Psychotherapy: the queen of the cults

Or:

The ten books that made an impact in my life
before I became racially conscious
7.- Final Analysis
(read in 1999)

Do you know that one of the editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the official diagnostic guide of the American Psychiatric Association used by all psychiatrists, holds that for a “patient” to state that a therapist is boring is a primary sign of “the self-defeating personality disorder”? I propose the following experiment to those racially conscious individuals who believe that psychotherapy on mental issues represents a legitimate profession: Make an appointment in the nearest therapist office and express your racial concerns.

Your concern will be immediately labeled as pathological by the professional whether he or she is a psychiatrist, a psychoanalyst or a clinical psychologist.

I have devoted one of my most thoughtful papers to the subject of pseudoscience in biological psychiatry, but have not touched the subject of the non-psychiatric professions in the so-called “mental health” field. Here I would like to mention the book that has debunked psychoanalysis as ferociously as Phil Klass debunked the field of UFOlogy, or as James Randi, mentioned in my previous entry, has been exposing the “psychics” for decades. I refer to Jeffrey Masson’s Final Analysis: The Making and Unmaking of a Psychoanalyst.

Final Analysis is, by far, the most searing exposé of psychoanalysis that I am aware of. Keep in mind that Masson was a Harvard professor, a prominent psychoanalyst and that later, when he realized that his own profession was a fraud, Masson completely abandoned the very lucrative practice of therapy.

Only from the literary point of view, Final Analysis is a treat: Masson’s misadventures in the cult of psychotherapy are as readable as any entertaining novel. It is true that, as a typical liberal, Masson ignores that race matters. But the above thought-experiment that any racialist could put into practice to check for himself the legitimacy of the therapeutic profession, moves me to quote Masson’s final words of his book:

There are no experts in loving,
no scholars of living,
no doctors of the human emotions
and no gurus of the soul.

For the other nine books see here.

Published in: on June 14, 2012 at 5:13 pm  Comments (10)  

10 Comments

  1. Very good experiment proposal. As someone who is quite knowledgeable too on the “psy” spectrum of professions (I use the term spectrum because it is a vast dump with hundreds of incompatible theories :)), I can confirm that any general critique of society, any notion that there is a social decay or a social problem, would indeed tend to be interpreted as the sign of an underlying psychic disorder.

    Which led me to tell humorously a psychologist friend once that “if Baudelaire and Maupassant had been born recently, they would have ended in an asylum for pessimism”. He agreed that certain elements of the profession tend to go too far.

    My advice on psychotherapy is of course that it is bunk; it can have an utility if you feel the need to talk to someone about your existential questionings and have no one in your entourage to do so. But beyond that, the “common sense” of the laymen is right: a shrink can’t fix your problems more than you can.

    • My advice on psychotherapy is of course that it is bunk; it can have an utility if you feel the need to talk to someone about your existential questionings and have no one in your entourage to do so.

      That’s why I advice nationalists to become familiar with other pseudoscientific movements besides the most obvious (Boasian anthropology, etc) in the academia, because even that statement is not true.

      The point of Masson’s book, which I have corroborated dozens of times with all sort of therapies when I tried to look for help before my abusive family, is that invariably the therapists side the family and the status quo against the victim.

      Masson says that he who enters a therapist’s office could be psychologically damaged, seriously damaged I mean. The worst insults I have received in life came from a psychoanalyst when I was seventeen. You won’t believe the level of siding with the perpetrators endemic in the analytic profession. Decades later, thanks to Masson and others I found out that siding with the perp is very common in the profession. I am even tempted to translate my chapter on Freud to elucidate this point.

  2. On a relevant note, Breivik’s original psychiatrists (Torgeir Husby and Synne Sørheim) have reconfirmed their judgment that he is “schizophrenic”.

    Their rationale is his “lack of empathy”, and “bizarre, grandiose and delusional thoughts”… seems subjective and shaky at best for a supposedly scientific diagnosis, especially when they detail what are these thoughts:

    […] He was convinced that he was a warrior in a “low intensity civil war” and had been chosen to save his people. To the psychiatrists, Breivik described plans to carry out further “executions of categories A, B and C traitors” by the thousands, themselves included, and to organise Norwegians in reservations for the purpose of selective breeding.

    Perfectly normal for someone who feels he has a mission to fulfill. As to the “selective breeding”, Breivik probably talked about eugenics and the shrinks didn’t understand very clearly.

    No, the truth in all this is that Breivik, like many before him, is targeted by a political diagnosis. As Yuri Andropov in the USSR understood, psychiatry is the most efficient tool for dissidence control since it provides character assassination, shaming and guilt by association all at once.

    • Absolutely, but the scary thing is that it’s happening in the West too, especially by controlling white children, especially intelligent males, with licit drugs—and nationalists are unaware of it. (This is one of the reasons I became upset with Greg Johnson: he preferred to publish implicit homo articles instead of my piece exposing this scandalous situation in NorthAm.)

  3. Personally, I tend not to care if a male over, say, 13, voluntarily accepts to take drugs — it is his choice, he is mature enough. What is indeed more of a problem is the “helicopter mom” phenomenon, which can be described as gullible and well-meaning American housewives drugging their young children in order to “improve” or “fix” them. All sorts of drugs, including antibiotics and statins.

    HBD blogger OneSTDV wrote a lot of posts on this subject with the keyword “War on Childhood”. If you don’t know them already, they are highly interesting and well-put. He has especially nailed the egalitarian component of this phenomenon: parents cannot suffer the idea that their children may not “succeed in life” (whatever this means) and therefore become hypochondriacs.

    (This is one of the reasons I became upset with Greg Johnson: he preferred to publish implicit homo articles instead of my piece exposing this scandalous situation in NorthAm.)

    Perhaps he had his reasons: didn’t want to sound too alarmist or to demoralize his readers? For all I know, Johnson has published an article critical of psychiatry (“I’m An Off-The-Charts Narcissist”), so he is partially aware of the issue.

    • Jef Costello, the author of such article, looks like a nihilist to me with his movie reviews at CC (I believe that all of today’s Hollywood films contain toxic messages for the white people).

      The expression you mention “War on children”, was coined by psychiatry critic Peter Breggin, whose wife sent me for free one of Breggin’s books when I was more active exposing psychiatry.

      It makes no sense to say that you must not “scare” the readership by pointing out the fact that millions (literally) of white children are being drugged with Ritalin in the States. No sense at all. It’s pure willful ignorance of nationalists who are unwilling to see and confront all heads of the hydra (drugging so many children with healthy brains is obviously a gigantic enterprise of social control thru psychiatry).

      You cannot understand the current Western predicament unless and until you address each and all pseudoscientific doctrines within the academia, not only anti-racialism or anti-white readings of history but psychiatry and how the mental health professionals always side the status quo; Keynesian economics; anthropology, and more.

      Counter-Currents and the other sites simply don’t do it. That’s why many of them will be totally unprepared when the dollar crashes: they don’t want to see that the Keynesian paradigm that presently rules the Fed is as pseudo as biopsychiatry, parapsychology or astrology.

  4. Do you think Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is useful? I don’t think that is the same thing as psychotherapy.

    • In other of his books, Against Therapy: Emotional Tyranny and the Myth of Psychological Healing, Masson argues that all kind of therapy is wrong.

      At first I thought this was an exaggeration. I wanted to spare at least a tiny fraction of therapy where the real etiology of mental stress and disorders is addressed.

      I read Against Therapy about the same time that I read Final Analysis and it took me ten years more to realize that Masson… was right.

      I have written extensively about it in a blog in Spanish. Suffice it to say that there is no therapist in the world that would side a hundred percent a former victim of parental abuse, since there are no laws to incarcerate, say, a schizophrenogenic parent in some way that the parent can do an examination of consciousness.

      The subject of psychoses is complex. But I’ll try to summarize it as best as I can.

      The one who caused the problem, the parent (see for example the splendid metaphor of the Kubrick / Spielberg film A.I.), is the one who has the “password” to heal the child, who is otherwise in an infinite loop trying to understand why he lost the affection of the mother when he is alone, abandoned in the forest (visualize the plot of David with Monica in A.I.).

      To break that infinite loop—imagine now David caged with Teddy at the floor of the ocean in the amphibicopter—the meccas had to revive Monica.

      Because of the problem of attachment to the perpetrator, the parent is the only person in the world who has a “password” to heal the disturbed mind. Unlike the futuristic meccas, in real life no therapist would plot to kidnap a schizophrenogenic parent so that the parent makes an “examination of consciousness” and then “type” the password in the child’s disturbed mind. That has never happened and won’t happen in the so-called “therapeutic” profession (in fact, a fraudulent profession), at least in the near future.

      In other words, to really side the disturbed, grown-up child you have to break a couple of human laws. And you need money to move the kidnapped parent to a comfortable mansion (again, cf. A.I.). Thus, the only possessor of the password in the entire world may start to see his or her own story of abuse and how s/he repressed it through decades. And how such repressions were afterwards hysterically acted out in the next generation of children (or child: the schizophrenogenic parent usually directs all of his/her fury against a chosen child—see the Oscar winning film Shine).

      The above refers to psychoses, i.e., cases such as the second in the above linked article on the “problem of attachment to the perpetrator”.

      As to the first case in such article—mere neuroses in the grown-up adult—the mental dynamics is basically the same, with the exception that the symptoms are milder. But like the psycho cases, in common neuroses therapists never go to the root problem, as a potentially true follower of Alice Miller would do.

      Again, it took me decades to understand this problem. Since that afternoon in 1983 reading that antipsychiatric book until the end of 2010 when I became extremely upset with my sister’s therapist, supposedly a most humane therapist who had read Miller herself.

      Long story, but if you want to understand why, like Masson I now reject all therapy including Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, click on first link above, on problem of “attachment to the perpetrator”, which will take you to my latest post at Fallen Leaves.

  5. Do you think all mental problems are caused by parents or is that just one of the causes ? I have OCD. Was that caused by my parents? I have read that people have been helped with CBT.

    I think we have our inborn temperament and personality, but we are also formed by all the experiences in our life . Like a computer we have our ROM that is built into the computer and each person’s is different. Then we have RAM that is added into us as we live, which entails everything we learn (like religion ,societal mores, ideology of our country} and our experiences with other people.

    Have you read Mark Twain’s What is Man essay? It pretty much says what I said above. It is very good.

    I have also had low grade depression since college.Is this caused bu repressed anger.I have to say I am angry.

    I think working in big corporations or maybe any job can cause mental illness. These places are alienating and inhuman. My mental health started to go further down hill when I started to work for them.

    On a side note do you think humans have free will? From my readings I doubt we do. Of course, everybody is brought up to believe we do.

    • Is this caused b[y] repressed anger?

      Sure it is. Please read my essay “On depression”.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: