Saturday, May 23, 2009

Crackpots and Cracked Pots: Transforming Mental Illness into Political Power for Fun and Profit!

Here's one from the waybarack machine. However, don't be surprised if I put up a new post later, since I woke up in a scribblin' mood, perhaps because of the added slack of the holiday. It's still early here. Much depends upon how long the boy sleeps....

Update: instead of writing a new post, I added a lot of new material to this one....

Other compacts are engraved in tables and pillars, but those with wives are inserted in children. --Pythagoras

Our founders, being that they were deeply rooted in Judeo-Christian principles, had no illusions about the desirability of political "unity." To the contrary, they set up the Constitution in such a way that it would be practically impossible to achieve -- or impose, is more like it -- unity, what with the separation of political power into competing branches of government. Naturally, this doesn't preclude synthesis, which is another thing entirely, i.e., e pluribus unum.

As it pertains to contemporary politics, you might say that the left is the pro-"static unity" faction, while the right is the pro-"dynamic synthesis" faction (which in turn is why the left shades off into fascism, while conservatism -- not the GOP, mind you -- is the last bastion of American liberalism).

This can be seen quite clearly in the dangerous lust for "unity" that we are told drives the Obama campaign. I don't know about Obama's handlers -- who I assume are just as cynical and calculating as any political hacks -- but with his followers it is a different matter. Being that "the hypnotized never lie," I suppose we should take them at their word that they are not being disingenuous, and that they actually believe the loony things Obama says. They actually believe the dream.

A few years back, a study came out about the damaging psychological consequences of divorce for children. Now, as a psychologist, I can assure you that almost all psychological research that emanates from academia is not even wrong. Rather, it is thoroughly politicized with leftist assumptions dressed up as conclusions. As a result, there is no truly free inquiry; rather, certain politically, academically, and sexually correct conclusions are mandated, while others are forbidden, so the whole exercise is mostly an anti-intellectual farce.

But this study made a subtle point about the lasting consequences of divorce. But even more importantly, it comports with common sense. That is, the child who grows up in a broken home will be deprived of the living experience of a harmonious synthesis at its deepest level, which derives from the union of male and female.

Obviously, marriage is an organic synthesis -- especially as it transforms through time -- not a mechanical union (although it certainly can be; there is no guarantee that someone from an "intact" home will know the type of higher unity we are discussing). The point is that the psyche of the child of divorce can be "fractured" in ways both subtle and enduring.

But of course, if you have no idea of the cosmic implications of male and female -- which is the case in academia -- then you will have no way to even think about this problem. It will result in symptoms with no cause. And then, because there is no cause, the symptoms will be normalized. When you do this, you are not doing the victim any favor. It is another example of the idiot compassion of contemporary liberalism, which wants everyone to be "normal" in the absence of normality.

As we have discussed before, early psychoanalysis focused exclusively on the "content" of the mind, consistent with its roots in the naive mechanistic positivism of the late 19th century. All bad philosophies presuppose what they need to explain, and in this regard, psychoanalysts didn't even think about the psychological container, only the content, i.e., "id," "ego," and "superego." When one does this, one inevitably slips in a false notion of the mind, as if it is a sort of unproblematic "bag" with various contents. To "cure" someone, all we have to do is get rid of the "bad" content -- like removing a tumor.

But beginning in about the 1960s there was much more of an appreciation of the priority of the container over the content, especially for more serious forms of mental illness, e.g., what are called "personality disorders," which are enduring forms of maladaptive thought, emotion, and behavior. These lifelong conditions are to be distinguished from the "neuroses," which are more easily conceptualized in terms of "bad content," so to speak (or conflict between one part of the mind and another). But even then, if you scratch the surface of most neurotics, you will find issues of "containment" to which the neurosis is a sort of adaptation.

One way to think about it is that neuroses are more or less "horizontal," whereas personality disorders are more "vertical," extending down much more deeply into the psyche.

I hope this isn't too pedantic. In my book, I talk about "mind parasites." When you think about these, the image of a discrete foreign invader no doubt comes to mind. But the deepest mind parasites -- excluding purely genetic and biochemical things like schizophrenia or bipolar disorder -- are much more analogous to autoimmune disorders, in that they are not so much the content as the context.

Just as an autoimmune disorder attacks the body's own tissue, a person with a "bad container," so to speak, attacks his own mental content. However, he can also project the content into other people and attack it that way, as do, for example, the insane Bush haters; to see a rabid Keith Olbermann is to see this externalized intrapsychic process quite vividly. One of the reasons he is so disturbing to a normal person, is that he inducts everyone around him into his personal psychodrama. A normal person instinctively knows how to deal with such a freak: don't make eye contact, and back away slowly.

This is what people with personality disorders do: they simply cannot keep their mental illness to themselves. They must act out, or they will implode from their lack of containment.

In turn, this is why it is always such an uphill battle for the normals of the world. We have no compulsion to act out and impose our psychological problems upon others, whereas this is essence of leftism. Therefore, it should be no surprise that the ranks of the left are -- and always have been -- filled with so many crazies. When you hear that someone is a left wing "activist," I would say that there is a better than 50% chance that their "activism" is simply a masked personality disorder: "activism" = acting out.

In other words, people with personality disorders act out their conflicts instead of thinking about them; once they can think about them, they are freed of the compulsion to act them out. But this is very difficult, since it requires painful introspection, which is precisely what the liberal cannot do.

That is, the liberal usually locates the problem outside of himself (hence the belief that he is a victim), whereas the conservative usually locates the problem within himself. If my life isn't working, I know that it's my fault. And this is certainly the way I will raise my child, for this is the ultimate empowerment and liberation. For it places the locus of control within oneself, not in the vague societal forces imagined by the professional victim.

Now, one of the odd things about human beings is that we do not come into this world with any kind of adequate container. This is a remarkable point, and one that is fraught with consequences, both good and bad. No other animal needs to be "contained." Rather, they are driven by instinct, which you might say defines the "outer limits" of their consciousness. No animal is terrified of infinity. No animal worries about death, or the end of being.

But man, being that he is in the image of the creator, is born into "infinity," so to speak. I shouldn't even say "so to speak," because I am being quite literal. The purpose of containment is ultimately to "translate" infinity into time, which is none other than to think. Which in turn is why real thinking is a "transformation in O," or O-->(k). But there are many counterfeit forms of thinking, and most of them ultimately have to do with various issues of containment.

Let's take an obvious example. As Lee Harris has written, the jihadi doesn't become a jihadi because there is any realistic hope of creating a unified Islamic caliphate worse than death. Rather, the reason he becomes a jihadi is to take part in this intoxicating fantasy. To believe the narrative is to be transformed by it, so the real motivation is strictly personal, just projected onto the world-historical stage. And to imagine, as does Obama, that they will give up this life-transforming narrative if he is nice to them, is just the height of stupidity, or narcissism, or naivete, or all three.

In so many ways, leftism shares this same dynamic, in that it always promises things that by definition it can never deliver. We know this ahead of time. But that's not the point. The point is to believe and to be transformed by the belief. But it's not a genuine transformation, just a temporary diminution of symptoms. This is why the left is such an odd grab-bag of losers, perverts, crackpots, ideologues, dimwits, and evil geniuses. (This book looks like a promising exploration of these themes; just ordered it. UPDATE: really good book.)

Let's take a recent example. Last week [now last year] a single judge on the California Supreme Court (being that it was a 4-3 decision) decided not only to redefine the accepted meaning of marriage, but to impose this idiosyncratic definition on 35 million others. This is something that even Californians do not want, but it doesn't matter. "Unity" has been imposed from on high by a single fascist judge. And as is true of all forms of fascist unity, it actually undermines the possibility of real synthesis, being that it attacks the very institution that makes it possible at the deepest level, i.e., the union of male and female.

This kind of leftist judicial pathology presupposes a materialistic paradigm. Atheists talk a good game, but if you could be magically transformed into an actual materialist, you would die either of horror or boredom. To actually be consigned to materialism would instantly drain the world of its spiritual content and context, leaving a sort of barren landscape with no intrinsic meaning whatsoever. It sounds paradoxical, but it would be a kind "infinite finitude" from which there would be no vertical escape. It would be a kind of living spiritual death which you can scarcely imagine, unless you have attended a major university, for it is the death of the human imagination, and with it, our "spiritualizing" faculty.

Now, Obama is the product of an alcoholic, deadbeat, bigamist father and a hippy flake of a mother. Is such a person automatically consigned to a leftist hell in search of the Lost Unity? No, of course not. That would be a gross over-simplification. To cite just one example, God's grace is real, and can help deliver one from a fractured state.

D'oh!

What did Obama do? He went and joined a deeply pathological church that repeated the trauma of his childhood, so two wrongs made a Wright! Paranoid, delusional, spiritually fractured, riven by projection, and driven by the chimera of "black unity." Of course he wants Unity, for he wants to clean up after the mess his parents made. But he is the mess, and now he's trying to cure himself by making a mess of the country.

Marriage between man and woman is not an end in itself but a divinely ordained arrangement for the purposes of receiving the grace that will transform both parties. A dysfunctional marriage is one in which no spiritual transformation takes place -- it is spiritually "stillborn," so to speak, or "infertile" no matter how many children it produces -- like a Kennedy marriage.

This is why, strictly speaking, there can be no "secular" marriage. Or put it this way: to the extent that your marriage is only a secular affair, I do not see how or why it could transcend the state of essentially being -- as Glen Campbell sang -- "shackled by forgotten words and bonds and the ink stains that have dried upon some line." Anything short of spiritual union involves using the other person in one way or another. It merely creates the conditions for narcissism rather than its transcendence, which is surely one reason why there are so many divorces. Marriage can never do for you what it was never intended to do, which is to make you "happy" or "fulfilled" in the material sense, at least not for long. No mere earthling can do that.
-The Sacred Diatribes of Petey

30 Comments:

Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

The pathological narcissism is really quite breathtaking. I mean, who cares what his mother, of all people, told him about our Constitution?

5/23/2009 07:51:00 AM  
Blogger QP said...

".....leftist assumptions dressed up as conclusions. As a result, there is no truly free inquiry; rather, certain politically, academically, and sexually correct conclusions are mandated, while others are forbidden, so the whole exercise is mostly an anti-intellectual farce."

In the realm of totalitarian kitsch, all answers are given in advance and preclude any questions. It follows, then that the true opponent of totalitarian kitsch is the person who asks questions...What the f*ck is this sh*t?Likewise whenever a camera is in the offing, [politicians] immediately run to the nearest child, lift it into the air, kiss it on the cheek. Kitsch is the aesthetic ideal of all politicians and all political parties and movements...

[Which is why, among other things, Sobbing Six-Year-Olds Turned Away at the White House Gate will help insure the downfall of "the product of a deadbeat father and a hippy flake of a mother." ]

5/23/2009 08:42:00 AM  
Blogger jwm said...

From QP's link:
Ruscha hanging in the White house. Ruscha. Poster boy for the talentless. He's the last word in pretentious hacks, passing off maningless mediocre shit for art. Just Obama's style.

JWM

5/23/2009 09:17:00 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Wow! Just, Wow! One post integrates observations on fascism, victimhood, unity, Obama's parentage, and the sacredness of marriage; all things I have been wondering about. Bravo!

5/23/2009 09:36:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

the conservative usually locates the problem within himself. If my life isn't working, I know that it's my fault.

Always reassuring to know that at least I've gotten that part right.

Back to the Kristol article, his assertion that he can hold a summit and chat with muslim leaders, and they'll listen because it's Him, is just breathtakingly foolish.

5/23/2009 09:42:00 AM  
Blogger QP said...

The WSJ art piece is a fertile mine.

The link stated that Obama recently picked "Nice" by
Nicholas De Stael, who "was a romantic figure, a White Russian nobleman, son of the Baron Vladimir Ivanovitch de Stael-Holstein, who was dispossessed by the revolution. He was very tall, with a booming voice, a lyrical intelligence and the manic- depressive character of so many Russians, now lethargic and broody, now consumed with febrile energy. Desperately poor most of his life, he was generous to the point of folly; when money came, he threw it away like a cavalryman on a binge. He was acutely conscious of lineage and tradition.

The art of the past, one might say, became De Stael's absent father."

-from an article @ Time

5/23/2009 10:03:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Uh-oh, Robobama!

I hope he wasn't built by Skynet...

5/23/2009 10:04:00 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

After reading and commenting on Bob's post, I picked up the Denver Post and saw this headline: "Flat tires blamed on mother, cops, Flats." It seems that a Boulder resident has admitted to slashing tires on at least 46 vehicles because "he is frustrated with the current state of his relationship with his mother, his anger at police for the fact that his drivers license was taken from him a few years ago, his parents made him wear braces in the 1990s, and he thinks he might have radiation poisoning because he lives near the Rocky Flats nuclear production facility."

5/23/2009 10:31:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Off topic but entertaining, now this is enthusiasm :)

5/23/2009 11:16:00 AM  
Blogger jwm said...

From QP's link again

This "Nice" piece o'fart sums up everything about artless, beautyless, meaningless art. Is there a human being on the planet who could look at this piece, and honestly say that it moved him? Is there anyone who would catch a glimpse of this painting and stop dead in their tracks, transfixed by a spontanoeous vertical ingression of sheer aesthetic ecstasy? Could any living being's breath be taken away by this? Same questions for Ruscha. Stand there flat footed, and give me a 'yes' to any of those. Double dog dare you.

JWM

5/23/2009 11:47:00 AM  
Blogger Lynn said...

G-Bob wrote: "...Of course [Obama] wants Unity, for he wants to clean up after the mess his parents made. But he is the mess, and now he's trying to cure himself by making a mess of the country. .."And he does it with -

No ClassPower Line ^ | May 23, 2009 | John Hinderaker


I've never thought much of Barack Obama's policies, and I'm starting not to think much of him as a human being. Today he continued his gratuitous and graceless attacks on his predecessor in the inappropriate context of Memorial Day:

Our fighting men and women - and the military families who love them - embody what is best in America. And we have a responsibility to serve all of them as well as they serve all of us.

And yet, all too often in recent years and decades, we, as a nation, have failed to live up to that responsibility. We have failed to give them the support they need or pay them the respect they deserve. That is a betrayal of the sacred trust that America has with all who wear - and all who have worn - the proud uniform of our country.

Barack Obama, the soldiers' friend! As ( Chris Stirewalt) notes:

It gets little notice, but even to this day Bush makes calls on wounded veterans at military hospitals, corresponds with families of fallen service members and gives his own money to veterans charities. In office, Bush hugely increased funding for veterans programs and worked relentlessly to improve the lot of ordinary troops.

It would be interesting to know how much of his own money Barack Obama has given to veterans' charities over the years. I'd hazard a guess: zero.

Obama's incessant attacks on the Bush administration tell us nothing about former President Bush, but a great deal about Barack Obama: the man has no class.

5/23/2009 01:08:00 PM  
Blogger sehoy said...

De Stael's "Nice" looks like a skeleton's claw scratching on a blackboard.


Obama is acting out his issues while president?

Just great.

5/23/2009 01:34:00 PM  
Blogger Lynn said...

Whoo Hoo!

Liz Cheney, 42, the eldest daughter of former vice-president Dick Cheney, is contemplating a political career of her own now that her father’s White House years are over. “It’s an honourable profession and it’s something I may want to do, if I can persuade my five children to be my campaign staff,” she said in an interview.

HERE

5/23/2009 01:35:00 PM  
Blogger Lynn said...

Liz Cheney Conducts a Clinic on How to Destroy Liberal Arguments

5/23/2009 01:41:00 PM  
Blogger QP said...

Figures. Obama Confuses Memorial Day With Veterans Day AgainI'm in the mood for snarky comments today, so I found the whole post very satisfying.

5/23/2009 02:09:00 PM  
Blogger sehoy said...

Palin/Cheney 2012

Cheney/Palin 2012

5/23/2009 02:15:00 PM  
Blogger jwm said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

5/23/2009 02:50:00 PM  
Blogger jwm said...

OT, but OH NO!

Skully has been kidnapped.JWM

5/23/2009 02:54:00 PM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

Darth Cheney's speech at AIE is now up on Youtube (4 parts)

Having read the text several times before viewing, it's interest to see the delivery by The Man himself.

5/23/2009 02:56:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

From QP's Memorial Day link comes this comment:

"Wow, isn't it wonderful that we have a president that can point out and apologize for all of our past faults? Constantly pointing out our great land's failures. Taking it upon himself to right all past wrongs as seen by the new administration. What a guy...."

No, see, they just don't understand - the big O is actually taking all of America's sins upon himself...

5/23/2009 03:02:00 PM  
Blogger sehoy said...

I don't think that Obama is taking all of our sins onto himself.

I think that he is heaping them on us. US.

If he is taking on all of our sins, he is doomed. To self-destruction.

Because he belongs to a religion that offers no forgiveness. No salvation.

5/23/2009 04:46:00 PM  
Blogger QP said...

☎ Ft. Hood Texas: Too bad we won't find this kind of meaningful artwork being trucked into the White House.

Soldiers honor their fallen with personal memorials“This is a daily reminder of what people have done for me,” Maust said.

♥ 

5/23/2009 04:50:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

I was being facetious, but I think you're correct, Sehoy. As he sows, so shall we reap. Unfortunately.

5/23/2009 06:08:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

If anyone missed it, look up the latest Keith Olberman "critique" of Cheney's response to Obama's torture speech.
The time for backing away slowly is over.

5/23/2009 06:30:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

"All bad philosophies presuppose what they need to explain..."

Excellent repost today.

5/23/2009 09:33:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

"...decided not only to redefine the accepted meaning of marriage, but to impose this idiosyncratic definition on 35 million others. This is something that even Californians do not want, but it doesn't matter. "Unity" has been imposed from on high by a single fascist judge. And as is true of all forms of fascist unity, it actually undermines the possibility of real synthesis, being that it attacks the very institution that makes it possible at the deepest level, i.e., the union of male and female."

Imposed from on high...Hideous... the attempt to exclude people from their own lives.

The moments where we experience actively living our lives, the point where the soul within makes contact with the world without, where you exercise life, are those moments of making our choices, freely made, right or wrong, wise or foolish, nothing is more sacred and neccessary to liberty and freedom... than the right to exercise your free will in your pursuit of happiness.

The exercise of your free will is an issue so critical, not even an all powerful God felt it would be proper for him to make those choices for us, but left it to humanity to choose to abide by his laws... or not.

The materialists life, the leftists ideal life, would require that we be mindless, fleshbots... preprogrammed and resynched with the central cpu on a regular basis. They are trying for it aren't they.

The hallmark of the statist in general and the leftist in particular, is to exclude you from your own life, regulating you out of the choices that make you, you, shoving you out of your own life.
Where you would, in a free country, have exercised your free will, engaged and lived your life, made your choices... you are prevented from doing so... even if you would have made the choice as the state would have preferred you to... they've already made the choice for you... effectively zombifying you in those moments.

And the number of those regulated moments have been multiplying more and more and more every day.

Do any of them ever ask why East Germany looked like a living graveyard compared to the West? Why is a satellite night view of North and South Korea show the north to be so dark?

Because they are dark... even in the light of day. Zombie movies aren't fiction.

The 'art'work revamping linked to above... vampiring... omg. It's in moments like these, that I take momentary dips which make our friend Scipio seem positively cheerful and optimistic.

""To actually be consigned to materialism would instantly drain the world of its spiritual content and context, leaving a sort of barren landscape with no intrinsic meaning whatsoever. It sounds paradoxical, but it would be a kind "infinite finitude" from which there would be no vertical escape. It would be a kind of living spiritual death which you can scarcely imagine, unless you have attended a major university, for it is the death of the human imagination, and with it, our "spiritualizing" faculty."

Right between the eyes.

5/23/2009 10:12:00 PM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

"It is another example of the idiot compassion of contemporary liberalism, which wants everyone to be "normal" in the absence of normality."

That (f)art that Obama selected in QP's links is just one of many examples of this.

Outstanding post, Bob.

5/23/2009 10:48:00 PM  
Anonymous Skully said...

Affirmative (f)art. (TW: JWM for the (f)art reference).

5/23/2009 11:00:00 PM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

"Because they are dark... even in the light of day. Zombie movies aren't fiction."

Good point, Van. And Resident Evil wasn't just a video game. Thing is, zombies are never satisfied. They just keep tryin' to turn everyone else into a zombie and eat their brains, if possible.

5/23/2009 11:10:00 PM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

From QP's Memorial Day link commenter 'exceller' writes:

He knows the Alinsky playbook forward and backward.

American patriotic holidays and traditions? not so much.
Ouch

5/24/2009 01:52:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home