By temperament and upbringing, I had always taken comfort in orthodoxy. In a life spent subject to authority, deference had become a deeply ingrained habit. I found assurance in conventional wisdom. Now, I started, however hesitantly, to suspect that orthodoxy might be a sham. I began to appreciate that authentic truth is never simple and that any version of truth handed down from on high -- whether by presidents, prime ministers, or archbishops -- is inherently suspect. The powerful, I came to see, reveal truth only to the extent that it suits them. Even then, the truths to which they testify come wrapped in a nearly invisible filament of dissembling, deception, and duplicity. The exercise of power necessarily involves manipulation and is antithetical to candor.
http://www.fpif.org/articles/the_unmaking_of_a_company_man
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
'I Mean No Harm Nor Put Fault, On Anyone Who Lives In a Vault' -- Bob Dylan
People who are hired to do a certain job often lose the ability -- or at least the willingness and the power -- to either think for themselves, and/or to voice their thoughts, if or when these thoughts run contrary to the thoughts of the person/people paying their cheque. Does this really surprise us? Economics rules ideology as much as ideology rules economics. (Probably even more the first way around.) Regardless, the two factors are in a dialectic relationship with each other -- each influencing the other. And to be sure, not always in good ways.
The obvious main problem is that this sets up the possibility of a 'conflict of interest' situation in practically every 'capitalistic endeavor' where a man or woman's decisions are influenced by money, the lack of it, and/or by plain old self-interest -- or worded otherwise, narcissism.
To a certain extent, we all become subject to the dangers of 'group think', 'organization think', 'institution think', 'party think', 'paycheque think'....It is part of what leads to 'the silence and the silencing of the lambs'... It is what Nietzsche called the 'herd' mentality, it is what prevented Spinoza from accepting a position as a professer at a Holland university...(Instead, he 'ground glass' for a living which probably sped up his death...)
...........................................................................................................................................
'But I mean no harm, nor put fault,
On anyone that lives (and thinks and feels) in a vault,
But It's alright, Ma, if I can't please him...' -- Bob Dylan (inside the italics mine)
......................................................................................................................................
I don't really know or expect a practical answer to this problem....I just know that this problem is constantly endangering all epistemological and ethical endeavors....In effect, saying nothing here that isn't already known...'Money changes everything...' -- Cyndi Lauper
Money affects our search for -- and our willingness to share the results of our search for -- truth and justice.
Put another way,
'All ideology blinds us from that truth that contradicts our ideology.' -- dgb
Marketing and business interests are affected by what we say and don't say, and/or by how much we are willing to financially invest in what we say, and in turn, what we say and do, or don't do, including our lack of financial investment, affects the behavior of the business systems that are either willing to carry and market our thoughts -- or not -- at least withinin a 'Capitalist System'... And most 'Socialist Systems' have shown themselves to be only worse, at least historically speaking.
Which seems to lead to the inevitable conclusion: 'All thinking is affected by different narcisstic interests, especially the most powerful narcissistic interests....
Which in turn leads to 'the silence and the silencing of the lambs within a narcissistic, ideological system.'
Or worded otherwise, 'thinking, and feeling, and living in a vault -- the vault of ideological narcissism or narcissistic ideology'.
-- dgb, Aug. 7th, 2010.
-- David Gordon Bain
................................................................................................................
It's Alright, Ma (I'm Only Bleeding) -- Bob Dylan (from the internet)...
Darkness at the break of noon
Shadows even the silver spoon
The handmade blade, the child’s balloon
Eclipses both the sun and moon
To understand you know too soon
There is no sense in trying
Pointed threats, they bluff with scorn
Suicide remarks are torn
From the fool’s gold mouthpiece the hollow horn
Plays wasted words, proves to warn
That he not busy being born is busy dying
Temptation’s page flies out the door
You follow, find yourself at war
Watch waterfalls of pity roar
You feel to moan but unlike before
You discover that you’d just be one more
Person crying
So don’t fear if you hear
A foreign sound to your ear
It’s alright, Ma, I’m only sighing
As some warn victory, some downfall
Private reasons great or small
Can be seen in the eyes of those that call
To make all that should be killed to crawl
While others say don’t hate nothing at all
Except hatred
Disillusioned words like bullets bark
As human gods aim for their mark
Make everything from toy guns that spark
To flesh-colored Christs that glow in the dark
It’s easy to see without looking too far
That not much is really sacred
While preachers preach of evil fates
Teachers teach that knowledge waits
Can lead to hundred-dollar plates
Goodness hides behind its gates
But even the president of the United States
Sometimes must have to stand naked
An’ though the rules of the road have been lodged
It’s only people’s games that you got to dodge
And it’s alright, Ma, I can make it
Advertising signs they con
You into thinking you’re the one
That can do what’s never been done
That can win what’s never been won
Meantime life outside goes on
All around you
You lose yourself, you reappear
You suddenly find you got nothing to fear
Alone you stand with nobody near
When a trembling distant voice, unclear
Startles your sleeping ears to hear
That somebody thinks they really found you
A question in your nerves is lit
Yet you know there is no answer fit
To satisfy, insure you not to quit
To keep it in your mind and not forget
That it is not he or she or them or it
That you belong to
Although the masters make the rules
For the wise men and the fools
I got nothing, Ma, to live up to
For them that must obey authority
That they do not respect in any degree
Who despise their jobs, their destinies
Speak jealously of them that are free
Cultivate their flowers to be
Nothing more than something they invest in
While some on principles baptized
To strict party platform ties
Social clubs in drag disguise
Outsiders they can freely criticize
Tell nothing except who to idolize
And then say God bless him
While one who sings with his tongue on fire
Gargles in the rat race choir
Bent out of shape from society’s pliers
Cares not to come up any higher
But rather get you down in the hole
That he’s in
But I mean no harm nor put fault
On anyone that lives in a vault
But it’s alright, Ma, if I can’t please him
Old lady judges watch people in pairs
Limited in sex, they dare
To push fake morals, insult and stare
While money doesn’t talk, it swears
Obscenity, who really cares
Propaganda, all is phony
While them that defend what they cannot see
With a killer’s pride, security
It blows the minds most bitterly
For them that think death’s honesty
Won’t fall upon them naturally
Life sometimes must get lonely
My eyes collide head-on with stuffed
Graveyards, false gods, I scuff
At pettiness which plays so rough
Walk upside-down inside handcuffs
Kick my legs to crash it off
Say okay, I have had enough, what else can you show me?
And if my thought-dreams could be seen
They’d probably put my head in a guillotine
But it’s alright, Ma, it’s life, and life only
Copyright © 1965 by Warner Bros. Inc.; renewed 1993 by Special Rider Music
The obvious main problem is that this sets up the possibility of a 'conflict of interest' situation in practically every 'capitalistic endeavor' where a man or woman's decisions are influenced by money, the lack of it, and/or by plain old self-interest -- or worded otherwise, narcissism.
To a certain extent, we all become subject to the dangers of 'group think', 'organization think', 'institution think', 'party think', 'paycheque think'....It is part of what leads to 'the silence and the silencing of the lambs'... It is what Nietzsche called the 'herd' mentality, it is what prevented Spinoza from accepting a position as a professer at a Holland university...(Instead, he 'ground glass' for a living which probably sped up his death...)
...........................................................................................................................................
'But I mean no harm, nor put fault,
On anyone that lives (and thinks and feels) in a vault,
But It's alright, Ma, if I can't please him...' -- Bob Dylan (inside the italics mine)
......................................................................................................................................
I don't really know or expect a practical answer to this problem....I just know that this problem is constantly endangering all epistemological and ethical endeavors....In effect, saying nothing here that isn't already known...'Money changes everything...' -- Cyndi Lauper
Money affects our search for -- and our willingness to share the results of our search for -- truth and justice.
Put another way,
'All ideology blinds us from that truth that contradicts our ideology.' -- dgb
Marketing and business interests are affected by what we say and don't say, and/or by how much we are willing to financially invest in what we say, and in turn, what we say and do, or don't do, including our lack of financial investment, affects the behavior of the business systems that are either willing to carry and market our thoughts -- or not -- at least withinin a 'Capitalist System'... And most 'Socialist Systems' have shown themselves to be only worse, at least historically speaking.
Which seems to lead to the inevitable conclusion: 'All thinking is affected by different narcisstic interests, especially the most powerful narcissistic interests....
Which in turn leads to 'the silence and the silencing of the lambs within a narcissistic, ideological system.'
Or worded otherwise, 'thinking, and feeling, and living in a vault -- the vault of ideological narcissism or narcissistic ideology'.
-- dgb, Aug. 7th, 2010.
-- David Gordon Bain
................................................................................................................
It's Alright, Ma (I'm Only Bleeding) -- Bob Dylan (from the internet)...
Darkness at the break of noon
Shadows even the silver spoon
The handmade blade, the child’s balloon
Eclipses both the sun and moon
To understand you know too soon
There is no sense in trying
Pointed threats, they bluff with scorn
Suicide remarks are torn
From the fool’s gold mouthpiece the hollow horn
Plays wasted words, proves to warn
That he not busy being born is busy dying
Temptation’s page flies out the door
You follow, find yourself at war
Watch waterfalls of pity roar
You feel to moan but unlike before
You discover that you’d just be one more
Person crying
So don’t fear if you hear
A foreign sound to your ear
It’s alright, Ma, I’m only sighing
As some warn victory, some downfall
Private reasons great or small
Can be seen in the eyes of those that call
To make all that should be killed to crawl
While others say don’t hate nothing at all
Except hatred
Disillusioned words like bullets bark
As human gods aim for their mark
Make everything from toy guns that spark
To flesh-colored Christs that glow in the dark
It’s easy to see without looking too far
That not much is really sacred
While preachers preach of evil fates
Teachers teach that knowledge waits
Can lead to hundred-dollar plates
Goodness hides behind its gates
But even the president of the United States
Sometimes must have to stand naked
An’ though the rules of the road have been lodged
It’s only people’s games that you got to dodge
And it’s alright, Ma, I can make it
Advertising signs they con
You into thinking you’re the one
That can do what’s never been done
That can win what’s never been won
Meantime life outside goes on
All around you
You lose yourself, you reappear
You suddenly find you got nothing to fear
Alone you stand with nobody near
When a trembling distant voice, unclear
Startles your sleeping ears to hear
That somebody thinks they really found you
A question in your nerves is lit
Yet you know there is no answer fit
To satisfy, insure you not to quit
To keep it in your mind and not forget
That it is not he or she or them or it
That you belong to
Although the masters make the rules
For the wise men and the fools
I got nothing, Ma, to live up to
For them that must obey authority
That they do not respect in any degree
Who despise their jobs, their destinies
Speak jealously of them that are free
Cultivate their flowers to be
Nothing more than something they invest in
While some on principles baptized
To strict party platform ties
Social clubs in drag disguise
Outsiders they can freely criticize
Tell nothing except who to idolize
And then say God bless him
While one who sings with his tongue on fire
Gargles in the rat race choir
Bent out of shape from society’s pliers
Cares not to come up any higher
But rather get you down in the hole
That he’s in
But I mean no harm nor put fault
On anyone that lives in a vault
But it’s alright, Ma, if I can’t please him
Old lady judges watch people in pairs
Limited in sex, they dare
To push fake morals, insult and stare
While money doesn’t talk, it swears
Obscenity, who really cares
Propaganda, all is phony
While them that defend what they cannot see
With a killer’s pride, security
It blows the minds most bitterly
For them that think death’s honesty
Won’t fall upon them naturally
Life sometimes must get lonely
My eyes collide head-on with stuffed
Graveyards, false gods, I scuff
At pettiness which plays so rough
Walk upside-down inside handcuffs
Kick my legs to crash it off
Say okay, I have had enough, what else can you show me?
And if my thought-dreams could be seen
They’d probably put my head in a guillotine
But it’s alright, Ma, it’s life, and life only
Copyright © 1965 by Warner Bros. Inc.; renewed 1993 by Special Rider Music
On Missing The Changes in Life....
People who think in terms of closed generalizations are more subject to missing the changes, evolutions, modifications, adaptations, mutations, compensations, and nuances in life...
-- dgb, Sept. 7th, 2010,
-- David Gordon Bain
-- dgb, Sept. 7th, 2010,
-- David Gordon Bain
Saturday, September 4, 2010
On The Politics, Economics, and Psychology of Hypocrisy...Ideology...Religion, Humanism, Narcissism, 'Free Trade', Freud, Psychoanalysis, and Ethics
Why do we have hypocrisy? Why is hypocrisy so prevalent? Am I wrong to say that most people are ethically harder on others than they are on themselves? Sometimes it may be the reverse but not very often.
I like religion to be defined not by 'how loyal you are to whatever your image of God may be' but rather by how good you are to other people, and to 'the protection, the salvation, and the re-generation of all God's creations, including the Earth and the Universe as a whole. If God helps you get there -- i.e., towards treating other people better -- then great! But if God is leading you down a path of righteousness, unbridled narcissism, nastiness towards others, and destruction, then I challenge your image of God and what you believe HE/SHE is demanding of you...Or you are a hypocrite.
I see some people dressed up in all their religious garbs -- and/or simply regular church goers without the garbs -- and I see these same people cheating and squeezing their employees at work all week long between religious sessions -- and I say 'that isn't religion'....Or at least, it certainly isn't anything close to the type of religion I believe in.
I would trumpet the words and the deeds of a 'humanistic atheist' while ignoring and/or 'deconstructing' the words and deeds of a 'narcissistic Church-goer and/or supposedly religious person' -- a person who spouts off and/or professes to believe in a particular religious philosophy/ ideology that he or she defies and aborts in every action that he or she presents to the world for others to look at, interpret, and evaluate' -- again, the hallmark of hypocrisy...
Hypocrisy basically comes down to either the 'un-integration' of a 'split ego' and/or the workings of a 'narcissistic ego' that is attempting to hide -- with a show of 'smoke and mirrors' -- his or her 'narcissistic activities'. At the extreme, this is the hallmark of the 'psychopathic and/or sociopathic personality'. In greater or lesser degrees of moderation, this is the rest of us.
Except for the case of what might be called 'white lies' (i.e., lying in order to not hurt someone's feelings) -- most forms of lying, cheating, hiding, covering up, non-transparency, hypocrisy, greed, unethical behavior -- these are all the calling cards of the 'unethical, narcissistic personality' at work...
Self enhancement through the 'putting down' and/or 'disrespect and debasement of others' is not a very 'religious' activity in my mind. I see it every day I go to work.
There are good 'employers', bad employers, narcissistic employers, altruistic employers, ethical employers who aim to split the difference between narcissism and altruism, employers who spout an ideology that they cannot, will not, and/or choose not, to live up to, employers who break promises, break comittments, who tell you one thing with 'rose colored glasses on', and then the rose-colored glasses quickly disappear into Never, Never Land....and of course, the same can be said for 'employees' as well...
'Unions' were created to protect the worker from bad employers....and 'free trade' was created by politicians via employers to 'break unions'...
There are 'good unions', 'bad unions', and 'no unions' which is the direction we are going now with 'free trade'. To have 'free trade' with 'third world countries' where workers get paid a dollar an hour, if that, in dehumanistic conditions where they could be working 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, that defy any sense of the word 'humanity' ('sweat shops', they are often called) -- a situation that we here, in Canada, are 'following suit' with in order to 'compete' with these third world countries, and in order to just personally 'survive' in a 'country of diminishing wages coupled with rising prices' -- this is what we got with 'free trade'.... a country with 'rising sweat shops', cheaper labour, and a stressed out, overworked, disappearing middle class, at least for those who are a part of the 'plummeting wages scene' and the 'rising competitiion amongst low income earners' who are willing to be paid less and less, and work more and more, just to have a job in a context of high unemployment...
The unscrupulous, narcissistic employer takes advantage of this scene -- and/or is forced to -- in order to compete with the 'cheap goods' coming in from foreign, third world markets...
North America -- as a consequence of 'free trade' -- has become a continent with 'little to no manufacturing' as the 'cheapest goods are coming from foreign markets' in a foreign labour market that North America cannot compete with (at least without tariffs -- gee, I wonder why 'tariffs' were around for a hundred years before 'free trade'?) unless our wages keep tumbling, and/or the wages in these foreign markets start to go up...That is not likely to happen in our lifetime...at least without intervention....
What we need is a 'universal, international minimum wage' where all countries can compete on the same footing...Failing that, if we ever want to see 'manufacturing' in this continent again, we need to re-introduce tariffs...
'Free trade' was presented to us in a spirit of 'Adam Smith Idealistic Capitalistic Ideology'. Back when Mulroney introduced this idea to the Canadian people, I didn't have a clue as to what the ramifications of it would be....
All the talk at the time was about a 'big, bad America' crushing and 'taking over' a much smaller, weaker Canada...
Little did we know that 'free trade' would be a law that would 'favor the weakest economic countries in the world' -- plus the 'multi-international corporations' who were big enough to close down their manufacturing plants in North America and open them up in all these 'weaker economic countries' with a hugely 'cheaper work force'...
A free trade agreement between America, Canada, and Mexico...Gee, who is going to win that agreement? America? Canada? Try Mexico -- and all the American and Canadian Corporations who have enough money to move their manufacturing plants down there...Sorry, all you American and Canadian workers -- particularly, those of you who were a part of a big, bad 'corporate union' -- but you just lost your jobs.
The 'unions' that are left in North America have much less power than they used to which is partly a good thing and partly a bad thing. On the one hand, some corporate unions were becoming increasing 'narcissistic and pathological' in their own management style...leading to 'out of control labour costs'.... Eg. the auto industry....But on the other hand, these unions were the only bargaining power that workers had to protect themselves, and enhance themselves, in an otherwise overpowering context of 'big, bad corporate management wolves'...
Today, it is hard to tell whether some unions are actually working for the workers or 'colluding' with the 'bad corporate management wolves' in their mutual aim to suppress and dehumanize the workers...
Six suicides amongst nurses in a Quebec hospital. The spokesperson for the union said that the nurses all had 'personal family problems'. Interview other 'still living' nurses at the hospital and you find out that the nurses were/are all being forced to work 'unGodly' hours where they had/have no time for 'family' -- no wonder why the six nurses all had 'family problems'. In this context, you have to ask the question: Who is the union working for -- management or the workers?
You have a problem with your phone in Canada. You phone an operator -- and you find that the operator lives in India...
You go to Wal-Mart and you are lucky if you can find a single manufactured good that is made anywhere in North America... For that matter, it is hard to walk into any retail outlet and still find a manufactured good made in North America... Unless the manufacturing -- or 'service' company for that matter -- has either 'imported cheaper labour from other cheaper international work force markets' and/or the 'local labour market wage prices' have been 'forced downwards' by the high unemployment rate and/or the existence of a sufficient body of workers who are 'willing to work for less' than what used to be the going rate...
When it gets to the point where even graduating teachers and lawyers are having a tough time finding jobs and beginning their careers....you get the idea that something is wrong with this picture...
What you have basically is a 'cheapening of the Canadian job market'....
With all due respect to immigrants and refugees, immigrants and refugees should not be let into this country -- except for perhaps a bare minimum -- in a time of a bad recession and high unemployment. Otherwise, you are just putting more and more stress on the backs of Canadians who already live here. Canadians are overtaxed, underemployed, many underpaid, being forced to work longer and longer hours or work two or three jobs to meet inflationary Canadian prices, our Seniors are not sufficiently protected from falling under the Canadian Safety Net -- with pensions that are not sufficient to support them (unless you have the support of a private, corporate or government pension plan...)
A single male (and I presume female) in the 'Employment Works' (Social Assistance, Welfare) Program gets a cheque each month for $585. That is barely enough to cover their rent, let alone their food, transportation, hygiene, clothing...That type of cheque basically puts them under 'house arrest'...
Meanwhile, our federal MPs don't want to disclose their expense accounts.
Does the NDP have a political voice -- and/or an 'idealistic mission' -- anymore?
Jack Layton has been pretty quiet on the political front for the last year or so -- maybe because of personal health reasons -- and no one to really step up in his absence. Just one 'deal with the devil' (i.e., Harper) to give more people on (un)employment insurance more time on the back end to find a job...How about all of the unemployed Canadian workers who have been paying into their federal (un)employment insurance their whole working lives -- and don't even make it 'through the front gate' of UI because of the many 'stipulations' that the federal government puts on 'who qualifies for this insurance' once they become unemployed? If you are 'fired', you are ineligible..
If you 'quit' or 'resign', you are ineligible...If you are 'downsized', you are eligible...The federal government is supposedly trying to 'screen out' unscrupulous, unethical ex-workers here but who in the federal government from this same (un)employment insurance department is looking at 'corporate ethics'....
I call that 'worker profiling' and 'federal government prejudice and discrimination' on who does and doesn't get (un)employment insurance. The only thing that should matter is whether you have paid enough into your government insurance plan to qualify you for drawing it back out when you need it...
I am not a socialist or a capitalist in their respective solitary one-sided perspectives, but rather a 'dialectic-democratic-humanistic' who operates in the context of wanting to integrate the best of capitalism and socialism together in a way that creates a good employer-employee labour situation -- a 'win-win' situation where both parties can work and prosper together, not aim to ravage and pillage each other...
A political and/or corporate hypocrite is someone who professes a particular idealistic ideology on the one hand, but operates by a much 'shadier' set of rules 'under the table' and/or 'behind closed doors' or 'in back alleys' perhaps with 'brief cases full of money'...that won't leave a 'paper' trail behind him or her...
Like Prime Minister Stephen Harper who campaigns on a platform of 'political, democratic transparency' and 'ethical accountability'....who hated the practice of previous Prime Ministers 'stacking the deck' with 'partisan' (read 'Liberal) Senators but had absolutely no problem with 'stacking the deck' with 'Conservative' Senators...I guess 'two wrongs do make a right'...as in a Senate full of 'right' leaning Senators...
And we have our 'Wanna Be Toronto Mayor' -- Mr. Rob Ford -- who seems to have found the right voter audience in his aim to lower Toronto debt and taxes at the same time (doesn't almost every campaigning politician say that?) Mr. Ford has been very outspoken -- even calling City Hall 'corrupt' which obviously didn't go over too well with the existing mayor, David Miller and his Council -- and has supposedly charged ahead in the race to be the next mayor.
Mr. Ford yelled loud and righteously about the wrongfulness and corruptness of an 'untendered, exclusive long term city contract' to an existing restaurant vendor operating on Woodbine Beach... And yet, Mr. Ford turned around and supported the same type of untendered, exclusive long term contract to a restaurant vendor on Sunnyside Beach...The difference...it seems like perhaps the first vendor was a 'lobbyist' who 'belonged' to a competing politician whereas the latter vendor was one of his 'own lobbyists'.... I would definitely say that this discrepancy in Ford's political perspective depending apparently on 'who' exactly the lobbyist/vendor was/is
-- is a big warning 'red flag' to all Torontonian voters...
Let me finish this essay by moving to psychology from politics...
Again, 'hypocrisy' can be -- and usually is -- a sign of 'underlying narcissitic bias'...
We all have to walk a day to day line between how much 'personal narcissism' we are going to let 'surface from the inner depths of our personality to 'outer social (or anti-social) behavior.
And how much narcissism we are going to 'push back down' into our 'inner depths' again....unplayed out in our social (or anti-social) behavior...
Where we draw the line between 'acceptable and unacceptable narcissistic behavior' is probably the truest indicator of our personal 'state of ethics'...and whether our professed 'idealism' and 'idelology' actually matches with, and is 'congruent with', how we actually behave...
As the police credo states....'Deeds speak'...
Freud definitely made some serious 'epistemological mistakes' in my opinion...
And he probably made some serious 'ethical mistakes' as well...
Or his so-called epistemological and ethical mistakes -- like his rigid interpretation of The Oedipal Complex -- may not have been 'mistakes' at all...They may very well have been 'narcissistically motivated'....Like most of the rest of us to differing degrees -- it is possible that he may have simply decided to 'step away from a political, legal, and therapeutic can of worms'...in order not to be 'politically incorrect' and/or have his career jeopardized....Nobody around him at the time apparently wanted to talk about 'childhood sexual assault'...so why should he stick his neck on the line and risk the future of his career? But would he actually intentionally change his Psychoanalytic theory 180 degrees in order to stay out of this can of worms? That is rather mind-boggling and definitely hard to believe...That would indeed be a first degree 'breach of theoretical and therapeutic ethics'....and I don't think I would personally believe Freud capable of that...
Finally, to finish here, there is the relationship between a 'split ego' and 'hypocrisy'... This is the other major reason (besides personal narcissism) for human hypocrisy.
Let's take Freud's first conscious memory again as an example of this type of 'traumacy and transference based, 'split ego' hypocrisy'...
Little Freud at about 3 or 4 years old bursts into his parents bedroom while they are having sex together....He is in shock -- and completely at a loss -- as to undestanding what is happening in front of his eyes with his father probably perched over his mother, in what looks to the little Freud like his dad in a 'power' position 'debasing' his mother... His irate father angrily evicts the little Freud from the parental room, from this 'primal scene'....
This is the moment of most radical change in the little Freud's personality -- the beginning of his 'Primary Transference Complex' (PTC) if you will...The little Freud's ego -- his 'wholistic ego' -- is radically 'split into two' by this shockingly traumatic event...
One side of the little Freud's character at that radical moment in time, in the exact ways remembererd by the little Freud in his memory (which Freud never fully articulated in any kind of detail but which a good psychoanalyst, if he or she knows what to look for, can 'reconstruct' by the many, many essays that Freud wrote about one of his favorite subject matters most intimately connected to his 'PTC' -- specifically, the subject of 'primal memories/phantasies'...) became like the little Freud's father -- 'anally rejecting', 'very private', 'pushing people away from his most personal, private life', and at the same time 'wanting to powerfully possess and dominate/demean/perch over his wife'...
This universal feature of human behavior and 'human transference complexes' has been given the name in Psychoanalysis of 'identification with the aggressor'...I also call it 'identification with the rejector, betrayor, abandoner...' depending on the exact details of the 'primal transference memory'....Sometimes I will also call it 'transference reversal' as one of our 'primal transference phantasies' becomes in effect, the 'transference switching of roles' of our main transference rejector and ourselves...(little Freud and father Freud) and also in this case, the 'winning of his mother' over his main 'Oedipal' rival -- his father -- which means that Freud essentially 'invented' the 'Oedipal Complex' not after 1896 but rather when he was 3 or 4 years old, i.e., as a part of his Primary (or Primal) Transference Scene...
Thus, the second part of the little Freud's new 'split ego' is the 'rebellious child', the deconstructionist, the boy who wants to usurp his father in terms of power, and in terms of power over his mother...The 'little rebel' Freud wanted to 'know absolutely everything that was happening in his parents bedroom that the little Freud did not understand' -- and that his own father would not properly explain to him. In this regard, the little Freud essentially spent the rest of his life pursuing a 'perfectionist's understanding' of anything and everything that could and was happening in 'the primal bedroom'... This he eventually called Psychoanalysis and the study of Psychoanalysis eventually came to include not only the study of 'adult sexuality' but also of 'childhood sexuality'....and the inter-relationship between 'childhood and adult sexual desires and fantasies'...
Thus, the underlying 'hypocrisy' of Freud's character is that he wanted to know anything and everything about everyone else's personal life and yet he didn't want anyone to know anything about his own very private and personal life. This is what I call 'split-ego hypocrisy' the paradox and discordance between that part of his character that 'introjected' his father's attitude of wanting his own 'personal space and privacy' and the other part of the little Freud's character that wanted to know 'absolutely everything about this father's most personal, intimate business'...
The little Freud knew that his father was 'lying' to him, he knew that his father was 'resisting' the truth, he knew that his father was 'defending against' or 'covering up' the 'truth' of what was happening inside his parents' bedroom....and later, with more awareness, the little Freud would come to know that the truth behind 'bedroom doors' was about 'hidden sexuality and hidden sexual impulses'....and Freud was absoutely intent on finding anything and everything about all these 'hidden sexual impulses'.....They would become his life adventure...
Thus, the hipocrisy within Sigmund Freud's character was between the 'voyeur' (the little Freud) and the person who 'didn't like to be watched' (his introjection or identification with his dad)...
And another hipocrisy within Freud's character was between the little Freud who essentially wanted an 'open bedroom policy' and 'the truth that lies behind closed doors' on the one hand and the other part of Freud (his 'topdog' or 'superego' 'rejecting dad') who was 'covering up the truth' and who wanted to 'run a secret society behind closed doors'...
If Freud had really understood his own 'transference complexes', he would have better understood his most important one -- which he didn't....and thus, he couldn't properly see through his own 'transference hypocrisies'... Thus, his 'character flaws' became the 'transferred and/or 'projected' flaws of 'Classical Psychoanalysis'.
For those of you -- whether you be a politician or a philosopher or an economist or a corporate leader, or a scientist, or a psychotherapist, or a therapeutic client -- who really want to properly investigate and understand all the immense potential creative insights of Psychoanalysis -- at its best -- and who do not want to be 'hypocrites' and or 'silenced lambs' who profess to one idealistic ideology while behaviorally subscribing to something else entirely -- for all of you who really have 'the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth' in mind -- in your mind -- I offer you a study of a type of Psychoanalysis that takes the best 'Classical Psychoanalysis' has to offer us -- while eliminating the flaws in Classical Psychoanalysis that were caused by 'the neurotic transference symptoms' in Freud's character....that have been 'transferred again' onto the power brokers and the 'silenced lambs' of The Orthodox, Anal Psychoanalytic Establishment...
I offer you a 'wilder', much more 'unothodox' brand of 'underground' Psychoanalysis...
And I call this brand of 'underground' Psychoanalysis...
'DGB Quantum ('Post-Hegelian' or 'Multi-Dialectic-Democratic) Psychoanalysis'
Shorten it as you wish...
Have a good evening,
-- dgb, Sept. 4th, 2010,
-- David Gordon Bain,
-- Dialectic Gap-Bridging Negotiations...
-- Are Still in Process...
I like religion to be defined not by 'how loyal you are to whatever your image of God may be' but rather by how good you are to other people, and to 'the protection, the salvation, and the re-generation of all God's creations, including the Earth and the Universe as a whole. If God helps you get there -- i.e., towards treating other people better -- then great! But if God is leading you down a path of righteousness, unbridled narcissism, nastiness towards others, and destruction, then I challenge your image of God and what you believe HE/SHE is demanding of you...Or you are a hypocrite.
I see some people dressed up in all their religious garbs -- and/or simply regular church goers without the garbs -- and I see these same people cheating and squeezing their employees at work all week long between religious sessions -- and I say 'that isn't religion'....Or at least, it certainly isn't anything close to the type of religion I believe in.
I would trumpet the words and the deeds of a 'humanistic atheist' while ignoring and/or 'deconstructing' the words and deeds of a 'narcissistic Church-goer and/or supposedly religious person' -- a person who spouts off and/or professes to believe in a particular religious philosophy/ ideology that he or she defies and aborts in every action that he or she presents to the world for others to look at, interpret, and evaluate' -- again, the hallmark of hypocrisy...
Hypocrisy basically comes down to either the 'un-integration' of a 'split ego' and/or the workings of a 'narcissistic ego' that is attempting to hide -- with a show of 'smoke and mirrors' -- his or her 'narcissistic activities'. At the extreme, this is the hallmark of the 'psychopathic and/or sociopathic personality'. In greater or lesser degrees of moderation, this is the rest of us.
Except for the case of what might be called 'white lies' (i.e., lying in order to not hurt someone's feelings) -- most forms of lying, cheating, hiding, covering up, non-transparency, hypocrisy, greed, unethical behavior -- these are all the calling cards of the 'unethical, narcissistic personality' at work...
Self enhancement through the 'putting down' and/or 'disrespect and debasement of others' is not a very 'religious' activity in my mind. I see it every day I go to work.
There are good 'employers', bad employers, narcissistic employers, altruistic employers, ethical employers who aim to split the difference between narcissism and altruism, employers who spout an ideology that they cannot, will not, and/or choose not, to live up to, employers who break promises, break comittments, who tell you one thing with 'rose colored glasses on', and then the rose-colored glasses quickly disappear into Never, Never Land....and of course, the same can be said for 'employees' as well...
'Unions' were created to protect the worker from bad employers....and 'free trade' was created by politicians via employers to 'break unions'...
There are 'good unions', 'bad unions', and 'no unions' which is the direction we are going now with 'free trade'. To have 'free trade' with 'third world countries' where workers get paid a dollar an hour, if that, in dehumanistic conditions where they could be working 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, that defy any sense of the word 'humanity' ('sweat shops', they are often called) -- a situation that we here, in Canada, are 'following suit' with in order to 'compete' with these third world countries, and in order to just personally 'survive' in a 'country of diminishing wages coupled with rising prices' -- this is what we got with 'free trade'.... a country with 'rising sweat shops', cheaper labour, and a stressed out, overworked, disappearing middle class, at least for those who are a part of the 'plummeting wages scene' and the 'rising competitiion amongst low income earners' who are willing to be paid less and less, and work more and more, just to have a job in a context of high unemployment...
The unscrupulous, narcissistic employer takes advantage of this scene -- and/or is forced to -- in order to compete with the 'cheap goods' coming in from foreign, third world markets...
North America -- as a consequence of 'free trade' -- has become a continent with 'little to no manufacturing' as the 'cheapest goods are coming from foreign markets' in a foreign labour market that North America cannot compete with (at least without tariffs -- gee, I wonder why 'tariffs' were around for a hundred years before 'free trade'?) unless our wages keep tumbling, and/or the wages in these foreign markets start to go up...That is not likely to happen in our lifetime...at least without intervention....
What we need is a 'universal, international minimum wage' where all countries can compete on the same footing...Failing that, if we ever want to see 'manufacturing' in this continent again, we need to re-introduce tariffs...
'Free trade' was presented to us in a spirit of 'Adam Smith Idealistic Capitalistic Ideology'. Back when Mulroney introduced this idea to the Canadian people, I didn't have a clue as to what the ramifications of it would be....
All the talk at the time was about a 'big, bad America' crushing and 'taking over' a much smaller, weaker Canada...
Little did we know that 'free trade' would be a law that would 'favor the weakest economic countries in the world' -- plus the 'multi-international corporations' who were big enough to close down their manufacturing plants in North America and open them up in all these 'weaker economic countries' with a hugely 'cheaper work force'...
A free trade agreement between America, Canada, and Mexico...Gee, who is going to win that agreement? America? Canada? Try Mexico -- and all the American and Canadian Corporations who have enough money to move their manufacturing plants down there...Sorry, all you American and Canadian workers -- particularly, those of you who were a part of a big, bad 'corporate union' -- but you just lost your jobs.
The 'unions' that are left in North America have much less power than they used to which is partly a good thing and partly a bad thing. On the one hand, some corporate unions were becoming increasing 'narcissistic and pathological' in their own management style...leading to 'out of control labour costs'.... Eg. the auto industry....But on the other hand, these unions were the only bargaining power that workers had to protect themselves, and enhance themselves, in an otherwise overpowering context of 'big, bad corporate management wolves'...
Today, it is hard to tell whether some unions are actually working for the workers or 'colluding' with the 'bad corporate management wolves' in their mutual aim to suppress and dehumanize the workers...
Six suicides amongst nurses in a Quebec hospital. The spokesperson for the union said that the nurses all had 'personal family problems'. Interview other 'still living' nurses at the hospital and you find out that the nurses were/are all being forced to work 'unGodly' hours where they had/have no time for 'family' -- no wonder why the six nurses all had 'family problems'. In this context, you have to ask the question: Who is the union working for -- management or the workers?
You have a problem with your phone in Canada. You phone an operator -- and you find that the operator lives in India...
You go to Wal-Mart and you are lucky if you can find a single manufactured good that is made anywhere in North America... For that matter, it is hard to walk into any retail outlet and still find a manufactured good made in North America... Unless the manufacturing -- or 'service' company for that matter -- has either 'imported cheaper labour from other cheaper international work force markets' and/or the 'local labour market wage prices' have been 'forced downwards' by the high unemployment rate and/or the existence of a sufficient body of workers who are 'willing to work for less' than what used to be the going rate...
When it gets to the point where even graduating teachers and lawyers are having a tough time finding jobs and beginning their careers....you get the idea that something is wrong with this picture...
What you have basically is a 'cheapening of the Canadian job market'....
With all due respect to immigrants and refugees, immigrants and refugees should not be let into this country -- except for perhaps a bare minimum -- in a time of a bad recession and high unemployment. Otherwise, you are just putting more and more stress on the backs of Canadians who already live here. Canadians are overtaxed, underemployed, many underpaid, being forced to work longer and longer hours or work two or three jobs to meet inflationary Canadian prices, our Seniors are not sufficiently protected from falling under the Canadian Safety Net -- with pensions that are not sufficient to support them (unless you have the support of a private, corporate or government pension plan...)
A single male (and I presume female) in the 'Employment Works' (Social Assistance, Welfare) Program gets a cheque each month for $585. That is barely enough to cover their rent, let alone their food, transportation, hygiene, clothing...That type of cheque basically puts them under 'house arrest'...
Meanwhile, our federal MPs don't want to disclose their expense accounts.
Does the NDP have a political voice -- and/or an 'idealistic mission' -- anymore?
Jack Layton has been pretty quiet on the political front for the last year or so -- maybe because of personal health reasons -- and no one to really step up in his absence. Just one 'deal with the devil' (i.e., Harper) to give more people on (un)employment insurance more time on the back end to find a job...How about all of the unemployed Canadian workers who have been paying into their federal (un)employment insurance their whole working lives -- and don't even make it 'through the front gate' of UI because of the many 'stipulations' that the federal government puts on 'who qualifies for this insurance' once they become unemployed? If you are 'fired', you are ineligible..
If you 'quit' or 'resign', you are ineligible...If you are 'downsized', you are eligible...The federal government is supposedly trying to 'screen out' unscrupulous, unethical ex-workers here but who in the federal government from this same (un)employment insurance department is looking at 'corporate ethics'....
I call that 'worker profiling' and 'federal government prejudice and discrimination' on who does and doesn't get (un)employment insurance. The only thing that should matter is whether you have paid enough into your government insurance plan to qualify you for drawing it back out when you need it...
I am not a socialist or a capitalist in their respective solitary one-sided perspectives, but rather a 'dialectic-democratic-humanistic' who operates in the context of wanting to integrate the best of capitalism and socialism together in a way that creates a good employer-employee labour situation -- a 'win-win' situation where both parties can work and prosper together, not aim to ravage and pillage each other...
A political and/or corporate hypocrite is someone who professes a particular idealistic ideology on the one hand, but operates by a much 'shadier' set of rules 'under the table' and/or 'behind closed doors' or 'in back alleys' perhaps with 'brief cases full of money'...that won't leave a 'paper' trail behind him or her...
Like Prime Minister Stephen Harper who campaigns on a platform of 'political, democratic transparency' and 'ethical accountability'....who hated the practice of previous Prime Ministers 'stacking the deck' with 'partisan' (read 'Liberal) Senators but had absolutely no problem with 'stacking the deck' with 'Conservative' Senators...I guess 'two wrongs do make a right'...as in a Senate full of 'right' leaning Senators...
And we have our 'Wanna Be Toronto Mayor' -- Mr. Rob Ford -- who seems to have found the right voter audience in his aim to lower Toronto debt and taxes at the same time (doesn't almost every campaigning politician say that?) Mr. Ford has been very outspoken -- even calling City Hall 'corrupt' which obviously didn't go over too well with the existing mayor, David Miller and his Council -- and has supposedly charged ahead in the race to be the next mayor.
Mr. Ford yelled loud and righteously about the wrongfulness and corruptness of an 'untendered, exclusive long term city contract' to an existing restaurant vendor operating on Woodbine Beach... And yet, Mr. Ford turned around and supported the same type of untendered, exclusive long term contract to a restaurant vendor on Sunnyside Beach...The difference...it seems like perhaps the first vendor was a 'lobbyist' who 'belonged' to a competing politician whereas the latter vendor was one of his 'own lobbyists'.... I would definitely say that this discrepancy in Ford's political perspective depending apparently on 'who' exactly the lobbyist/vendor was/is
-- is a big warning 'red flag' to all Torontonian voters...
Let me finish this essay by moving to psychology from politics...
Again, 'hypocrisy' can be -- and usually is -- a sign of 'underlying narcissitic bias'...
We all have to walk a day to day line between how much 'personal narcissism' we are going to let 'surface from the inner depths of our personality to 'outer social (or anti-social) behavior.
And how much narcissism we are going to 'push back down' into our 'inner depths' again....unplayed out in our social (or anti-social) behavior...
Where we draw the line between 'acceptable and unacceptable narcissistic behavior' is probably the truest indicator of our personal 'state of ethics'...and whether our professed 'idealism' and 'idelology' actually matches with, and is 'congruent with', how we actually behave...
As the police credo states....'Deeds speak'...
Freud definitely made some serious 'epistemological mistakes' in my opinion...
And he probably made some serious 'ethical mistakes' as well...
Or his so-called epistemological and ethical mistakes -- like his rigid interpretation of The Oedipal Complex -- may not have been 'mistakes' at all...They may very well have been 'narcissistically motivated'....Like most of the rest of us to differing degrees -- it is possible that he may have simply decided to 'step away from a political, legal, and therapeutic can of worms'...in order not to be 'politically incorrect' and/or have his career jeopardized....Nobody around him at the time apparently wanted to talk about 'childhood sexual assault'...so why should he stick his neck on the line and risk the future of his career? But would he actually intentionally change his Psychoanalytic theory 180 degrees in order to stay out of this can of worms? That is rather mind-boggling and definitely hard to believe...That would indeed be a first degree 'breach of theoretical and therapeutic ethics'....and I don't think I would personally believe Freud capable of that...
Finally, to finish here, there is the relationship between a 'split ego' and 'hypocrisy'... This is the other major reason (besides personal narcissism) for human hypocrisy.
Let's take Freud's first conscious memory again as an example of this type of 'traumacy and transference based, 'split ego' hypocrisy'...
Little Freud at about 3 or 4 years old bursts into his parents bedroom while they are having sex together....He is in shock -- and completely at a loss -- as to undestanding what is happening in front of his eyes with his father probably perched over his mother, in what looks to the little Freud like his dad in a 'power' position 'debasing' his mother... His irate father angrily evicts the little Freud from the parental room, from this 'primal scene'....
This is the moment of most radical change in the little Freud's personality -- the beginning of his 'Primary Transference Complex' (PTC) if you will...The little Freud's ego -- his 'wholistic ego' -- is radically 'split into two' by this shockingly traumatic event...
One side of the little Freud's character at that radical moment in time, in the exact ways remembererd by the little Freud in his memory (which Freud never fully articulated in any kind of detail but which a good psychoanalyst, if he or she knows what to look for, can 'reconstruct' by the many, many essays that Freud wrote about one of his favorite subject matters most intimately connected to his 'PTC' -- specifically, the subject of 'primal memories/phantasies'...) became like the little Freud's father -- 'anally rejecting', 'very private', 'pushing people away from his most personal, private life', and at the same time 'wanting to powerfully possess and dominate/demean/perch over his wife'...
This universal feature of human behavior and 'human transference complexes' has been given the name in Psychoanalysis of 'identification with the aggressor'...I also call it 'identification with the rejector, betrayor, abandoner...' depending on the exact details of the 'primal transference memory'....Sometimes I will also call it 'transference reversal' as one of our 'primal transference phantasies' becomes in effect, the 'transference switching of roles' of our main transference rejector and ourselves...(little Freud and father Freud) and also in this case, the 'winning of his mother' over his main 'Oedipal' rival -- his father -- which means that Freud essentially 'invented' the 'Oedipal Complex' not after 1896 but rather when he was 3 or 4 years old, i.e., as a part of his Primary (or Primal) Transference Scene...
Thus, the second part of the little Freud's new 'split ego' is the 'rebellious child', the deconstructionist, the boy who wants to usurp his father in terms of power, and in terms of power over his mother...The 'little rebel' Freud wanted to 'know absolutely everything that was happening in his parents bedroom that the little Freud did not understand' -- and that his own father would not properly explain to him. In this regard, the little Freud essentially spent the rest of his life pursuing a 'perfectionist's understanding' of anything and everything that could and was happening in 'the primal bedroom'... This he eventually called Psychoanalysis and the study of Psychoanalysis eventually came to include not only the study of 'adult sexuality' but also of 'childhood sexuality'....and the inter-relationship between 'childhood and adult sexual desires and fantasies'...
Thus, the underlying 'hypocrisy' of Freud's character is that he wanted to know anything and everything about everyone else's personal life and yet he didn't want anyone to know anything about his own very private and personal life. This is what I call 'split-ego hypocrisy' the paradox and discordance between that part of his character that 'introjected' his father's attitude of wanting his own 'personal space and privacy' and the other part of the little Freud's character that wanted to know 'absolutely everything about this father's most personal, intimate business'...
The little Freud knew that his father was 'lying' to him, he knew that his father was 'resisting' the truth, he knew that his father was 'defending against' or 'covering up' the 'truth' of what was happening inside his parents' bedroom....and later, with more awareness, the little Freud would come to know that the truth behind 'bedroom doors' was about 'hidden sexuality and hidden sexual impulses'....and Freud was absoutely intent on finding anything and everything about all these 'hidden sexual impulses'.....They would become his life adventure...
Thus, the hipocrisy within Sigmund Freud's character was between the 'voyeur' (the little Freud) and the person who 'didn't like to be watched' (his introjection or identification with his dad)...
And another hipocrisy within Freud's character was between the little Freud who essentially wanted an 'open bedroom policy' and 'the truth that lies behind closed doors' on the one hand and the other part of Freud (his 'topdog' or 'superego' 'rejecting dad') who was 'covering up the truth' and who wanted to 'run a secret society behind closed doors'...
If Freud had really understood his own 'transference complexes', he would have better understood his most important one -- which he didn't....and thus, he couldn't properly see through his own 'transference hypocrisies'... Thus, his 'character flaws' became the 'transferred and/or 'projected' flaws of 'Classical Psychoanalysis'.
For those of you -- whether you be a politician or a philosopher or an economist or a corporate leader, or a scientist, or a psychotherapist, or a therapeutic client -- who really want to properly investigate and understand all the immense potential creative insights of Psychoanalysis -- at its best -- and who do not want to be 'hypocrites' and or 'silenced lambs' who profess to one idealistic ideology while behaviorally subscribing to something else entirely -- for all of you who really have 'the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth' in mind -- in your mind -- I offer you a study of a type of Psychoanalysis that takes the best 'Classical Psychoanalysis' has to offer us -- while eliminating the flaws in Classical Psychoanalysis that were caused by 'the neurotic transference symptoms' in Freud's character....that have been 'transferred again' onto the power brokers and the 'silenced lambs' of The Orthodox, Anal Psychoanalytic Establishment...
I offer you a 'wilder', much more 'unothodox' brand of 'underground' Psychoanalysis...
And I call this brand of 'underground' Psychoanalysis...
'DGB Quantum ('Post-Hegelian' or 'Multi-Dialectic-Democratic) Psychoanalysis'
Shorten it as you wish...
Have a good evening,
-- dgb, Sept. 4th, 2010,
-- David Gordon Bain,
-- Dialectic Gap-Bridging Negotiations...
-- Are Still in Process...
On Ethics
Ethics can usually be viewed as the 'half-way' point, the point of 'homeostatic, dialectic, democratic balance' between narcissism and altruism, between self and social interest.
-- dgb, Sept. 4th, 2010.
-- David Gordon Bain
-- Dialectic Gap-Bridging Negotiations...
-- Are Still in Process...
-- dgb, Sept. 4th, 2010.
-- David Gordon Bain
-- Dialectic Gap-Bridging Negotiations...
-- Are Still in Process...
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
On Freedom of Speech vs. Political Correctness: 'The Silencing of The Lambs', Part 3
Freedom of speech is not a popularity contest. Sometimes people -- particularly philosophers -- have to say or write what is 'politically unpopular' or 'politically incorrect'. Without this 'rhetorical crashing through of political, legal, economic, and/or philosophical boundaries', 'cultural taboos' associated with philosophical injustices would never be confronted...like the 'stoning of women (or men) in Iran'...or women showing their face, or being allowed to wear makeup or heels (again in Iran), or in Canada not so long ago... women being allowed to vote...and being allowed to become a member of parliament, and being allowed to be a lawyer and a judge...
Similarily, 'domestic assault' issues need to be addressed from the perspective and the equality of both sexes, not just one sex; and with the fact that a 'sexual assault charge' can destroy a man's life -- his professional career and his marriage and family -- and I am not talking about a conviction here but an assault charge -- an assault charge that may easily be front page news when the charge is laid and nowhere to be found in the same newspaper when the man is found a year or two later to be innocent of the charge -- to repeat, with the fact that a sexual assault charge can easily destroy a man's life -- something needs to be done strongly to deter and prevent a woman from laying a 'false charge' for any of a number of reasons such as one or more of the big three: power, revenge, and/or money. This applies particularly to those cases where a woman with the wrong motivation in her mind might be looking for a 'large payout' to keep the court case out of court....
And finally, if there is one chance in a hundred that a Classical Psychoanalyst's application of 'The Oedipal Theory/Assumption' might prevent the analyst from recognizing the 'actuality of a real childhood sexual assault', then that theory and assumption needs to be strongly and democratically addressed through 'freedom of speech'.....not subject to the potential coercion of 'being expelled' from Psychoanalysis for opening one's mouth against the theory....and in effect, being 'silenced like a lamb'...This is not democratic....but then again, who said Psychoanalysis was or is democratic?
The power holders at the top of Psychoanalysis -- I don't even know who they are any more -- keep running and hiding and not saying anything on an issue that keeps coming back to haunt them, over and over again, like the 'repetition compulsion' and/or 'transference'....and they keep getting philosophically 'pulverized' on Freud's rigid interpretation of The Oedipal Complex because there is no logical defense on what Freud and now Psychoanalysis in general keeps trying narcissistically to hold onto (there is some serious 'separation anxiety' going on here and/or 'self preservation in the name of Freud' at all cost...) -- my image in my head is of anti or counter or modified Oedipal Theorists metaphorically 'Storming The French Bastille'...over and over again, and one day, like the French Bastille, the 'Psychoanalytic Bastille' that is holding The Oedipal Complex 'prisoner'....will fall...
I hope I am alive to see it...
And I hope Jeffrey Masson is alive to see it...One day he will be vindicated...
Just as one day all the men in Canadian jails who are serving sentences for 'domestic assault'...
That a woman would never have been charged on...
Will also be vindicated...
We have heard of 'racial profiling'....Well, there is 'sexual profiling' as well...
Most men in Canada are all to aware of this phenomenon....
But once again...the 'lambs -- even grown men -- are silenced'....
-- dgb, Sept 2nd, 2010,
-- David Gordon Bain
Similarily, 'domestic assault' issues need to be addressed from the perspective and the equality of both sexes, not just one sex; and with the fact that a 'sexual assault charge' can destroy a man's life -- his professional career and his marriage and family -- and I am not talking about a conviction here but an assault charge -- an assault charge that may easily be front page news when the charge is laid and nowhere to be found in the same newspaper when the man is found a year or two later to be innocent of the charge -- to repeat, with the fact that a sexual assault charge can easily destroy a man's life -- something needs to be done strongly to deter and prevent a woman from laying a 'false charge' for any of a number of reasons such as one or more of the big three: power, revenge, and/or money. This applies particularly to those cases where a woman with the wrong motivation in her mind might be looking for a 'large payout' to keep the court case out of court....
And finally, if there is one chance in a hundred that a Classical Psychoanalyst's application of 'The Oedipal Theory/Assumption' might prevent the analyst from recognizing the 'actuality of a real childhood sexual assault', then that theory and assumption needs to be strongly and democratically addressed through 'freedom of speech'.....not subject to the potential coercion of 'being expelled' from Psychoanalysis for opening one's mouth against the theory....and in effect, being 'silenced like a lamb'...This is not democratic....but then again, who said Psychoanalysis was or is democratic?
The power holders at the top of Psychoanalysis -- I don't even know who they are any more -- keep running and hiding and not saying anything on an issue that keeps coming back to haunt them, over and over again, like the 'repetition compulsion' and/or 'transference'....and they keep getting philosophically 'pulverized' on Freud's rigid interpretation of The Oedipal Complex because there is no logical defense on what Freud and now Psychoanalysis in general keeps trying narcissistically to hold onto (there is some serious 'separation anxiety' going on here and/or 'self preservation in the name of Freud' at all cost...) -- my image in my head is of anti or counter or modified Oedipal Theorists metaphorically 'Storming The French Bastille'...over and over again, and one day, like the French Bastille, the 'Psychoanalytic Bastille' that is holding The Oedipal Complex 'prisoner'....will fall...
I hope I am alive to see it...
And I hope Jeffrey Masson is alive to see it...One day he will be vindicated...
Just as one day all the men in Canadian jails who are serving sentences for 'domestic assault'...
That a woman would never have been charged on...
Will also be vindicated...
We have heard of 'racial profiling'....Well, there is 'sexual profiling' as well...
Most men in Canada are all to aware of this phenomenon....
But once again...the 'lambs -- even grown men -- are silenced'....
-- dgb, Sept 2nd, 2010,
-- David Gordon Bain
Your Inspirational Quote For The Day....
"A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so
well that no one would find fault with what he has done."
-- Cardinal Newman
well that no one would find fault with what he has done."
-- Cardinal Newman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)