What is Psychopolitics?
As Beverly Eakman says: ‘Psychopolitics is as the art and science of asserting and maintaining dominion over the thoughts and loyalties of individuals, officers, bureaus, and “the masses,” via various techniques ranging from “group dynamics,” “cognitive dissonance,” “de-sensitization,” “super-imposing alternate value structures,” “artificial disruption of thought,” the Delphi Method, the Tavistock Technique, to negative or positive “reinforcement.”‘
Citizens Commission on Human Rights International
“We’re All in China Now”
Date Accessed: 3.11.09
In a nutshell, what this process describes is the arbitrary classification of political opinions that are deemed to be not “politically correct” as constituting a “mental illnesses”. In a pluralistic society, the whole notion that there can be such a thing as “political correctness” smacks of totalitarianism. It suggests that the government or some other organisation or group deems certain attitudes to have no place in such a society – so much for tolerating dissent!
How can such a process occur?
You will doubtless recall that both psychiatry and psychology are pseudosciences. Pseudoscience is defined as:
“A system of theories or assertions about the natural world that claim or appear to be scientific but that, in fact, are not. For example, astronomy is a science, but astrology is generally viewed as a pseudoscience.”
Science Dictionary: pseudoscience
Given the infinitely flexible and unconstrained nature of pseudoscience terminology, it can, without any empirical evidence, declare something to be a mental illness depending on the prevailing political climate: Thus it constitutes a useful tool of oppression. To remind you of some of the important facts about psychiatry, you will no doubt recall that psychiatry differs from real medicine in a number of ways.
Mental Health Abuse
Date Accessed: 6.8.09
Dr Thomas Szasz tells us that there are no biological tests to determine the presence or absence of any mental illness.
Since there are no objective tests to determine such matters as the presence or absence of a mental illness, such can be defined and re-defined if need be in terms of the prevailing opinions of the day. There is a problem now, in terms of civil liberties being restrained worldwide in the name of protecting the population of a country from terrorism. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgMx2F41XD0&NR=1
The World saw this process when George W Bush removed a number of traditional liberties and undermined the US Constitution in the name of protecting Americans from terrorism and in so-doing passed legislation that resembled Adolph Hitler’s Enabling Act almost verbatim. See the similarities between the Patriot Act and the Enabling Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act
The process witnessed in America has been repeated in Australia. According to the Australian Council for Civil Liberties:
“No less than 17 different Acts of the Federal Parliament have been passed since the attack on the World Trade Center in September,2001, in response to an overstated terrorist threat. The combined effect of these Acts is to restrict trial by jury, bail, open courts, and the right to a lawyer of your choice, and to extend the powers of the Federal police and Security Agencies to tap phones and access emails and text messages. Most of the Acts have no sunset clause or provision for periodic review by Parliamentary committees. Various Acts have been passed by State Parliaments restricting traditional civil liberties, for instance by giving police the right of surreptitious entry to private premises to access computers and private files. Such Big Brother extensions of power have a chilling effect on freedom of speech.”
Governments worldwide are ‘monitoring’ their national residents with a view to identifying those who are considered a threat and this of course entails a great deal of intrusive surveillance of ordinary citizens. What signs are ‘abnormal’ are defined from the plethora of psychobabble terms from psychiatry and psychology and then the government, by using computer tracking and keeping secret data bases on citizens vilifies those with whom it does not agree by applying a pejorative label. The key point is that, what is defined as a threat is based on mental health definitions not political concepts. Some time back, I predicted that the mental health profession would be used to formulate a ‘gotya list” to catch those who fell through the list of terrorist suspects, so that the state could use its coercive powers to catch citizens and forcibly incarcerate them and treat them with psychiatric drugs. I sounded warnings to civil libertarians only to receive no reply.
Consider what Beverly Eakman says in relation to the process of classifying divergent political opinions as mental illnesses:
“This lies at the heart of what is going on here in America, and we absolutely must put a stop to it, if it isn’t already too late. Data-mining (which actually pre-dates 9/11), along with longitudinal tracking (that’s tracking over long time periods) and, therefore, ongoing monitoring of individual perceptions, worldviews and beliefs is gaining momentum with every moment that computer technology evolves – which means constantly. Combine this with the practice of assigning mental-illness labels to private opinions, based on snippets of various information – with anything that might be favorable to the individual conveniently left out!”
We’re All in China Now
Unfortunately there are parallels in Australia and these come from the Early Intervention Program. There is an onerous checklist of psychobabble terms that can be used to coerce some hapless individual into psychiatric treatment. One of the items on this checklist is being extremely preoccupied with a particular theme, for example, death, politics or religion and this would, for example, cover anyone who disagrees with the curtailment of civil liberties or mental health screening.
Is Mental Health Screening Being Undertaken in Australia?
“Yes” is the answer to this question and somewhat alarmingly, it has been introduced to schools by the Commonwealth government. There are two websites that bear witness to this assertion and they are Kids Matter for primary school children http://www.kidsmatter.edu.au/ and Mind Matters for
Secondary school children http://www.mindmatters.edu.au/default.asp. Check these websites for the usual psychobabble about the Early Intervention Program. It is essential to note that the Early Intervention Program is based on a single study with dodgy methodology conducted in Buckinghamshire, in England, the results of which have not been replicated anywhere else in the world. (See Gosden, Richard Phd Punishing the Patient- How Psychiatrists Misunderstand and Mistreat Schizophrenia Scribe Publications Melbourne 2001 p.225). On the basis of psychiatric presumptions, there is a common assumption that psychotic disorders have a prevalence rate of 2%-3% in the community but the selection criteria employed by the Early Intervention Program’s research has implicated 51% of young people as suffering from schizophrenia. This is a statistically unsustainable figure.
The process that I have described is the subject of a short and informative video by G. Edward Griffin entitled “Psychiatry & Politics: Labeling Political Dissidents mentally ill” to be found on YouTube at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qT0LsFmAl1U The process has been in place in China for a long time and was in place in the old Soviet Union. The idea is simple – declare your opponents to be mad: What a piece of intellectual sophistication and subtlety – I don’t think!
The New World Order are definitely grooming our ‘value free’ thinkers for the police state of the not-too-distant future – this became obvious to me when I read the article Getting to know all about you by Adele Horin at http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/wellbeing/getting-to-know-all-about-you-20091030-hprh.html. This program closely resembles that put together by the UK group Common Purpose. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Purpose_UK
Where does all this lead?
It leads to totalitarianism! It leads to a society that will not tolerate dissent. It leads to a society that will not tolerate critiscism. Any society that refuses to tolerate criticism has something to hide!
“If you will not fight for the right, when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish, than to live as slaves.”
This says it all!
Go to visit your local MP. Don’t wait for the next election – see them now! The time has come for the population of this country and others to remind their elected representatives that it was you who put them into office and that it is your interests they are there to serve.