On the 7th of July Teresa sent me an e-mail from Madrid with the hatnote: “Don’t you realize that you’re shitting on your own doorstep?” And in the text itself she scolded me:
After Bush’s term, with all of his support (legal, educational, etc.) of the most biologicist and repressive trends in psychiatry, against which the group MindFreedom and others fought so hard, when at least another party reaches power with a little less conservative stance, you do nothing but excoriate him [Obama]! It looks to me that you are mistaking the target!
In my previous entry I said that Tere had the mania of reducing every political discourse into the false dichotomy “Either good progressives or bad Francoists.” Now I would like to talk a little about another of her absurd reductionisms: viewing democrats like Obama as “good” and republicans like Bush as “bad” regarding psychiatric oppression.
In her e-mail Tere was talking about my online critique to Obama’s stupid discourse in Cairo. As always, Tere placed all of my arguments in her memory hole and dismissed them on the basis of false dichotomies: the good and the bad guys. I won’t discuss here why I reject both Obama and Bush. What I must do is continuing to analyze her.
In another of my entries I said that she read in the dark my fourth book, El Retorno de Quetzalcóatl. While she agrees with my anti-psychiatric ideas, her e-mail shows that Tere didn’t even read with due attention another of my books, the second of my series of five, Cómo Asesinar el Alma de tu Hijo. If something was clearly expressed in that treatise is that in the United States psychiatry has already crossed through its blackest stage, which according to Robert Whitaker occurred during the first fifty years of the 20th century: when lobotomy, electroshock and other barbarities were practiced in much greater scales. I believe that analyzing Tere on this topic is important. Unlike El Retorno de Quetzalcóatl, a demolition of cultural relativism—ideology that Tere subscribes—, my above-linked blog/book, which Tere had read, goes along with her beliefs. But even so her ideology clouded her judgment. Instead of maintaining in her memory the information of my blog/book the sky under which Tere lives is such that she formed in her mind the idea that psychiatry under the Democratic Party presidencies is less repressive than under the Republican Party.
Why does Tere pull from her mind, like a rabbit out of a hat, that Bush promoted “the most biologicist and repressive trends in psychiatry”? Most interesting is that she herself had told me that there was a new far-leftist newspaper in Spain, and that not even there—not even in the most extreme of the leftist press—psychiatry was criticized.
In the last entry we will see a problem that Tere had with psychiatry: a problem that made her fear this profession like the devil himself. Suffice it to say for the moment that, both by direct experience in her country and by reading my voluminous book, she had all the relevant info to realize that psychiatry is as bad in right-wing presidencies as left-wing presidencies; as bad under Bush as under Obama; Aznar and Zapatero.
The pathology of Tere and the people of the same political beliefs rests on, as always, in identifying human rights with the forces of the left and repression with the right. This is so false that in times of the “leftist” Soviet Union more psychiatric drugs were used to repress the Russians than in the “rightist” democratic nations of Western Europe. Psychiatrically speaking, in real life, not in the fantasy world in which Tere lives, the United States under Obama is as repressive as the years of Reagan.
Therefore, not even in the subject that Tere is most interested, anti-psychiatry, was she capable of seeing things objectively: as shown in the e-mail she sent me.