MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Mental illness’

Psychiatry is Vexing Americans and Subverting Freedom

Posted by M. C. on May 21, 2024

University of Southern California clinical psychologist Darby Saxbe warns that mental illness labels have “become an identity marker that makes people feel special and unique. That’s a big problem because this modern idea that anxiety is an identity gives people a fixed mindset, telling them this is who they are and will be in the future.” Psychiatric labels can disable the people they seek to assist. The New York Times found that many young people were left worse off thanks to “mental health interventions.”

by Jim Bovard

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/psychiatry-is-vexing-americans-and-subverting-freedom/

mental illness list, psychiatric disorders

Psychiatry is ruining more lives than ever before. The New York Times recently showcased psychiatric “prevalence inflation”—a vast increase in reported mental illness among teenagers because they are encouraged to view normal symptoms as grave maladies requiring intervention.

Oxford University psychologist Lucy Foulkes observed that school programs are “creating this message that teenagers are vulnerable, they’re likely to have problems, and the solution is to outsource them to a professional.” In an analysis published last year in the academic journal, New Ideas in Psychology, Foulkes explained that “awareness efforts” spur young people “to interpret and report milder forms of distress as mental health problems.” Filing such complaints “leads some individuals to experience a genuine increase in symptoms, because labeling distress as a mental health problem can affect an individual’s self-concept and behavior in a way that is ultimately self-fulfilling.”

Psychiatric diagnoses have become status symbols, propelled by snake oil “social emotional learning” programs. University of Southern California clinical psychologist Darby Saxbe warns that mental illness labels have “become an identity marker that makes people feel special and unique. That’s a big problem because this modern idea that anxiety is an identity gives people a fixed mindset, telling them this is who they are and will be in the future.” Psychiatric labels can disable the people they seek to assist. The New York Times found that many young people were left worse off thanks to “mental health interventions.” Endless classroom presentations on mental health spur “co-rumination”—excessively talking about one’s problems—which might remind many people of first dates from hell.

A deluge of new mental illnesses and is helping to hobble an entire young generation. Hungarian-American psychiatrist Thomas Szasz warned in the last century, “Psychiatrists manufacture mental diagnoses the way the Vatican manufactures saints.” But Szasz’s deft ridicule did nothing to prevent a sham stampede.

The American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) now lists more than three-hundred mental illnesses, five times as many as it specified in the 1960s. Dr. Allen Frances, writing in Psychology Today, warned that the latest DSM contained “many changes that seem clearly unsafe and scientifically unsound” and is “likely to lead to massive over-diagnosis and harmful over-medication.” After the DSM redefined autism in the 1990s, the autism rate “quickly multiplied almost 100 fold.” Thanks to another DSM redefinition, the “number of American children and adolescents treated for bipolar disorder increased 40-fold” between 1993 and 2004, The New York Times reported. Psychiatrist Laurent Mottron complained in 2023 that the latest version of the DSM “is full of vague and trivial definitions and ambiguous language that ensures more people fall into various, abnormal categories.”

The DSM provides a road map for federal discrimination law. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compels schools and universities to provide “reasonable accommodation” to students who claim to have a disability, physical or mental. Even before the pandemic, up to 25% of students at top colleges were “classified as disabled, largely because of mental-health issues such as depression or anxiety, entitling them to a widening array of special accommodations like longer time to take exams,” The Wall Street Journal reported in 2018. Similar string-pulling occurs for the rigorous entrance exams for New York City’s elite high schools, where “white students…are 10 times as likely as Asian students to have a [disability] designation that allows extra time,” The New York Times reported.

Between 2008 and 2019, the number of undergraduate students diagnosed with anxiety increased by 134%, 106% for depression, 57% for bipolar disorder, 72% for ADHD, 67% for schizophrenia, and 100% for anorexia, according to the National College Health Assessment. Students’ struggles skyrocketed after COVID shutdowns. A Boston University analysis of students on almost 400 campuses in 2022 found that “60% of the respondents met the qualifying criteria for ‘one or more mental health problems, a nearly 50% increase from 2013.’” But awarding endless psychiatric Purple Hearts to college students will do nothing to help graduates adjust to the challenges of daily life beyond the classroom.

I recognized that the APA had gone nuts after attending their 1986 annual meeting in Washington. Here are some riffs from a Detroit News piece I wrote at that time:

The APA served attendees a batch of freshly-ordained mental illnesses, including  “premenstrual dysphoric disorder.” The APA says symptoms of this “mental illness” include “irritability,” “marked fatigue,” and “negative evaluation of self.” According to the APA’s definition, a third of all women go crazy once a month.

The second newly ordained mental illness is “self-defeating personality type,” previously known as common or garden-variety masochism. The symptoms for this grade disorder include, “complaints, directly or indirectly, about being unappreciated,” “repeatedly turns down opportunities for pleasure,” and “remains in relationships in which others…take advantage of him or her.” Bring on the Valium!

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Healthy High School Kid Fakes Mental Illness So He Can Fit In With Everyone Else

Posted by M. C. on January 19, 2022

https://babylonbee.com/news/high-school-loser-doesnt-even-have-any-mental-illnesses

POCATELLO, ID—A freshman student at Sacagawea High School doesn’t have any mental illnesses, sadly making him a loser nobody can relate to. The 15-year-old student, whose name has not been released to the public, doesn’t have ADD, OCD, anxiety disorder, gender dysphoria, or even schizophrenia, say school counselors.

“Who?” asked classmate Sylvia Rodriguez, who sits next to the young man in 3rd period English. “Oh, that guy? He’s a looooser! He doesn’t even see a therapist!”

A recent survey of students confirmed that over 80% of the student body had no idea who the loser was, and those who did found him boring and unrelatable.

Principal Andrew Johnson expressed concern on behalf of the loser student. “We try to make everyone feel welcome here. School is hard enough without being an unpopular outcast, but there’s only so much I can do for [the boy],” he said. “He’s white, emotionally stable, cisgendered, has two great parents, and doesn’t even think COVID is an incredibly deadly disease that will murder his whole family. No wonder he has no friends!”

Sources say the young man has taken to faking mental illness in order to make himself seem more relatable. Instead of talking with his friends about movies and baseball, he strikes up conversations about his pronouns and the latest medications he’s taking. In order to seem more convincing, he has also started dying his hair and wearing makeup while wearing a space alien costume.

His parents expressed concern over the direction their son was going but were quickly investigated by the FBI as possible domestic terrorists.

The young man is being encouraged by teachers to keep “living his truth,” even if it’s not his truth at all. 

Bee seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Opinion: – Assange wins. The cost: Press freedom is crushed, and dissent labeled mental illness

Posted by M. C. on January 6, 2021

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/56130.htm

By Jonathan Cook

January 04, 2020 “Information Clearing House” – The unexpected decision by Judge Vanessa Baraitser to deny a US demand to extradite Julian Assange, foiling efforts to send him to a US super-max jail for the rest of his life, is a welcome legal victory, but one swamped by larger lessons that should disturb us deeply.

Those who campaigned so vigorously to keep Assange’s case in the spotlight, even as the US and UK corporate media worked so strenuously to keep it in darkness, are the heroes of the day. They made the price too steep for Baraitser or the British establishment to agree to lock Assange away indefinitely in the US for exposing its war crimes and its crimes against humanity in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But we must not downplay the price being demanded of us for this victory. https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1346059260539637760&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.jonathan-cook.net%2Fblog%2F2021-01-04%2Fassange-wins-the-cost-press-freedom-is-crushed-and-dissent-labelled-mental-illness%2F&siteScreenName=Jonathan_K_Cook&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=500px

A moment of celebration

We have contributed collectively in our various small ways to win back for Assange some degree of freedom, and hopefully a reprieve from what could be a death sentence as his health continues to deteriorate in an overcrowded Belmarsh high-security prison in London that has become a breeding ground for Covid-19.

For this we should allow ourselves a moment of celebration. But Assange is not out of the woods yet. The US has said it will appeal the decision. And it is not yet clear whether Assange will remain jailed in the UK – possibly in Belmarsh – while many months of further legal argument about his future take place.

The US and British establishments do not care where Assange is imprisoned – be it Sweden, the UK or the US. What has been most important to them is that he continues to be locked out of sight in a cell somewhere, where his physical and mental fortitude can be destroyed and where he is effectively silenced, encouraging others to draw the lesson that there is too high a price to pay for dissent.

The personal battle for Assange won’t be over till he is properly free. And even then he will be lucky if the last decade of various forms of incarceration and torture he has been subjected to do not leave him permanently traumatised, emotionally and mentally damaged, a pale shadow of the unapologetic, vigorous transparency champion he was before his ordeal began.

That alone will be a victory for the British and US establishments who were so embarrassed by, and fearful of, Wikileaks’ revelations of their crimes.

Rejected on a technicality

But aside from what is a potential personal victory for Assange, assuming he doesn’t lose on appeal, we should be deeply worried by the legal arguments Baraitser advanced in denying extradition.

The US demand for extradition was rejected on what was effectively a technicality. The US mass incarceration system is so obviously barbaric and depraved that, it was shown conclusively by experts at the hearings back in September, Assange would be at grave risk of committing suicide should he become another victim of its super-max jails.

One should not also discard another of the British establishment’s likely considerations: that in a few days Donald Trump will be gone from the White House and a new US administration will take his place.

There is no reason to be sentimental about president-elect Joe Biden. He is a big fan of mass incarceration too, and he will be no more of a friend to dissident media, whistleblowers and journalism that challenges the national security state than was his Democratic predecessor, Barack Obama. Which is no friend at all.

But Biden probably doesn’t need the Assange case hanging over his head, becoming a rallying cry against him, an uncomfortable residue of the Trump administration’s authoritarian instincts that his own officials would be forced to defend.

It would be nice to imagine that the British legal, judicial and political establishments grew a backbone in ruling against extradition. The far more likely truth is that they sounded out the incoming Biden team and received permission to forgo an immediate ruling in favour of extradition – on a technicality.

Keep an eye on whether the new Biden administration decides to drop the appeal case. More likely his officials will let it rumble on, largely below the media’s radar, for many months more.

Journalism as espionage

Significantly, Judge Baraitser backed all the Trump administration’s main legal arguments for extradition, even though they were comprehensively demolished by Assange’s lawyers.

Baraitser accepted the US government’s dangerous new definition of investigative journalism as “espionage”, and implied that Assange had also broken Britain’s draconian Official Secrets Act in exposing government war crimes.

She agreed that the 2007 Extradition Treaty applies in Assange’s case, ignoring the treaty’s actual words that exempt political cases like his. She has thereby opened the door for other journalists to be seized in their home countries and renditioned to the US for embarrassing Washington.

Baraitser accepted that protecting sources in the digital age – as Assange did for whistleblower Chelsea Manning, an essential obligation on journalists in a free society – now amounts to criminal “hacking”. She trashed free speech and press freedom rights, saying they did not provide “unfettered discretion by Mr Assange to decide what he’s going to publish”.

She appeared to approve of the ample evidence showing that the US spied on Assange inside the Ecuadorian embassy, both in violation of international law and his client-lawyer privilege – a breach of his most fundamental legal rights that alone should have halted proceedings.

Baraitser argued that Assange would receive a fair trial in the US, even though it was almost certain to take place in the eastern district of Virginia, where the major US security and intelligence services are headquartered. Any jury there would be dominated by US security personnel and their families, who would have no sympathy for Assange.

So as we celebrate this ruling for Assange, we must also loudly denounce it as an attack on press freedom, as an attack on our hard-won collective freedoms, and as an attack on our efforts to hold the US and UK establishments accountable for riding roughshod over the values, principles and laws they themselves profess to uphold.

Even as we are offered with one hand a small prize in Assange’s current legal victory, the establishment’s other hand seizes much more from us.

Vilification continues

There is a final lesson from the Assange ruling. The last decade has been about discrediting, disgracing and demonising Assange. This ruling should very much be seen as a continuation of that process.

Baraitser has denied extradition only on the grounds of Assange’s mental health and his autism, and the fact that he is a suicide risk. In other words, the principled arguments for freeing Assange have been decisively rejected.

If he regains his freedom, it will be solely because he has been characterised as mentally unsound. That will be used to discredit not just Assange, but the cause for which he fought, the Wikileaks organisation he helped to found, and all wider dissidence from establishment narratives. This idea will settle into popular public discourse unless we challenge such a presentation at every turn.

Assange’s battle to defend our freedoms, to defend those in far-off lands whom we bomb at will in the promotion of the selfish interests of a western elite, was not autistic or evidence of mental illness. His struggle to make our societies fairer, to hold the powerful to account for their actions, was not evidence of dysfunction. It is a duty we all share to make our politics less corrupt, our legal systems more transparent, our media less dishonest.

Unless far more of us fight for these values – for real sanity, not the perverse, unsustainable, suicidal interests of our leaders – we are doomed. Assange showed us how we can free ourselves and our societies. It is incumbent on the rest of us to continue his fight.

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His books include “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is www.jonathan-cook.net. If you appreciate his articles, please consider making a donation

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Is Libertarianism a Mental Illness? – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on February 25, 2020

Does it not border on mental illness to support something that is the cornerstone of a police state?

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/02/laurence-m-vance/is-libertarianism-a-mental-illness/

By

Although I had not written anything about the government’s war on drugs since December (see here), earlier this month I received a brief note in my inbox with the subject line of: “Like libertinism (aka liberalism), libertarianism is bordering on mental illness.” The body of the e-mail simply said: “—regarding freedom to use drugs (( been writing about that insanity for three decades )).” The note closed with “JungianINTP,” which refers to the Carl Jung personality type of “Introverted iNtuitive Thinking Perceiving” (INTP).

So, basically, what my respondent was saying is that the freedom to use drugs is insane and libertarianism is bordering on mental illness for espousing such freedom. No essays, articles, or books written over the last three decades about the insanity of drug freedom were mentioned.

But is it libertarians who are insane for believing in drug freedom or is it drug warriors who have a mental illness?

The libertarian position on the drug war is straightforward. Here is the condensed version:

There should be no laws at any level of government for any reason regarding the buying, selling, growing, processing, transporting, manufacturing, advertising, using, or possessing of any drug for any reason.

The drug war should be ended immediately because it is not the proper role of government to prohibit, regulate, restrict, or otherwise control what a man desires to eat, drink, smoke, inject, absorb, snort, sniff, inhale, swallow, or otherwise ingest into his mouth, nose, veins, or lungs.

This, of course, does not mean that libertarians think that drug use is moral, safe, beneficial, or healthy, or that they recommend that anyone take drugs. And it also doesn’t mean that libertarians are naïve about the negative effects of drug abuse. Using drugs may cost you your money, your health, your mind, your job, your status, your reputation, your family, and/or your friends. Using drugs may even kill you. But with drug freedom comes responsibility. Drug users are ultimately responsible for their own actions.

So no, drug freedom is not insanity, and libertarians who believe in drug freedom are not bordering on mental illness.

Now consider the following—

Does it not border on mental illness to want the government to outlaw drugs but not alcohol?

Does it not border on mental illness to believe that drugs should be prohibited because they are immoral, but that other immoral activities like committing adultery and fornication should not be the concern of government?

Does it not border on mental illness to support a drug war with costs that greatly exceed any of its supposed benefits?

Does it not border on mental illness to support the monstrous evil that is the drug war that has ruined more lives than drugs themselves?

Does it not border on mental illness to believe that drugs should be prohibited because they are self-destructive, but that self-destructive activities like having casual sex and habitually overeating are none of the government’s business?

Does it not border on mental illness to support a drug war that is a complete and utter failure?

Does it not border on mental illness to support the federal drug war when there is no constitutional authority for it?

Does it not border on mental illness to believe that drugs should be prohibited because they are dangerous, but that dangerous activities like skydiving, MMA fighting, bungee jumping, and working as a roofer or logger should be permitted?

Does it not border on mental illness to say that marijuana should be illegal but that tobacco—which kills tens of thousands every year directly and indirectly—should be legal?

Does it not border on mental illness to not want the government to interfere with Americans’ consumption habits except when it comes to the consumption of drugs?

Does it not border on mental illness to want the government to ban marijuana—even though the government acknowledges that marijuana use has never killed anyone—but not to ban aspirin and other NSAID drugs, which have killed thousands?

Does it not border on mental illness to believe that drugs should be prohibited because they are addictive, but that addictive activities like playing video games and viewing pornography should not be the concern of government?

Does it not border on mental illness to support something that is impossible to reconcile it with a limited government?

Does it not border on mental illness to support something that is the cornerstone of a police state?

Does it not border on mental illness to believe that drugs should be prohibited because they are unhealthy, but that eating junk food and drinking beverages laden with high-fructose corn syrup is none of the government’s business?

Does it not border on mental illness to support the government waging war on a plant?

I think it is drug warriors who are out of their mind.

I think that drug prohibition is insanity, and drug warriors who believe in drug prohibition are bordering on mental illness.

Be seeing you

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Logic Is a Tool of the Patriarchy – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on January 25, 2020

Politicians aren’t that meaningful. They aren’t to be taken seriously. They are a form of sardonic entertainment that allow us to feel better about the inordinate amount of the workday we must slave away just to afford the taxes the government levies on us.

Mental illness is the involuntary parting with reality. This social justice style of argumentation is the voluntary parting with reality. They are two peas in the same pod.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/01/allan-stevo/logic-is-a-tool-of-the-patriarchy/

By

If you have ever had a conversation with a social justice warrior, you may be well aware that a confusing occurrence tends to take place.

For all your effort to use reason and evidence to truly understand the position that the person holds, it’s incredibly difficult to get even a semblance of either reason or evidence out of the social justice warrior in response.

It’s a fool’s errand. The best that can be expected is often a collection of slogans practically chanted in a daisy chain in increasing volume and intensity as the conversation progresses.

The more you invite the social justice warrior to use reason and evidence, the more you are informed you are “splitting hairs” or “going around in circles.”

If the slogans fail, and the claimed faux pas of splitting hairs does not deter you, terms of derision may start to flow.

Bigot or nazi or racist may be used to describe situations that are not bigoted, national socialist, or racist. However, if you protest the misapplication of such a serious term, the social justice warrior may attempt to explain the application through the use of circular logic, or with another onslaught of slogans. It is evident that these names do not actually fit this situation. They are merely ugly words meant to silence you. At this point where name-calling emerges for the sake of bullying a person, the conversation has grown abusive, and no respectable person would feel comfortable either doing the name-calling or being a recipient of the name-calling.

The conversation quickly grows very tiring as a great deal of energy is expelled and very little reason is utilized. The volume of voices may grow elevated. There is great emotion. And sure everyone is invested in their personal opinions to some degree, everyone has topics they are passionate about, but intellectual discussion between two adults is the time to open the spigot on reason and evidence and to tighten that other spigot that prevents an uncontrolled outpouring of emotion.

Culturally, these seemingly thoughtless outpourings of emotion are increasingly encouraged in our era.

In fact, some will go so far as to call logic, “a tool of the patriarchy.” That’s right. The mental faculty that has helped humans to better our world, through millions and billions of applications a day for millennia, is to be dismissed as a mere tool of the patriarchy. What a trendy and carelessly callous insult to lob at such an awesome human capacity. One of the key distinctions between man and beast is to be dismissed because those who are poorly trained in using their executive function and limiting their emotional outpouring feel triggered by its use. To follow in their wishes is to bring us closer to beast as individuals and as a society.

Mental illness is the involuntary parting with reality. This social justice style of argumentation is the voluntary parting with reality. They are two peas in the same pod.

And that’s a scary thing. If given the power to do away with reason and evidence, the social justice warrior will do just that. In intentionally insular silos of social interaction – through social media, academia, daily life, and often even the workplace – these ideas receive nearly no challenge by reasonable people. It’s just not worth the pain of being yelled at (or worse) by someone who is either crazy and or willfully acting crazy. Counter to logic and meritocratic notions, the unreasonable silence the reasonable.

The illogical application of law makes this situation all the more likely to occur. And in the name of tranquility, treading on touchy ground is unwelcome. Heaven forbid someone may even go so far as to burst into tears, at which point it grows evident to any onlooker that this stickler for reason and evidence is surely a savage brute worthy of derision. Not only legal pressure, but also social pressure encourages the reasonable to bite their tongues.

It is not by choice, it is only by happenstance that a social justice warrior faces reason and evidence. The rest of society grows up hearing the social justice lines parroted in school, in entertainment, in media, likely even in church. Often the only controversial views welcomed in such environments are social justice views. The astute thinker, constantly inundated with these views both seeks out and is confronted with a host of additional views naturally, and must learn to reason through that conflict. The discomfort of conflict and the ability to self-soothe enough to persevere in the midst of conflict are required to grow the faculty for logic.

The social justice warrior is often done the disservice of being insulated from opposing views to the point where reality is painfully intrusive when it comes about.

This aversion to the intrusion of reality has made it natural for college professors to preface material with “trigger warnings,” in the event that someone in the room is not mature enough to handle a conflicting viewpoint without bursting out in great, seemingly uncontrollable, displays of emotion. Even with a trigger warning, an academic risks disciplinary action if the conflicting viewpoint is seen as too intrusive. This style of material from thinkers was once referred to as “thought-provoking” and was an important part of the reason for taking the time and effort to attend university.

A notable aversion to the intrusion of reality took place with the so-called emergence of Trump Derangement Syndrome in an outburst running up to, but most notably following the November 9, 2016 presidential elections. This has amounted to a multi-year tantrum in response to an election. Yes, an election. A measly election.

Thousands take place a year. Politicians aren’t that meaningful. They aren’t to be taken seriously. They are a form of sardonic entertainment that allow us to feel better about the inordinate amount of the workday we must slave away just to afford the taxes the government levies on us.

Unless you are the losing candidate, if an election means that much to you, there is something seriously wrong with you. And even the candidate probably didn’t belong in the election if they are still triggered years later. Toughen up snowflake. It’s an election.

But to say so, is to be patriarchal. To abhor involuntary crazy and voluntary crazy alike and to pursue health and wellness is to be patriarchal. To praise the successes of humanity through the ages and to want less of the failures is to be patriarchal. To desire to use emotion for all the things it is good for, and to desire to use logic for all the things it is good for, and to implement them together as a well-adjusted healthy person is to be patriarchal. To demand those same high standards is to be patriarchal.

And that is othering. And racist. And literally what only someone who is literally a fascist, literal nazi, literal bigot would do. Literally.

Be seeing you

How to Be a Social Justice Warrior – Actual Anarchy

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »