical evidence has been turned over to me, so I can no longer be in denial. Part of why I was having difficulty in overcoming my denial was because I’d broken a bone 4 days after my doctor expressed concerns of the abuse and I had been put on a bad drug cocktail. Plus, the alleged child molesters were board members of my child’s “school for gifted children.” One does not innately assume board members of a school will be child molesters.

      Nonetheless, to help cover up the abuse of my child, the pastor upsets this nice Christian mommy by denying her other child a baptism, a pastoral sin marked throughout eternity with a “Never Forget” mantra, because this pastoral sin occurred at the exact moment the second plane hit the second World Trade Center building on 9.11.2001. I do now believe God did indeed have reason to be miffed with many Americans on 9.11.2001, from the psycho / pharmaceutical industries to the banks to the child molestation supporting religions.

      And after shocking me with this rude pastoral sin, the pastor calls my husband, defames me to him, and insists my husband take me to his “Christian therapist” friend. Eventually, I agreed to go because I was hoping the “Christian therapist” would help the pastor and I work out our differences. But no, she did not. She went and got a list of lies and gossip from the pastor and alleged child molesters, claimed my disgust at 9.11.2001 and the adverse effects from the bad drug cocktail were a “life long incurable genetic mental illness,” and I was immediately shipped to a psychiatrist. This resulted in a “Foul up” with Risperdal, according to my medical records.

      The story goes on and on, to the point I was eventually shipped to a Dr. V R Kuchipudi, whose now been arrested by the FBI for having many patients shipped unnecessarily to him, “snowing” them, and performing unneeded tracheotomies on them, merely for profit. But the point is anyone can be railroaded. And at least some of the psychiatric professionals (and mainstream doctors) are in the business of harming decent people, to cover up the sins and malpractice of the unethical pastors (and friends) and doctors who want to cover up their easily recognized “bad fixes” on broken bones.

      It’s a story of painting iatrogenic bipolar (I’m a fine artist and my paintings over the past twenty years speak a thousand words when it comes to visually depicting over time a sane unmedicated mind vs one being destroyed by the chaos created by psychiatric drugs), and subsequent research. And a story which hopefully will help enlighten all of humanity to the fact the psychiatrists are not ethical enough to deserve to be in charge. Although apparently neither are the religions, bankers, mainstream doctors, nor corporations. Absolute power corrupts all humans (irrespective of their profession), so no human should ever be given absolute power.

      If anyone knows of a possible publisher for such a story, I’d be terribly grateful. And my story does have a palitable and pleasant side to it, as I can basically tell the entire story in the lyrics of pop music. Which makes it much cheerier, and hopefully great makings for a movie some day.

      Report comment

    • “but it just doesn’t make sense that talking to one another, preaching to the choir, is going to make much difference. – TC”

      I don’t see this a s preaching to the choir here. The people here need to learn this ie “a pro-suffering cultural shift”
      There is actually far less support here for this than you might imagine. Far too much they try to drown and murder life and love with sympathy and support. I am so sick of seeing those sentiments misused as instruments of control -It’s Bio-psych ideology without the meds.

      People have been corrupted and co-opted at a basic level without realizing it, They need to change the goalposts as this essay suggests.

      Report comment

      • 🙂

        Thank you skybluesight.

        Changing our cultural conception of suffering and struggle might do us good.

        This is not to suggest that joy and pleasure and ease aren’t present or shouldn’t be sought out.

        It is more to protect ourselves from the harmful ramifications of the warm and fuzzy wishful fantasy that the meaning of life is happiness – simply not true IMO and I think most historical, philosophical, religious, spiritual, and artistic documents since the dawn of humankind – support this perception.

        Yes changing our goalposts might be powerful. I perceive that I grew up in a culture which implied that if someone was suffering – that was a bad thing or inherently wrong thing. Suffering is uncomfortable and hard and it is often an experience that we instinctually try to avoid or overcome – but the experience of pain is not bad or wrong in itself, and it serves an important function in civilization.

        For me, in response to psychiatry distorting the causality of contextualized suffering and causing immense harm – it is not so much about asserting a “real causality model” and “fixing suffering,” but more about acknowledging that things that feel incomprehensible, torment us, or make sense to feel deeply about – need to be left and explored in their recondite form – not reduced or resolved.

        I believe it is not the paradigm and sales pitches of bio-psychiatry which make us vulnerable to eugenic pseudo-science – but rather our innate tendency and desire to want to reduce the profound and messy – that makes us vulnerable to eugenic pseudo-science.

        IMO, on some level (albeit to drastically different degrees) no one believes in the the BS of bio-psychiatry.

        Report comment

  4. Thank you Ted.
    You are absolutely correct IMO – that placing our concerns and aspirations in a broader context which resonates with humans whom have little connection to psych-survivor identity – is one of the most if not the most vital strategic priority.

    Maybe talking about the reality of life being hard and not for the faint of heart and the drawbacks of indolently drugging our children, taps into any US social capital/neighborhood communal culture that existed prior to the nearly complete subjugation of social fabric to corporate interests which has taken place in my lifetime – more effectively than talking about the evils of bio-psychiatry and the dangers of psych-drugs specifically?

    Report comment

  5. I question whether all symptoms of ‘mental illness’ are caused by existential conflicts, isolation, loneliness, abuse, etc. An individual can experience ‘psychosis’ mood changes, and behavioral problems because of drug interactions, substance abuse or medication withdrawal, food allergies, sleep deprivation, etc. Claiming that ‘bio psychiatry is dead’ may be counter productive to individuals who seek relief from their symptoms using an alternative medical model that rejects force and values collaborative, transparent, informed decision making.

    Saying bio psychiatry is dead also may reduce the likelihood that bio psychiatry research could be used to undo and mitigate psychiatric harm, abuse, and neglect by shifting the focus of research (usually involving the brain) into practical clinical protocols to help individuals safely withdraw from psychiatric medications.

    Many individuals claim to have found great relief by radically altering their diet, exercise patterns, sleep patterns, etc. I don’t want to argue the role of medication in recovery, but if we claim that bio psychiatry is dead, aren’t we invalidating the voices of consumers and survivors who claimed to have been helped by such approaches possibly bio chemical in nature? Even placebo effect is not fully understood.

    This is where I get uncomfortable. Sometimes we sing to the choir, those of us who have been hurt or traumatized by psychiatry; we are understandably eager to create healing sanctuaries, treatment choices, reduce stigma, etc.

    I worry about ‘all or nothing’ approaches; then we all get to in-fighting over the whole ‘chemical imbalance’ theory and nothing ever changes from a policy perspective.

    People shouldn’t be forced to accept a one-sized-fits-all standard of treatment, period. People should get help when they ask for it, not have it shoved down their throats. But as for ruling out potentially promising avenues of research that may provide great relief to individuals, or ignoring the stories and voices of people who claim to have been helped with a treatment that was arguably medical in nature, I get very uncomfortable.

    Report comment

    • Have to agree Madmom and thanks for clarifying that for me. I have seen people irreparably harmed after starting a short course of benzos and I know holistically minded people who feel like their lives were saved by psych drugs. To me it has always come down to informed choice and giving people a full understanding of what they are getting into when they start “meds”. But making blanket all or nothing statements not only feels like an injustice to many people who would be sympathetic to reform, it could indeed make a lot of people just tune out the message.

      Report comment

      • “make a lot of people just tune out the message.”
        ..
        Don’t weaken in the face of fascism. If they are propel infected with bio-med ideology and getting primary rewards for the use of force then being nice to them won’t change them.

        Let them tune out and drop dead. You don’t need them. We need to dis-empower them not cater to them.
        There is nothing wrong with “all or nothing” – personal transformation requires total commitment and making an all or nothing choice to come alive or to remain dead.
        If a blanket works I’ll use it to smother the pharma agit-prop. They are waging propaganda war backed up by billions of dollars – it needs to be blanketed.

        ===================
        “aren’t we invalidating the voices of consumers and survivors who claimed to have been helped by such approaches possibly bio chemical in nature?”

        Yeah! And it’s great became those voices are invalid. And those voices aren’t even their own voices – they are the propped up puppets of the psych industry. The only voices that are valid are those that have come through to the other side and stand on their own two feet.

        ———————

        ” into practical clinical protocols to help individuals safely withdraw from psychiatric medications.”

        In what dreamworld is that? You want that done, it has to be from successful survivors , it won’t come from the Indu$try of P$ychiatric $Death$ .

        Report comment

        • I think you are making sweeping generalizations about psychiatrists and it remains to be seen whether or not psychiatry can reshape itself to the new paradigm of care people are demanding in ever greater numbers. I say, give it a chance.

          Although it is true that the majority of psychiatrists see medication maintenance as the standard of care for most ‘mental illnesses’ and they are unwilling or incapable of helping patients withdraw from meds (unless there is a compelling medical reason such as pregnancy, side effects that are life threatening and irrefutably linked to the meds, etc., not all psychiatrists are like that.

          The consumer/survivor movement has caused some psychiatrists to look twice at the evidence of harm, reflect on the recovery model, and second guess the existing standard of care.

          There is at least one psychiatrist in this MIA community who has openly shared that she is helping her patients safely reduce/withdraw from their meds.

          There are some psychiatrists listed in the Mindfreedom Alternatives Directory and in the MIA Directory who will help patients in this way. I cite this as evidence that some people trained in the medical model are willing to admit the limitations of this model and mitigate the damage done to people when the model is uniformly applied to broad populations.

          This does not include many psychiatrists who are ‘closed door’ allies, helping their patients withdraw from drugs underneath the radar so their medical licenses won’t be suspended or their tenure put at risk. My daughter enlisted the support of one such psychiatrist giving our entire family hope and faith that the system may, sometimes, serve people well.

          Unfortunately, open and closed door allies are in the minority and many communities lack such practitioners for vitally needed services. Peer delivered services are incredibly valuable, but many times, there is a medical piece to the process of rebuilding a life shattered by psychiatric harm and abuse.

          If we want more psychiatrists to practice in this way, caring less of what their peers think, and caring more about what their patients think, one of the ways we can help is to create a culture of respect and see each person, including psychiatrists as human beings capable of change and capable making good decisions. I think that honey changes people better than vinegar.

          Recently, I participated in a town hall meeting of consumers, survivors, occupiers, allies, and treatment providers; we discussed how to create a community based sanctuary for people withdrawing from drugs. We want more than discussion groups where people can vent. We want places where people can get food, lay their head at night, be safe from the cops, restore their strength and dignity similar to Soteria but tailored to our community’s needs.

          It takes real estate, community partnerships with consumer/survivor groups, corrections, law enforcers, judges, ER’s, waivers to zoning restrictions, liability insurance, referrals from emergency first responders, educational campaigns, sustainable funding, leadership, medical resources, governance, stewardship of donors, etc.

          To suggest that people in extreme states will automatically find refuge when we shift our culture to one of extreme tolerance is a utopian dream without any measurable goals. In a world that is infused with hope, real places exist where people can minger with their peers and find nourishment not just for the soul but for the body. Services such as community gardens, free clinic, clubhouses, etc. are reliable because they are structured, organized, and sustainable.(not necessarily hierarchical or institutionalized)

          Report comment

          • “I think you are making sweeping generalizations about psychiatrists and it remains to be seen whether or not psychiatry can reshape itself to the new paradigm of care people are demanding in ever greater numbers. I say, give it a chance.”

            Very good Pharma Prop especially the stuff how you co-opt the survivor movement.

            I day use a broom on the system and sweep it into the dustbin, and if that doesn’t work use the broom handle.

            Report comment

          • “Peer delivered services are incredibly valuable, but many times, there is a medical piece to the process of rebuilding a life shattered by psychiatric harm and abuse.”

            Madmom,

            Of course, there may be a medical piece to that process. Quite often, that’s true. Surely.

            But, is there a need for psychiatrists, truly?

            Are there not other kinds of physicians who could provide needed medical care — and, indeed, much better medical care than psychiatrists could provide?

            While I realize there are ‘success stories’ in the realm of psychiatry (apparently, you’ve experienced such a story, in your own family), when it comes to bio-psychiatry, I see mainly stories of abject failure.

            But, you believe you’ve seen some actual bio-psychiatric success, in your family; and, you would naturally like to replicate such success, in the lives of others…

            You know of your own encounter, with a psychiatrist who has been helpful to a family member.

            OK, I’ll take your word for it and won’t question your account of your family member’s story, as such (unless or until some contrary evidence leads me to question it); meanwhile, I know that real successes are terribly rare in the realm of bio-psychiatry.

            (I say “bio-psychiatry” as that accounts for most psychiatric practice; and, it is synonymous with psychiatric ‘medical’ practice.)

            Here I speak of bio-psychiatrists, as those are the vast majority of psychiatrists, and they are the psychiatrists who are active prescribers of psychotropic ‘medications’ (and other brain-altering ‘treatments’).

            You claim there are “many psychiatrists who are ‘closed door’ allies, helping their patients withdraw from drugs underneath the radar so their medical licenses won’t be suspended or their tenure put at risk. My daughter enlisted the support of one such psychiatrist giving our entire family hope and faith that the system may, sometimes, serve people well.”

            My response to that:

            Wonderful… for you and your family — truly. But, in good conscience I cannot possibly recommend that anyone seek to duplicate that experience, of your family, …as I know the System does far more harm than good, generally speaking; and, I know, reality dictates: It is simply not reasonable to expect that most “patients” can find a psychiatrist who will help them in the way that you describe your family member was helped.

            [P.S. — I suggest, contact the MIA commenter Altostrata, who has, apparently — for years now — worked fairly tirelessly, attempting to attract psychiatrists to take on such work. My understanding is that, she found the list of psychiatrists who will actively work that way is, in fact, exceedingly small. Most psychiatrists know next to nothing about taking “patients” off psychiatric drugs. In the course of their schooling, they aren’t instructed in such matters. (MIA’s own Dr. Datta explained that, very well, in one of his blog posts, this past year.)]

            You say there are many such psychiatrists working “underneath the radar.” Many? Really?

            I highly doubt that’s accurate.

            In fact, here I challenge you to, please, offer some ‘proof’ that there are many psychiatrists working that way.

            (Note: I don’t feel you are being deliberately misleading, yet I can’t help but challenge you, that way, as every indication that I’ve found, on the Web, is that, what you are suggesting there is simply not true. It is, I would say, purely wishful thinking…)

            But, in any case, madmom, you must realize, by this point, it would take literally battalions of psychiatrists, all working quite openly, toward getting their “patients” off pscyhiatric drugs (and, that would mean getting them off most of their psychiatric drugs, in the near term), to even begin making a dent in the plague/epidemic of poly-pharmacy (blatant over-drugging) that psychiatrists have created in recent decades.

            In my humble opinion, commenter skybluesight is right: There are quite enough resources, created by psychiatric survivors (and presented online), to lend anyone (and his/her family members) a very clear idea of how best to begin tapering off psychiatric drugs.

            [P.S. — Also, there’s the 12 Step framework for overcoming addictions. I highly recommend creating relatively small 12 Step groups, to assist in that process, of withdrawing from psychiatric drugs; only, I must say: do realize: this is not like A.A., where members are encouraged to quit drinking altogether immediately. Withdrawing from psychiatric drugs requires tapering, so it’s a different kind of 12 Step program that’s needed. (E.g., I highly recommend: Work the first three steps and only the first three steps for at least six months or a year before moving on, to the fourth. One should not be doing a ‘personal inventory’ without a strong sense of connection to ones own ‘Higher Power.’)]

            In my humble opinion, no one should be encouraged to wait upon ‘care’ from any psychiatrist, as psychiatry is unneeded.

            Finally, I must say: For as long as I live, from this point forward, I will not ever again entrust my life (nor entrust the life of any friend or love one) to any psychiatrist who works for the system. Frankly, I won’t seek professional consultations with any psychiatrists, but I am most entirely insistent, in my rejection of psychiatrists who work for the System.

            I believe no psychiatrist can be relied upon, to deliver genuine care, unless or until s/he refuses to order and/or condone forced psych ‘treatments’.

            And, while some few psychiatrists who work for the system are not inclined to order such ‘treatment,’ all psychiatrists who work for the system do condone such ‘treatment’ in some supposedly “necessary” instances.

            (Please read my preceding comment, posted above, on January 18, 2014 at 1:01 pm, so you can hopefully understand why I say: Forced psychiatric ‘treatment’ creates the very root of bio-psychiatry’s ultimate failures.)

            Medical-coercive psychiatry is the worst Systemic evil that I personally have ever encountered.

            Out of compassion, I cannot ever recommend any psychiatrist who works for the System, to anyone — because all psychiatrists who work for the System are inclined to condone coerced and forced ‘treatment’; I would not want even my worst enemies to seek the ‘help’ of such psychiatrists.

            The ultimate harms that such psychiatrists create (most often, with the best intentions) are, in the long run, far beyond the average person’s ability to imagine; no one deserves to suffer such harms.

            And, as the well-known dissident psychiatrist, Peter Breggin MD, has explained: “Psychiatry’s nature cannot be changed; it can only be constrained by public outrage.”

            Hence, your call for milder talk and your stated vision for ideal community care, though well-meaning, are not what I would ever recommend.

            I can’t recommend such calls, as they are calls for the inclusion of psychiatrists who, in working for the System, simply must condone, encourage — and, perhaps, necessarily, order — forced ‘treatment’ in some instance…

            Hopefully, nothing I’ve said here shall discouraging you in commenting further.

            I actually appreciate your comments, they are well-considered, and I find your posts to be at least as valuable as that of any other commenter on this website.

            Respectfully,

            Jonah

            Report comment

    • Oh yeah, wonderful “relief” –
      For who? the observer who can’t take it. Without ones’ symptoms one has not life. Usually the afflicted love their symptoms a lot more than the outside “altrusit” can understand.
      ..o

      Te use of psych-meds produces lobotomies pure and simple,
      It’s not that psych meds are dead but psych meds are death.
      True they might be useful as a temporary bring down but permanent use is permanent death.
      ..

      “potentially promising avenues of research”
      Ha! You are humorous. The lonesome cry of the “Sickeninious Ignoramus” bird, the bird that feasts on the leavenings of humans in the mental health industry.
      comm.

      Nobody needs research. We already know everything we need to know. We just need to practice tried and true methods of wellness and cure. If you don’t know what to do then ask a successful survivor – they will smarten you up.

      Report comment

      • “Nobody needs research. We already know everything we need to know. We just need to practice tried and true methods of wellness and cure. If you don’t know what to do then ask a successful survivor – they will smarten you up.”

        Absolute truth. Period.

        Report comment

        • When the research provides the evidence that the ‘tried and true’ methods of attaining wellness work then funding for such things including, housing, vocational training, meaningful employment, education, recreation, music, art, yoga, gym memberships, community agriculture, peer support, etc. will follow.

          Tossing research out the window is a very naive approach, considering how the world works, unless one is suggesting that we don’t need government services anymore to support individuals going through extreme emotional and mental challenges.

          If one is going to reject all forms of government support then what is going to replace current forms of support? Even if that support is meager, where will our young adults go who are being discharged from secure psychiatric facilities, back to the streets? Will their friends take care of them? Will their families take care of them? Jail? Peer support is not yet developed to the point that everyone getting discharged can rely on peer support for a crisis or a soft landing

          Report comment

          • I don’t view our aspirations for richer human communities – as revolving around deciding between values and cash flow.

            I write this because while appreciate what I think is your point – that people are left out and isolated without resources -I don’t think we necessarily need research or more money to act upon what we believe is tried and true and garden and interact intertwine our happiness with the pursuit of leading a meaningful life as a member of a community. And I believe that the existence of governmental research supported bio-psychiatric inadequate and harmful safety net – actually impedes our albeit lackluster engagement of that which is tried and true (inherently unscientific and unsubstantiated by research) basic human interaction.

            Report comment

          • “Tossing research out the window is a very naive approach, considering how the world works, unless one is suggesting that we don’t need government services anymore to support individuals going through extreme emotional and mental challenges.
            – a pharma’s Self Appointed Propagandist”

            If you stop tossing experience out the window you would find the “research” has already been done by successful survivors.
            It’s so absurd that they are spending money on “research” to find chemical imbalances on the head of a pin but do not spend a single dollar on many forms of psychotherapy which have all demonstrated the ability to facilitate many kinds of cure.

            The Government services you mention currently amount to a successful mass lobotomization and thus mass murder program.

            Legislate to take one tenth of the profit from the drug industry and funnel it into social interventions and the mental illness will start to have a 90 percent cure rate instead of a 99 percent lobotomization rate.

            Report comment

        • Personally, I would like to see more research being done. Not on brain disease, but on diseases that affect the brain. Madmom touched on this in her first paragraph.

          I understand this research wouldn’t apply in cases of trauma but it is the other side of your coin. Sick individuals with “mental illness” symptoms basically left to rot on psychiatric drugs while their medical conditions go untreated.

          I am very surprised that physicians so easily dismiss their history when there is ample evidence of conditions thought to be psychological (asthma, ulcers, syphilis, to name a few) are in fact proved to be caused by physical illness.

          Likewise, all the healing peer support in the world would not help those with physical illness, except of course learning how to cope with the disability it brings and with being labeled mentally ill.

          I don’t suppose I’ll see much money spent on this type of research. I know they redirected money on CFS research, just because, I guess it is all in the sufferers heads anyway.

          Report comment

    • madmom, thank you for reading and for your well thought out comment.

      I have no use for erroneous science. That said, the gulf between my outlook and your outlook may be smaller than you or I might perceive at any one moment.

      I don’t know what tough experiences are caused by and I feel that the value of the pursuit of causality for tough experiences is grossly exaggerated and dangerous – in our culture.

      What is true to me is that tough experiences are not symptoms and that “mental illness” is not a verified entity.

      Tough experiences are real though and I don’t know what they are or what causes them.

      What I am suggesting is that maybe value and healing lies in appreciating tough human experience as something we can’t understand, fix, or eradicate.

      Report comment

      • Perhaps being aware of how we choose to respond to and interpret rough times and experiences would at least bring in some ease and meaning into these experiences, on a soul level, which can be unconscious or conscious, depending on our individual awareness.

        We have many choices about how we respond to anything, and we can make those consciously. When we experiment with this, we find that we can actually create different realities with each response, because we can create different outcomes depending on which choices we make. We also create different feelings in our bodies with each response, which also speaks to us.

        Clarity is something we seek, naturally, and our minds are curious. If our hearts are wounded and we have negative self-perceptions, then we will naturally interpret our thoughts, actions and feelings, as well as the world around us, predominately negatively.

        Whereas if we feel settled in our hearts, relieved of the effects of trauma and victimization (the inner work), then we have a much more positive view of things, and a more positive view of life. We also have better health.

        That, alone, creates a more calm and freeing reality. We share myriad realities within one humanity.

        We can’t expect the world to change so that we can feel better. The government has nothing to do with this, it has its own agenda, nothing to do with our well-being, in practice. We have to find our own inner peace, first, before expecting it on the outside. This would start with internalizing feelings of hope. Clarity and conviction are important for positive creation to occur. Ambiguity simply creates more ambiguity. Clarity of mind depends on a healed heart.

        We create from the inside out. Otherwise, we will always be dependent on others for our power, rather than seeking it internally. That can of dependence is, in reality, disempowering, and therefore, terribly unhealthy. An unhealthy society breeds unhealthy individuals. In turn, unhealthy individuals create unhealthy societies.

        It is vital that we know our own power of creating and manifesting, without relying on others.

        I like what skybluesight says above, about standing on our own two feet. Members of healthy communities will support each other mutually. An unhealthy community, however, is one sub-group being dependent on another, exclusively. That will never work.

        One by one, each of us finding peace in our own hearts, and living authentically in our own truth, the world will shift. It’s the only way.

        Report comment

      • Greg
        I appreciate your post and the comments coming after. I hope there are hundreds more. I even more wish that there was a big circle live conversation on this post of yours and so many other brilliant posts here on MIA including commenters here, and that all was televised on national TV as an ongoing series providing funds for authentic peer survivor designed services ,respites discoveries,etc. and reaching out to warn the population what they are up against. Are there no Harvard,Yale,or Princeton think tanks opposed to eugenics that would help us ? At least anybody that sees the posts and comments here can print a copy or 2 and tape them up at local “mental health facilities” or cop shops ,near wherever they live . A sign I taped up months ago saying “Stop Psychiatric Profiling” is still hanging in place at a local facility. It’s just a matter of timing and getting it done . Just an idea that might need refinement.

        I don’t understand this statement of yours or what your reasoning behind it is: “I don’t know what tough experiences are caused by and I feel that the value of the pursuit of causality for tough experiences is grossly exaggerated and dangerous – in our culture.” If what you mean is to ignore documented history like what is clearly documented in Edwin Black’s book “War Against The Weak” then I would strongly disagree with you on this point. Various survivors have identified various causalities based on lived experience ,some are not accepted by others (they prefer pseudo science).We see how far that has gotten us. How can people tell the difference between real science and psuedo- science (It all tries to pose as science)? For me lived experience sorts it out ,66 years of it. And years of natural healing modality experience. And the lived experience of other survivors.The proof is in the pudding. Any progress I have made is after unflinchingly looking straight for and at the truth which is painful sometimes ,but which has borne fruit for me many times and is part of my truth. Sometimes it takes a lot of time.
        Fred

        Report comment

        • Thank you Fred.

          You raise an important distinction.

          What I was trying to express is that i think we as a culture emphasize a false belief that (even if it were possible) knowing and reducing the cause of our pain – somehow is the end all be all in itself in that it gets us somewhere in terms of feeling less pain. Versus focusing on how who and what we are (which is infinitely complex) engages, interprets, and interacts with the goings on of our daily worlds.

          It is vital to view suffering contextually and ask if tragedies, frictions, disappointments, abuse, etcetera – have to do with the way we are experiencing our worlds. Versus reducing our experience of our worlds to erroneous “mental illness” and devaluing a person as defective when it is what has go on in their world or in between them and other people and their world that is problematic – not a microbiological deficiency inside of them.

          That said I don’t think my above rambling paragraph amounts to advocating for replacing bio-psychiatry causality with any kind of contextual causality model (trauma model, etcetera) or any causality model for that matter.

          I feel that scientific causality models are all inherently limiting and dangerous when it comes to human perception and experience.

          Thank you for asking for clarification.

          Report comment

    • @madmom,

      You wrote:

      “An individual can experience ‘psychosis’ mood changes, and behavioral problems because of drug interactions, substance abuse or medication withdrawal, food allergies, sleep deprivation, etc.”

      I agree.

      Unfortunately, the vast majority of shrinks are either unaware or choose to ignore these things; and a person is much wiser to go to another type of doctor for treatment of these issues.

      Which is why psychiatry is dead.

      Duane
      http://discoverandrecover.wordpress.com/root-causes-of-mental-illness/

      Report comment

  6. “My mind has been to harrowing places, where loneliness, fear, and the bewildering intensity of it all brought me to my knees. Since then, on both voluntary and paid bases I’ve sat with people in the midst of comparable experiences,

    ..
    But I have to admit that over the past few months my need for self-preservation required me to avoid these types of interactions.”

    It’s a little unclear…. what happened?
    ..
    I’ve been in the worst possible, and am now on the other side , I have a foot in both worlds.

    People don’t suffer enough is the problem. Some people have nothing but their suffering and yet the shrinks want to cheat them of that.
    They want to make an ocean of spotless minds in a spotless world bathed in the eternal and vapid sunshine of chemical suppressants. An end to evolution.

    Report comment

  7. Re: “Bio-psychiatry is dead…”

    *Finally*, someone else on MIA agrees!

    But some insist that modern “treatment” with bio-psychiatry appears to “alleviate suffering”… Surely, we ought to be open to the “medical advances” in the field of psychiatry.

    The same thing was said not long ago, with lobotomies:

    http://www.thepsychologist.org.uk/archive/archive_home.cfm?volumeID=27&editionID=235&ArticleID=2403

    I diagree.
    I say, psychiatry is *dead*!

    “The more things change, the more they stay the same.” – Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr

    Duane

    Report comment

    • Someone is convinced a third lobotomy might help improve the quality of their life… Who are we to say anything?

      Really?
      Are you *kidding* me?!

      Duane

      P.S.: Long-term use of neuroleptics disables the brain. But we should just be quiet when it comes to letting others know… Really?

      Report comment

      • My doctors all swore to my husband that the worst possible adverse reaction to their antipsychotics was “thirst.” Despite the fact they’d caused psychosis in me, with the antipsychotics. And my only family history of mental illness was an adverse reaction to an old antipsychotic in a grandmother who was also made ungodly sick by an antipsychotic, and quickly taken off it.

        But if the medical community creates psychosis with drugs in a patient, then every complaint of prior malpractice – even with medical proof – is null and void, because the patient was able to be made psychotic with antipsychotics – I was dealing with a cover up of a “bad fix” on a broken bone.

        Report comment

  8. Not to sound like a broken record but again, I wanted to remind folks that 70% of all psych drugs are prescribed by non psychiatrists. And many of those doctors are just as ill informed about these meds if not more than psychiatry is.

    My point is that just because you visit a regular doctor, doesn’t mean you are safe from being pressured to take psych meds, particularly if you are the type of patient who doesn’t respond to the typical medical interventions offered for your particular situation.

    Report comment

  9. Greg, I love what you wrote, but in my experience, the general public, public officials,Big Pharma, the media, politicians, academia, and organzied psychiatry have no idea that biopsychiatry has been been disroven and that the the argument is over and we won. The public mental helath system, and those who organize and pay for the system, are still in charge and they continue to do harm to countless thousands of people. So we haven’t won yet.

    Report comment

    • Yeah but that’s not the free world, bio-psychiatry is dead in the free world where it counts. Maybe the infected zombies will cannibalize themselves,self destruct, die out and we will survive.
      Bio-psychiatry has no evolutionary value – it is the death of evolution – it turns humans into flat-lined slugs – only the resilient can survive life.
      ..
      Unfortunately like the Black Death it will take it’s toll on humanity but I guess like the Black Death it will purify the gene pool and eliminate those not fit to evolve into the next form of homo sapiens sapiens excellentus.

      Report comment

      • skybluesight,

        This comment of yours (on January 19, 2014 at 7:09 am) is very confusing to me. I wonder who “infected zombies” refers to, exactly?

        (Does it refer to all who are somehow fooled into accepting psychiatry’s disease model? Does it refer to all who are adversely impacted by bio-psychiatry?)

        Your comment seems to encourage sitting idly by as a man-made (iatrogenic) plague wreaks havoc on humanity.

        Maybe I am misreading you, but it seems to me that you’re promoting nihilism. (On the other hand, it’s possible that you are just being ironic. If that’s the case, then I am misreading you; but, I presume others may misread you too. So…)

        Perhaps, you can clarify your meanings.

        Thanks much, in advance…

        Respectfully,

        Jonah

        Report comment

          • @ skybluesight,

            Thank you for that reply. Though it is somewhat coded, cryptic, it has led me to pondering an epic work of poetry.

            (All thanks to Google.)

            Here’s a bit more of that same poem, which I find apropos…

            The vivid, florid, turgid sky,
            The drenching thunder rolling by,

            The morning deluged still by night,
            The clouds tumultuously bright

            And the feeling heavy in cold chords
            Struggling toward impassioned choirs,

            Crying among the clouds, enraged
            By gold antagonists in air–

            I know my lazy, leaden twang
            Is like the reason in a storm;

            And yet it brings the storm to bear.
            I twang it out and leave it there.

            I appreciate your having led me to that poem, but your replying comment is so spare, it does not directly answer my question (who are the “infected zombies” to whom you refer?).

            I guess I’ll take that couple of lines you’ve offered (from Wallace Stevens’ “The Man with the Blue Guitar”), to imply, that: Basically, your comment on January 19, 2014 at 7:09 am is an example of your way of singing the blues.

            That’s perfectly fine by me.

            But, your expressions can easily be misread.

            So, here I am aiming to clarify…

            I do presume, after all, that you are not who believes what you said, at last, in that comment (as you wrote, “Unfortunately like the Black Death it will take it’s toll on humanity but I guess like the Black Death it will purify the gene pool and eliminate those not fit to evolve into the next form of homo sapiens sapiens excellentus.”)

            I fully presume that, when you speak of iatrogenic effects purifying the gene pool, you are being ironic.

            Surely, there must be some people who think that way, but I don’t believe you do.

            Again, to be as clear as possible, I say: You do not believe the cumulative harms of bio-psychiatry shall ultimately ‘purify’ the gene pool; but, rather, you suspect that some people who promote bio-psychiatry do believe that…

            That is what I gather from these last couple of comments, which you’ve posted.

            Of course, you can correct me if I’ve somehow misinterpreted you.

            Respectfully,

            Jonah

            Report comment

        • @ BeyondLabeling a.k.a. Jonah on January 19, 2014 at 1:51 pm

          It is already crystal clear, you just have to accept it. The psycho-zombie Apocalypse has already happened. The small group of survivors will have to do what they have to do to survive. You have some hard choices ahead – just don’t let them bite you.

          The “asking a question” subterfuge to make angry attacks is a very old tired ploy.

          Please don’t use my name when you want to post an opinion. Stand on your on two feet and get off my coattails.

          Report comment

          • @ skybluesight,

            RE: “angry attacks”

            ???

            I am truly baffled.

            What do mean by “angry attacks,” I wonder???

            I have never felt anger toward you.

            Truly, never for a moment have I felt any anger toward you whatsoever — not ever.

            I have never felt even the slightest iota of anger toward you.

            Not the least tiny bit of anger, truly.

            In fact, whenever I’ve posted your user name in any comment of mine, it has been done with a most certain pleasure and deep appreciation for you — quite honestly.

            As it happens, I love your presence in these MIA comment threads.

            So…

            RE: “Please don’t use my name when you want to post an opinion. Stand on your on two feet and get off my coattails.”

            I can’t help but wonder, what do you mean by that???

            A couple of times, I have mentioned your user name, in my comments, as I was tipping my hat to some things you’d said; in my view, I was merely agreeing and being respectful.

            Have I been standing on your coattails???

            Frankly, I am totally baffled by this, your latest comment, which you’ve offered me.

            But, I won’t fret it, Blue Guitar.

            🙂

            Really, I am quite sorry for any way that you feel offended by me.

            I never meant to offend.

            From now on, I will not address you, nor will I refer to any of your comments, in my comments.

            Blessings to you, Sir. And, thank you for giving me such a direct brush off. (Note: I really mean it; I deeply appreciate your being so direct.)

            Take Good Care…

            Respectfully,

            Jonah

            Report comment

        • @ BeyondLabeling a.k.a. Jonah on January 19, 2014 at 1:51 pm

          It’s possible I got you wrong, so I will give you and extended answer.
          ——————-
          I repeat and extend my answer:

          “It is already crystal clear, you just have to accept it. The psycho-zombie Apocalypse has already happened.”

          My analogy stands. If you are asking who are the infected, you are probably the infected and don’t realize it, in which case you need deprogramming.
          Like in the “Walking Dead”, everyone is infected. The reason .01 percent fascists rule is that they have the willing compliance of a thoroughly indoctrinated slave class. One does not exist without the other. You can say this compliant slave class has been culturally cultivated or even genetically cultivated over generations and all those who fought for individual freedom have been weeded out and killed off.
          If you try to fight for freedom the dobermans that will tear you to pieces will be the “innocent victims” of the fascist ruling class.
          ..
          Everyone has had their brains compromised , they want to fight for freedom just so long as it doesn’t oppose the fascists that rule them – they have been crippled by fascist-compliant ideology since childhood.
          The larger picture is where do the psychiatrists and the dopey-compliant-dopers that believe them come from? They are all the extensions or products of fascist indoctrination and fascist ideology – They all “believe” in their system – like the ancient Egyptians when their fascist oppressors die they will weep and wail and bury themselves with them.

          Psychiatry generally does not create mental illness – it aggravates it, and prevents it’s cure. Mental illness on the whole comes from oppression for the top down, the rejection of personal growth processes, personal self-protection in favour of compliance to fascism and adherence to ideologies and behaviors that reject the defense and self-protection of the individual.


          Mental illness is the primarily the distribution of repression and repressive social processes, distributed from the top down into the population in the form of interactive repressive social process which become internalized in individuals manifested as personal dysfunction.

          I would think that most people like myself who have gone through madness have become de-socialized and free from their indoctrinated illusions. I would hope so, else it would be a terrible waste of the madness. This is why the authorities and “normal” people (“walkers”) hate and fear survivors so much- especially the ones that have successfully passed through.

          The small group of survivors will have to do what they have to do to survive. You have some hard choices ahead – just don’t let them bite you.

          Civilization is already dead. I am neither nihilist nor advocating standing “idly by”. I am a survivalist. First Law of Survival is do not follow the zombies into the killing field no matter who they are. I disassociate from my personal self from anyone who is following a path of self-destruction, I will not let anyone pull me down.

          If you got the anti-virus for them, by all means save them, but otherwise, don’t go out there, they will tear you to pieces. If they all should be purged in a mass destruction due to the inherent contradictions of Fascism destroying itself, then:
          “Gee, What a pity – pass the gravy.”
          ..
          They die, the race is purged, survivalists of all kinds are free. I am free.
          OK , yeah a real tragedy but….
          Deal! Free at last, Oh Free at last!

          Report comment

          • @ skybluesight,

            RE: “It’s possible I got you wrong…”

            IMHO, if you thought I was angry with you, then you surely did get me wrong; for, I was not at all angry with you.

            (As mentioned already, in fact, I greatly appreciate your contributions to the discussions on this website.)

            IMHO, it takes a big man to admit he may be wrong.

            So, thank you for reconsidering my query and offering an extended answer.

            As I read through it, I find myself in some disagreement with you; however, quite frankly, I agree with a lot of what you say; and, seldom ever do I find myself in complete agreement with anyone — especially, when it comes to philosophical and political matters.

            But, as it happens, I fully agree with the blogger (Greg), in his expressed views, on this page.

            And, I see that you, too, appreciate his message; hence, we are bound to agree in ways…

            In terms of agreeing, I concur, fascism is a very real (and growing) threat in the world today. Indeed, much of that threat comes from within this country (the U.S.).

            However, I believe it can be quite difficult for anyone to say with final authority, where fascism begins and ends.

            There have been historical trends, in various countries, which are more or less completely fascistic; also, there are tendencies which some people (especially, some politicians) may demonstrate, which are clearly fascistic.

            But, fascism is not always obvious. (I think you agree with me, on that point.)

            Some people believe that this country (the U.S.) is a fascist country; I don’t know if that’s your view; but, in any case, I disagree with that assessment.

            I say, yes, there are fascistic trends, which are evident here.

            But, fascism, like most forms of institutional evil, can be hard to peg.

            Where does it begin? Where does it end?

            Maybe it would help to define the term, as I tend to think that the word “fascism” is not well understood by many people.

            Here I offer what I believe is a fairly good definition of it, from UrbanDictionary(dot)com,

            fascism

            The only official definition of Fascism comes from Benito Mussolini, the founder of fascism, in which he outlines three principles of a fascist philosophy.

            1.”Everything in the state”. The Government is supreme and the country is all-encompasing, and all within it must conform to the ruling body, often a dictator.

            2.”Nothing outside the state”. The country must grow and the implied goal of any fascist nation is to rule the world, and have every human submit to the government.

            3.”Nothing against the state”. Any type of questioning the government is not to be tolerated. If you do not see things our way, you are wrong. If you do not agree with the government, you cannot be allowed to live and taint the minds of the rest of the good citizens.

            The use of militarism was implied only as a means to accomplish one of the three above principles, mainly to keep the people and rest of the world in line. Fascist countries are known for their harmony and lack of internal strife. There are no conflicting parties or elections in fascist countries.
            Nazi Germany was extreme Fascism, better examples of fascist countries were Mussolini’s Italy, Iraq, Iran, and many middle eastern countries.

            Look it up people, I’m not wrong.
            by Gary August 05, 2004

            http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fascism

            To a large extent, psychiatry has been used, historically, to bolster fascist rule.

            Clearly, you are no fan of psychiatry, nor am I, and I’m glad to be assured, by you, that you are completely against fascism (and fascist-compliant ideology) and that your are not a nihilist and that you do not advocate standing idly by as a man-made (iatrogenic) plague wreaks havoc on humanity.

            That plague is the effect of physicians — psychiatrists and others who promote psychiatric dogma — ‘treating’ so-called “mental illness” with brain-damaging drugs and procedures.

            In you comment, you attempt to define “mental illness.”

            I completely appreciate that, in the process of offering you definition, you are essentially condemning authoritarianism of every kind, calling it the scourge that keeps people from overcoming that which is called “mental illness.” (That’s consistent with your opposition to fascism.)

            I, myself, don’t ever claim to know what “mental illness” is, because everyone uses that term in his/her own way.

            Thomas Szasz said that the many attempts at defining “mental illness” are useless; he called it a “plastic” term, and I agree.

            And, I question your speculations regarding genetics, as you write, “…this compliant slave class has been culturally cultivated or even genetically cultivated over generations and all those who fought for individual freedom have been weeded out and killed off.” (I absolute do not believe that all those who fought for individual freedom have been weeded out and killed off.)

            My essential disagreement with you, ultimately: You say “Civilization is already dead.”

            Here, I’ll quote you more fully,in context,

            “Civilization is already dead. I am neither nihilist nor advocating standing “idly by”. I am a survivalist. First Law of Survival is do not follow the zombies into the killing field no matter who they are.”

            IMHO, it’s truly good to be assured and to know that you are neither a nihilist nor standing idly by…

            And, I can certainly appreciate that First Law of Survival.

            Simply, I believe civilization is alive; and, though isn’t well, it’s well worth saving…

            Hence, I come back to the words of our blogger (Greg), who explains, this is “a conversation about doing something as a civilization that has never been done consistently on a large scale. A collective commitment to the well-being of each and every member of society.

            And, I remind myself of something Joseph Campbell once said: “Survival is the second law of life. The first is that we are all one.”

            Again, thank you for your extended reply…

            Respectfully,

            Jonah

            Report comment

    • Hi Darby.

      I am thrilled you weighed in on this.

      In my opinion a duality exists in that it is simultaneously true that disease model psychiatry’s suppression of human potential is caused and perpetuated by its manipulative underpinnings and coercion – and this suppression of potential is not caused and perpetuated by the disease industry’s erroneous manipulation and coercion.

      I am careful to appreciate the harm perpetrated by an industry that presents a metaphorical brain abnormality as an objective laboratory measure of biological pathology – and then encourages: 1. Viewing this metaphor as the cause of contextualized suffering, intensity, and confusion inherent to the human condition. And 2. numbing your ability to acknowledge and experience suffering, intensity, and confusion with physically and spiritually toxic drugs.

      The psychiatric industry to some extent manipulates everyone who “chooses” to receive “treatment” because it offers daily regimens of pills – falsely represented as the most viable option. People who desperately want a solution are offered daily regimens of pills as a safe and effective approach they should want and an approach that makes sense to want. But everyone is instinctually uncomfortable about wanting this approach and no one ever wants to want this approach.

      While the psychiatric industry deserves blame, as the psychiatric survivors “movement” says it does, the general population accepts what we correctly deem oppressive and scientifically dishonest medicine.  The general population accepts the – at first – reassuring explanation that “you have a serotonin or dopamine imbalance” when someone’s experience of – or way of relating to – the world is inconvenient.  The general population accepts the notion that the most viable intervention for someone who “might have a serotonin or dopamine imbalance” is a long-term or life-long regimen of psych-drugs that will ultimately destroy their health. 

      I am not suggesting individual charlatans and institutions be absolved from the crime of proliferating manipulative conjecture. I am just fleshing out my perception of current societal dynamics.

      While the psych-industry is the driver of this mess and a marketing machine primarily concerned with the economic aggrandizement of a tiny sub-set of the population, I don’t think the psych-industry is our biggest problem. Nor do I believe psychiatry controls whether or not we continue to perpetuate the destruction of human potential via daily drug regimens.

      Report comment

      • Our biggest problem just may be a society that refuses to face life and it’s ups and downs without some pill to numb peoples’ feelings and emotions.

        With the death of the generation of Americans who lived thorugh the Great Depression and the arrival of technology all we seem to want to do is sit by ourselves, zoned out on music or texts, or tweets, or phone calls. I see entire tables of people in restaurants sitting there texting on their phones rather than talking with one another. We seem to want to be isolated with our technology and we don’t want to be disturbed by our emotions and feelings or the feelings and emotions of others. We as a people can’t seem to sit still in silence with our own selves for five minutes. It seems as if we want to be numbed to life in general.

        All of my friends with the exception of one take the so-called antidepressants and one even takes a so-called antipsychotic. They know all the information about how dangerous these toxic drugs are, especially to children. But when I ask them why they choose to continue to take the toxic drugs every last one of them says, “Because I’m afraid not to take them!” This makes no sense to me at all.

        I agree that psychiatry is not our worst enemy. Our worse enemy is ourselves. What did Pogo say in the comics? “We’ve seen the enemy and he’s us!”

        Report comment

        • So many people refuse to deal with and work on their own “stuff.” It’s so much easier to pop a pill and pretend that we have no issues in our lives. I have to admit that most psychiatrists are the worst about not working on their own stuff. You can smell it on them when they walk into a room. Maybe this is why they attack people so badly under the guise of “treatment.”

          Report comment

        • If you are willing to share, I am curious to know they why behind your friends saying “Because I am afraid not to take them!”

          Is is because they are afraid of the withdrawal symptoms, themselves without the drugs or their doctors?

          Report comment

          • They are basically afraid, from what I can understand when I question them further, of their “problems” coming back, what psychiatry likes to call a “relapse.” All of it really makes no sense at all to me but of course, I’m not the one involved in the worries. I myself quit the damned drugs four years ago and deal with what life brings me the best that I can without any help from drugs.

            Report comment

          • Stephen, thanks for the reply.

            Two of my friends are both certain they no longer need antidepressants, yet they are afraid to attempt to get off of them because of what their psychiatrist and their therapist, respectively, are telling them. They are told things like, “if you go off of them and try to go back on you may need a higher dose” or you’ve been on them 10 years, I don’t think it is advisable to stop”.

            I can’t say what they are being told is wrong given the withdrawal effects, yet they are not being fully informed of anything about these drugs. I am glad you got off of them.

            Report comment

  10. “It is time that we get over ourselves and appreciate that a full existence as humans is fleeting and full of pain, suffering . . . and beauty.”

    Yes there is far too much talk here of psychiatrists. The people here give them undue attention. They are lopheads, the human part has been lopped off, you will find more intelligence in a parade of oysters following a walrus.

    I remember over 40 years ago, when I was in the hospital 14 floors up pressing the elevator button.

    I became terrified that I would fall through the floor and go plunging all the way down to my death. The floor had become insubstantial like a cloud and I would fall through.
    And falling, falling, I would become smashed at the bottom, bones broken in a hundred places speared by the re-bars and I would watch my own eyeballs pop out and go rolling in the thick and spurting blood.
    I tried not to think but my mind betrayed me over and over and would not let go of the reality of my doom.
    And so, I fell.
    And flailed and fell.

    So join hands with me in space and time as we go falling in the void, there is enough fear to go around it will be endless and ever drenching.
    We will have good crunch.
    ..
    So , in the transition to the third Bardo, the aspirants go into the wilderness and fast for ten days then sit at night by the open fire and chilly night. They can no longer tell if the wolves that rip them apart and chew at their bones are real or not.
    The psychotic shatters the fundamental illusion of physical reality.
    And it is an illusion, I’m sorry folks , there is no reality. Oh, it’s there, but then again there isn’t.

    It’s a valuable experiential lesson from suffering. It’s a bonus.Don’t waste it, it will give you power especially over those who live and have only lived in flatland. That is why they fear you , you know another world, an inner world, that terrifies them and that they cannot understand.


    So two monks met a psychiatrist at a riverbank and the shrink said “Hello’ , As they walked on , one day later , one monk said
    “I wonder what he meant by that?”
    To which the other monk said “I left the psychiatrist at the riverbank, why are you still carrying him?”

    Report comment

    • Skybluesight,

      I like this comment of yours (on January 19, 2014 at 6:47 am) quite a lot. With just the least bit of personal anecdote, offered in so few words, it quickly goes straight to the point, speaking clearly of the essence of the entire failure of bio-psychiatry. (And, I love your use of traditional Eastern wisdom, in the end.)

      Thanks for writing and posting it…

      Respectfully,

      Jonah

      Report comment

  11. thank you, greg. I agree with almost of all what you have written. I am in the middle of a horrific day dealing with my husband- an obsessive thinker who was/is caught in a 10 year benzo nightmare, and has caught me and our kids in it with him. reading articles like yours validates what I have suspected/known about our broken “system” for a long time. just wanted to say thanks.

    Report comment

  12. @Jonah
    Sorry Jonah, IMO, You are one of the infected, you have been compromised. You have been propagandized to support your own oppression and worse not even see it. This is an indoctrinated mental illness or in fact is the source is the source of much mental illness.
    If I’m arguing with you , I’m arguing with the system that created you and the system that you have been indoctrinated to protect. Your arguments are not your own arguments they are from your handlers and you have been indoctrinated to argue , to be a doberman of the system, to identify with it and protect it. Compliance has been achieved in you.
    This is the propaganda that has been extended into the population through social indoctrination of all kinds . I find these arguments tedious and repetitive. Always the same over and over again cutting off the ever recursive the tentacles of a monster..
    .

    North America is under totalitarianism. You don’t need a dictionary to figure it out, you just have to be wide wake. Neither you nor a community representing your interests own anything significant that you have – least of all your mind. Oh yeah – some people can hollow out small domains of escape with in the oppression, for now anyway.

    I absolute do not believe that all those who fought for individual freedom have been weeded out and killed off.

    You see? You are defending against things I haven’t said because you haven’t considered these concepts openly and objectively.


    “Simply, I believe civilization is alive; and, though isn’t well, it’s well worth saving…”

    Yeah , well you can’t even save yourself and story after story here shows that people can neither save themselves from themselves from the system (civilization ) that oppresses them.
    You can’t even separate your survival from the the survival of the fascists who own you.And you make it all one ( a concept which which was indoctrinated), it’s not all one – replace the world civilization with “system” – you mistakenly think it’s the only system that exists, that can exist and you want to save it all as a unit thus saving your oppressors.

    ” Joseph Campbell once said: “Survival is the second law of life. The first is that we are all one.”

    These and the other things are the general ugly thing I object to. The use of “lovey dovey attitudes” which actually promote and indoctrinate fascism and oppression – it’s nothing to do with love.
    In this fascist indoctrination -you learn to feel guilty about protecting yourself from oppressors – you didn’t first learn it from Campbell you probably were indoctrinated with anti-survival attitudes and to surrender to the “system” in Kindergarten.
    ..
    We are not all one, I am not one of “you” for sure, I do not represent the interests of my oppressors and reject them and all their agents and sockpuppets. and I am not one of your “them”, I am one of “us” the free, I have freed myself.

    “A collective commitment to the well-being of each and every member of society.”
    It’s good that you should understand what you do not have.

    I don’t attempt to define things. I attempt to explain things I know to be true form my experience. You can’t learn these things by arguing about them at this level – this is the level of consequence or effect so this is another useless conversation.

    I, myself, don’t ever claim to know what “mental illness” is, because everyone uses that term in his/her own way.

    Then perhaps you need to suffer more til you can say or know something definitive. Human experience is universal – that is First Law – that’s something psychiatrists try to deny by refusing to understand that something like for instance , schizophrenia , is just a dysfunction of normal psychology and by looking at normal psychological processes they can usually find a cure.

    Szaz is mostly useless in that most people use him to evade responsibility and avoid success and self-change.

    So the cure for the infected is to learn self-change and adherence to growth principles which include learning to accept suffering. When you become cured, the walkers will smell you and try to tear you to pieces. The cure can’t be achieved in arguing against a propaganda system.
    Genuine psychotherapy is actually revolutionary which accounts for it’s suppression by the fascist system we live in. It creates people that are self-protective and will challenge oppression. If people want a healthier society they have to advocate for the acceptance of true growth processes and the elimination of the anti-growth processes in popular culture. This is actually a revolutionary act agaisnt a totalitarian system

    Report comment

    • @ skybluesight

      Thank you very much for your reply.

      First of all, about the term “mental illness”: I think maybe you misunderstood me.

      Here I will briefly explain…

      I do believe there are sufferings, which many people experience, which are called “mental illness”; and, I do believe that such sufferings are typically made worse by bio-psychiatry.

      Simply, I don’t accept any definition of “mental illness” because that term means countless things to countless people.

      Here is a link (I have posted it already, a few times, in my recent MIA comments) to an article regarding the term “mental illness.”

      http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sacramento-street-psychiatry/201312/who-is-mentally-ill?tr=HdrQuote

      I agree with that article. It’s written by a psychiatrist, whom I know nothing about. (Apparently, he has written other articles, but that’s the only one which I’ve read.)

      Surely, if I were to learn more about that article’s author, I’d find many things objectionable, in his views; however, I do agree with his conclusions, in that article, most especially, when he comes to say,

      In my view, “the mentally ill” harbors too many unstated implications and vaguely shared assumptions regarding whom we are talking about.

      I completely agree with that view.

      Therefore, I don’t think of anyone as ‘mentally ill.’

      However, I can and do well accept that you think of some people that way.

      And, I find your views interesting.

      In fact, before I respond further, now, I will add: I don’t take offense at anything you’ve said, and I don’t feel attacked in any way, so I am feeling no anger whatsoever, as I offer this reply.

      (I say I am feeling no anger, because you previously believed I was angry when I was not angry at all; and, I am hoping to avoid a recreation of that misunderstanding.)

      I am not angry at all. I am merely curious…

      You say,

      “Human experience is universal – that is First Law – that’s something psychiatrists try to deny by refusing to understand that something like for instance , schizophrenia , is just a dysfunction of normal psychology and by looking at normal psychological processes they can usually find a cure.”

      I agree, human experience is universal; and, to me, that is exactly what Joseph Campbell was saying: “We are all one.”

      But, I don’t believe “schizophrenia” is a useful concept.

      (IMHO, “schizophrenia” is a worse than useless label, as it means far too many things to too many people… just like “mental illness” means too many things to too many people.)

      From considering the context of various comments you’ve posted in these MIA comment threads (including your comment above (on January 19, 2014 at 6:47 am), I believe that, when you speak of “schizophrenia,” you are referring to what I think of as, ‘personality disintegration.’

      I experienced a bit of that phenomena, in my own way, back in the mid 1980’s (when I was in my early twenties).

      The psychiatric ‘treatment’ that was forced upon me, at that time, made the situation much, much, MUCH worse.

      After a little over three years, I got away from psychiatry (and, that means, of course, I got away from all the psychiatric druggging); in the following couple of years, I gained a very strong sense of myself, as bodhisattva (in the tradition of Nichiren, which is a form of Mahayana Buddhism).

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhisattva

      I had no psychotherapists to turn to… (in fact, I had to leave my psychotherapist, because my psychotherapist supported the psychiatrists’ view, that I supposedly needed psychiatric drugs to survive).

      I have been free of psychiatry and free of psychiatric drugs ever since.

      I was greatly helped, then, by that Buddhist practice.

      In recent years, I have come to appreciate many forms of spiritual practice (including various forms of Buddhism).

      I think that many forms of spiritual practice, which include meditation (including forms of yoga), can serve as a basis for overcoming the sorts of sufferings that are usually called “mental illness.”

      Respectfully,

      Jonah

      Report comment

      • P.S. — @ skybluesight, I disagree with your view, that “North America is under totalitarianism,” but I do believe there is an evil system system in our midst; that’s called medical-coercive Psychiatry.

        As a rule, medical-coercive Psychiatry provides ‘treatment’ that is anything but healthy; in fact, it tends to inflict its so-called “patients” with the precise inverse of good care; it offers exactly the opposite of what would bring about health and well-being, in most instances.

        Why does such a system continue to thrive and hold sway, over the lives of millions, in this country (the U.S.)?

        I believe one reasonable answer to that question, is simply, that: It is an enforcer of ‘norms’ and a most convenient ‘denial system.’

        Many families are, on the whole, dedicated to keeping their members in line.

        S/he who would step out of line will be viewed as ‘mentally ill’ — because there is a tendency for most families to want to avoid revelations, regarding the actual realities, of what that seemingly anxious and/or angry individual’s life is expressing.

        In essence, families turn to the State, and the psychiatrist becomes fascistic/totalitarian, in his/her ‘treatment’ of that individual family member.

        Medical-coercive Psychiatry is a fascistic system, which adopts an appearance of ‘medical’ propriety.

        It will prevent the so-called “patient” from receiving good psychotherapy.

        In my first months of so-called “involuntary hospitalization,” I was, indeed, strictly refused any form of therapy, as I was being literally ‘brainwashed’ into thinking of myself as ‘mentally ill’ (with loads of unwanted psychotropic drugs).

        I begged to speak with a therapist, and it was not allowed.

        Many years later, my mom would explain to me, that she had been told (here I paraphrase), “They told us they can’t give a person therapy when he’s insane. They told us, first they had to seal the patient.”

        (What a truly Orwellian term, that is: “…seal the patient!”)

        In fact, I was not insane before I’d been forcibly made into an “inpatient”; only, I was being made ‘insane’ by constant drugging.

        And, psychotherapy was not allowed; it was forbidden.

        From this point of view, I feel your comment’s conclusion is right on.

        So, it bears repeating,

        “Genuine psychotherapy is actually revolutionary which accounts for it’s suppression by the fascist system we live in. It creates people that are self-protective and will challenge oppression. If people want a healthier society they have to advocate for the acceptance of true growth processes and the elimination of the anti-growth processes in popular culture. This is actually a revolutionary act agaisnt a totalitarian system”

        But, should anyone expect that the government will ever provide such psychotherapy?

        I don’t think so…

        Respectfully,

        Jonah

        Report comment

  13. Too many responses about psychiatrists and not enough about how to suffer more and embrace it.
    ..
    I’d like to see more people share about how to promote more suffering. First we must understand that anti-suffering is anti-life. You can’t take away the negative an have only the positive. Some people have only the negative, if you take it away then they have nothing, they are dead and dead-ended.

    Intervention,challenge and confrontation is very important The first good thing my psychotherapist did was to punch me on the shoulder , yes to physically assault me. He then ridiculed me extensively for my reaction when asked what do I feel?
    (I only said my shoulder feels a little sore.}
    The co-therapist across the circle was very warm and friendly and commiserated how how the two punches were very loud sounding ,even to her sitting across the circle. But even she asked me the question I couldn’t answer – how do I feel about it?
    This started to wake me up, to tell me what was wrong.
    They started me. Six months later I put my fist to a pillow and started to become alive.

    Can u imagine a psychiatrist or another agent of the state even considering to do either of these two types of interventions – actually promoting a schizophrenic to be angry?
    No.

    But I try to make my point for various forms of interventionism and living in an interventionist way. Interventionism is never certain, it is always a risk.
    But ordinary living is a risk – when we live on the edge, we are excited, when we live in the protected zone we are bored.

    The neurotic lives in mostly a cold and locked in world. The popular psychiatric attitude is that people have stressors and thus the solution is to avoid them – this guarantees mental illness – – growth processes in any form do the reverse. Popular attitudes are that when people are hurt we are to avoid any mention of it or discussion about it or even worse where it is inappropriate to pour loads of life-smothering sympathy on it.
    ..
    Popular attitudes do not distinguish between negative criticism meant to destroy and critical analysis meant to build up. For many people the inability to distinguish between the two (because of their background) puts a “cork in the bottle” – the healing elixir of life cannot flow out.

    Report comment

  14. @ Jonah

    “I agree, human experience is universal; and, to me, that is exactly what Joseph Campbell was saying: “We are all one.”

    ..

    No , it isn’t saying the same thing. He was drawing a goody two shoes conclusion for you.He was a storyteller and storytellers manipulate their audiences and tell happy endings.

    He didn’t tell you the full truth which is one part of humanity has to kill the other part who have made the wrong choices.
    The full truth is we are all one at birth, but later on in life “We are all Two”.
    You have to make a choice and not to make a choice is a choice.

    One idea is about similarity in functioning, the other is about what we do with it and what we are.

    The full truth is in the “Three Character Classic” which describes how all people are born the same at birth but become different by choosing one of two paths at some significant time in there lives.

    Report comment

    • @ skybluesight,

      I quite disagree with your assessment of Joseph Campbell and his views.

      I stand by my interpretation of what he meant, as he said “We are all one.”

      From what you’re saying about him (and about his having explained “We are all one”), it seems to me you’ve not read him fully enough, to understand his message.

      IMHO, his message was contained in that line, “We are all one” — which was, indeed, an encouragement, to develop compassion; however, that is not all; his ultimate message was that, each of us is endowed with the same essentials required to live heroically but, of course, on our own unique scale and ‘stage’ of life.

      According to Campbell, we might never be widely acknowledged, but that doesn’t matter; life’s greatest gifts always come from simply following ones own bliss and striving to develop compassion.

      In his view, the compassion that one must develop, need not be — and, indeed, probably could not be — all-encompassing.

      A soldier could develop immense compassion, in the midst of doing battle.

      To Campbell, the Holy Grail is the development of compassion; however, he doubted that anyone might develop compassion for all people equally, and he did not recommend attempting to do so.

      For example, I offer you the following passage (from the book, A Joseph Campbell Companion):

      Committing yourself to a person unconditionally is very different from having unconditional love for everybody in New York City. I’m not the Dalai Lama, who’s supposed to have unconditional love for everything in the world. Even God doesn’t have unconditional love. He throws people into hell. I personally don’t even think unconditional love is an ideal. I think you’ve got to have a discriminating factor and let bastards be bastards and let those who ought to be hit in the jaw get it. In fact, I have a list. If anybody has a working guillotine, I’d be glad to give them my list.

      (page 52)

      (Important to note: In that passage, above, Campbell’s reference was to the mythological ‘God’ of ancient stories; and, he was not a believer.)

      Campbell also said, “When I look in the faces of my enemy, it makes me proud.”

      I believe, in that line, he was implying two things simultaneously: He was recognizing the possibility of turning an enemy into a friend, and he was acknowledging the special dangers, especially of our modern age, wherein technology can allow complete strangers to all too easily wind up killing one another, by remote-control, at great distances; I believe he was cautioning against becoming in ways overly hasty, in deciding who should get the guillotine.

      Respectfully,

      Jonah

      Report comment

  15. @jonah
    Why does such a system continue to thrive and hold sway, over the lives of millions, in this country (the U.S.)?
    ..
    Because they are backed by a multi billion Drug Pharma Industry which is part of a larger drug industry which is one of the top earners of profit for the power elite (less that .01 percent) who own 96 percent + of the wealth, fund both political parties, have all the politicians in their pocket at every level, own all the major TV , Radio and news media that pipe propaganda into your head 24/7 and own almost everything you are dependent on -roads, cities, power, health services, housed cars etc. and almost everyone works for them as serfs or slaves with no ownership in those enterprises whatsoever and the overriding mission of the elite is to achieve absolute power and control over the US population.

    Its a system of economic fascism approaching near perfect totalitarianism.
    You have already lost lowlander. You don’t even know your enemy so you have no hope of winning or surviving.

    —-

    Report comment

    • Why does an openly fraudulent and harmful paradigm persist and grow? Drugging each other is a product of capitalism, poverty, racism, imperialism, and infinite systems far grander than psychiatry.

      Systems created by the downfalls of human nature and whose ills reflect flaws within us all. Biological psychiatry is born from and feeds off of our generalized unwillingness and inability to connect and interact. If psychiatry is but one problematic system of many resulting from and persisting because of our indolence, fear, and selfishness – it seems to me there is no “them” for “us” to overthrow. We must occupy and alter our behavior in order to dismantle the psychiatric powers that be.

      After all, humans run psychiatry.

      I am not suggesting that the down with mantra is discreditable. It is quite credible in an intellectual sense and it creates space for more people to avoid psychiatry. I am suggesting – in my slightly young, slightly tall, Caucasian, heterosexual male, self-absorbed, can’t sleep at night ambivalent kinda way – that biological psychiatry is one manifestation of our overall inharmonious way of coexisting and our tendency to distance ourselves from that which is messy about being human.

      So perhaps we should evolve our degradation which biological psychiatry grows out of – not as a “systematic” form of support or a way to foil current “treatment” – but as an end in itself that has nothing to do with biological psychiatry – lest we dismantle biological psychiatry and humans up against marginalization for more than just active minds become manipulated by whatever manifestation of our collective degradation replaces psychiatry.

      In this way instead of fighting an insidious force to which we’ve conceded control, we sort of say: “Who cares about biological psychiatry? It is already dead!” Or, “Biological Psychiatry!? Psssssst – who cares?”

      Maybe we should ignore psychiatry and do what we want. Independent of what psychiatry does or doesn’t do maybe we should advance the fabric of our collective existence.

      Maybe psychiatry is an insignificant pawn in a collective consciousness that we control. In the spirit of Frank Zappa maybe we should eat a doughnut and stick to wholesome activity.

      Hypothetically, if we were to dismantle the psychiatric powers that be – regardless of whether this were accomplished via the down with message, occupying our behavior, or some combination of the two – a war ridden, patriarchal, and poverty stricken world absent of psychiatric abuse – is not a world I’m satisfied with.

      Report comment

      • “Maybe we should ignore psychiatry and do what we want. Independent of what psychiatry does or doesn’t do maybe we should advance the fabric of our collective existence.”

        Greg,

        Ignore psychiatry? (Now I find myself disagreeing with you.)

        Of course, you can ignore psychiatry; you do that if you wish. I would be a personal choice.

        In fact, come to think of it, if you are feeling inclined to ignore it, maybe you should.

        I suggest, why not begin ignoring it today, and see how long you can go on doing so…

        Sometimes, I force myself to think about other things.

        I take periodic ‘time outs’ from thinking about psychiatry. (IMHO, that’s may be entirely necessary, at times — in order to gain some needed peace of mind and better focus on family responsibilities, personal goals, etc..)

        It’s certainly important that we develop a capability to think of other things!

        But, isn’t that different from what you are saying, as you use that phrase, “ignore psychiatry”?

        Should any form of genocide be ignored?

        I leave you with a brief passage from Thomas Szasz’s book, Coercion as Cure: A Critical History of Psychiatry (2007),

        Many people recognize that psychiatrists deal with human problems, not diseases of the brain, which fall in the domain of neurologists and neurosurgeons. However, it is one thing privately to recognize a “forbidden fact,” another to accept its moral and social implications, and still another to proclaim publicly that the psychiatrist-emperor is not merely naked but a liar and an abuser of his fellow man, unworthy of being considered a member of a healing profession. Despite seemingly radical changes in psychiatric principles and practices during the past half century, I contend that the truth about this mala fide medical specialty remains so terrible that it invites disbelief.

        (page 13)

        I highly encourage you to check out that book — or, at least, that page…

        http://bit.ly/1eew9rF

        Respectfully,

        Jonah

        Report comment

          • Jonah,

            Very fair criticism. The above comment of mine is glib and can alienate people and muddle my main point.

            What I want to say is: can we ignore psychiatry framed as psychiatry and talk about it as manipulation of universal wishful tendencies of humans, eugenics, genocide, or many other deeper issues about ourselves which the perpetuation of a phony science might make us contemplate?

            Hard to do granted – but can we ignore the debate about wether or not bio-psychiatry makes sense or how harmful versus helpful it is?

            We’ve already won that debate.

            Report comment

          • “Very fair criticism. The above comment of mine is glib and can alienate people and muddle my main point…”

            Greg, I see, you were being glib, and you’re really aiming to generate discussion that’s deeper than the tired old question, of whether or not bio-psychiatry is helpful. (Yes, we have won that debate.)

            Thanks for your reply.

            Be well (I’m taking a break from commenting now).

            Respectfully,

            Jonah

            Report comment

      • “Maybe we should ignore psychiatry and do what we want. Independent of what psychiatry does or doesn’t do maybe we should advance the fabric of our collective existence.”

        Of course. Psychiatry is proving more lethal to humanity that the Black Death.

        However the problem is that psychiatry will not ignore us. They are the foreteeth of a hungry monster. The best thing to do is to form cells of resistance and hope to keep the flame of knowledge alive in the ongoing and increasing storm of fascist oppression and control. Let us hope they break themselves and civilization can reconstruct – though this may take hundreds of years.
        It will take some patience to wait that long….

        Report comment

        • “…the problem is that psychiatry will not ignore us. They are the foreteeth of a hungry monster. The best thing to do is to form cells of resistance and hope to keep the flame of knowledge alive in the ongoing and increasing storm of fascist oppression and control. Let us hope they break themselves and civilization can reconstruct…”

          @ skybluesight,

          That’s well said. Here you are offering a good plan (and I share your sentiments).

          Respectfully,

          Jonah

          Report comment

      • Anon,

        As this website exists as an online community of sorts, I am now looking for feedback, on what has transpired between skybluesight and myself, in this comment thread.

        These two brief comments that you’ve offered provide the first first feedback I’ve received.

        You explain, “My comment above was in response to skybluesight’s entire entry on January 22, 2014 at 6:01 pm.”

        That line, of yours, refers to your preceding comment.

        Hence, you are making readers aware that the preceding comment is your message to skybluesight; there, you are offering praise for his comment, on January 22, 2014 at 6:01 pm.

        It is really high praise. You say, “Your words are very insightful, and you may have just turned a few people’s world views upside down. Or outside, in, as the case may be.”

        Of course, you are aware that that comment of his is largely a critique of me.

        And, it seems to me, that skybluesight has been quite unfair in his characterizations of me, in many of his comments.

        That comment seems particularly harsh, especially in its first few paragraphs.

        He accuses me of attacking himself and others.

        He never says who those others are.

        Nor does he say how I’ve attacked anyone.

        I don’t believe I have attacked anyone.

        From what you’re saying, should I gather that you feel skybluesight has accurately characterized me and my actions?

        I am sincerely curious, do you feel he has been entirely fair, in assessing me, as he does?

        Do you think he is correct, regarding literally everything he says of me?

        I am very interested to know…

        Respectfully,

        Jonah

        Report comment

        • Jonah,

          I have only marginally followed the exchanges between you and skybluesight. Even if I did follow them well, I wouldn’t weigh in on them anyway; it is between you and him.

          All I will say is that searching for validation from everyone you converse with on the web is a “fool’s errand”. No, I am not calling you a fool. I mean it is not a pursuit that can be realistically achieved, and even if you did achieve it through some miracle of random sampling, what would you gain from it? Maybe it’s better to disagree and to teach or learn something than to just discuss things with those that already agree with you.

          For the comment where I wrote that it was in response to the “entire” post, maybe it would have been better stated if I had used the term “theme” or “gist” of the post. skybluesight nailed it once again when he wrote
          “The post he referred to is about far more than you, it is to everyone, another way of looking at some things – where you are involved it is personally impersonal.” I was reading it as a generic “you”, not that it was personal to you, and that it was directed at a mindset. If you happen to have that mindset, so be it.

          The following is what I took from his comment on Jan 22 at 6:01. I have tried to use the simplest analogy possible, skybluesight can correct me if I am wrong.

          There are two forces on either end of a rope, the psychiatric community and those they label/treat/ostracize. They are engaged in a constant battle, with a little ground being won and lost on both sides all the time. But that isn’t the real fight. skybluesight saw that the tug-of-war was inside of us, between healthy and unhealthy. So, he dropped the rope and found a way to heal. He probably drew on all kinds of people and experiences to do so.

          The tug-of-war is no longer his battle. A man not pulling on the rope doesn’t define himself in the world that exists on either end of the rope. Not the one of the psychiatric community on a mission to force people to be well, nor the one where people exist in a world where their definition of themselves, and even their healing, is in response to what the psychiatric community isn’t. What would happen to you if the whole psychiatric community disappeared tomorrow? Would you still be clinging to the rope, lost without the forces that would pull against you, stuck in unhealthy?

          Can’t you see how free he is now he is not in that war? So, I don’t expect it goes over well with him when others ask him to take up the rope again. I think it is awesome that he is trying to show others the way he took to healing and freedom. It makes a whole paradigm shift in thinking, from a world where you are acted upon and react, to one where you win your battles inside of yourself.

          skybluesight – You’re very welcome, and of course I was sincere, life is way too short not to be 🙂

          Report comment

          • P.S. — Anon,

            In the reply comment that I just posted, to you (directly above), I offered the following lines,

            “It seems to me, that maybe (just maybe) he’d like to develop a system of non-medical coercive ‘mental health’ (IMHO, such a system would be an abomination).

            Upon rereading those lines, now, I believe they could be misread.

            So, here I’ll be perfectly clear:

            1. I am totally opposed to medical-coercive Psychiatry.

            2. I am also totally opposed to coercive psychotherapy.

            Essentially, I am entirely opposed to coercive ‘mental health care’ in all its possible forms — as I deeply believe that everyone should be afforded freedom of thought, always.

            Report comment

          • @ Anon, Very well said, right on ad beautifully expressed.
            ..
            Yes, “inside yourself’. This is it, the inner world. I wish I had had someone like my post-cure self to explain things to me long before that. The wild ride and long road I took might have been much different.
            After I passed over, I reviewed my life and I wondered why with amazement, from all the counselors, shrinks and workers I had seen in my life from all those I had sought out help, why no one had ever told me about this really simple stuff – about emotions, about how they worked , how they could transform and how they were related.
            ..
            But now I know , sadly why…in the general public their meta consciousness, their awareness of their consciousness is very very under-developed and social oppression helps to keep it that way.

            Yes, there is a lot of work to be done.

            Report comment

LEAVE A REPLY