53percenter's Blog

 

The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is the current name of an organization that originated in 1844 with the name Association of Medical Superintendents of American Institutions for the Insane.

Treatment of the insane presumably would be a worthy objective. As stated on the website of APA, “Psychiatry Online”:

American Psychiatric Association practice guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for the assessment and treatment of psychiatric disorders.

Treatment of the insane, therefore, does still appear to be on the APA’s agenda, 175 years after its founding. In order to treat the insane, those suffering from psychiatric disorders, any given patient or class of patients must be accurately assessed, to formulate an effective course of treatment. There’s the rub.

To accurately assess the psychiatric disorder of a patient or class of patients, it might be intuited to be desirable for those doing the assessment to possess some appreciable degree of mental health. That is to say, it would seem convenient, in order to arrive at a reliable assessment of the psychiatric disorder of some patient, if the psychiatrist conducting the assessment were, well, not insane. That seems a reasonable requirement.

That being the case, taking into consideration the range of behaviors which psychiatrists display, as well as the range of behaviors which they are willing to classify as alternative orientations, rather than as psychiatric disorders, one might hesitate to readily accept many psychiatrists as sufficiently mentally healthy to conduct valid assessments of the psychiatric disorders of others.

Take, for example, an editorial published by The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law on pedophilia. Perhaps the reader could stomach a review of the statements found in the editorial titled “Pedophilia and DSM-5: The Importance of Clearly Defining the Nature of a Pedophilic Disorder,” but perhaps not:

In the face of significant criticism of its inclusion in the DSM-5, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) has stated its intention to remove the term Pedophilic Sexual Orientation from the diagnostic manual. Removing that term in response to public criticism would be a mistake. Experiencing ongoing sexual attractions to prepubescent children is, in essence, a form of sexual orientation, and acknowledging that reality can help to distinguish the mental makeup that is inherent to Pedophilia, from acts of child sexual abuse.

Essentially, the broader statement in the editorial differentiates between the individuals who merely lust after children, indulging in fantasies based on that lust through use of child pornography, and those who actually rape them. The distinction may mean to assuage the repulsion of those who are repulsed, but the implication that “just” indulging in fantasies of child rape is somehow not quite as reprehensible as child rape seems like a qualifier of insanity. Recall that the editorial was written by Frederick S. Berlin, an American psychiatrist and sexologist specializing in sex offenses. And consider that it contains many other statements.

The APA had altered its assessment of pedophilia, which it previously had classified as a psychiatric disorder, but later reclassified as an alternative sexual orientation, as Dr. Berlin pointed out. Due to controversy that arose over that questionable decision, some backpedaling occurred, and APA decided to remove the term “Pedophilic Sexual Orientation” from the manual altogether. So that makes everything all better, right? Hardly.

Read the manual, if you have the time, a handy supply of aspirins, and a strong streak of self-loathing. The reflections and observations found therein may be found by psychiatrists to be rational. And that fact is what others might classify as evidence.

Add to all this the fact that psychiatrists commit suicide at a rate at least five times that of the general public, and the image produced of psychiatrists is that of a group whose mental health is unquestionably lacking.

And yet these highly esteemed mental health professionals are those on whom America depends to assess the mental health and stability or psychiatric disorders of others.

 

The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is the current name of an organization that originated in 1844 with the name Association of Medical Superintendents of American Institutions for the Insane.

Treatment of the insane presumably would be a worthy objective. As stated on the website of APA, “Psychiatry Online”:

American Psychiatric Association practice guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for the assessment and treatment of psychiatric disorders.

Treatment of the insane, therefore, does still appear to be on the APA’s agenda, 175 years after its founding. In order to treat the insane, those suffering from psychiatric disorders, any given patient or class of patients must be accurately assessed, to formulate an effective course of treatment. There’s the rub.

To accurately assess the psychiatric disorder of a patient or class of patients, it might be intuited to be desirable for those doing the assessment to possess some appreciable degree of mental health. That is to say, it would seem convenient, in order to arrive at a reliable assessment of the psychiatric disorder of some patient, if the psychiatrist conducting the assessment were, well, not insane. That seems a reasonable requirement.

That being the case, taking into consideration the range of behaviors which psychiatrists display, as well as the range of behaviors which they are willing to classify as alternative orientations, rather than as psychiatric disorders, one might hesitate to readily accept many psychiatrists as sufficiently mentally healthy to conduct valid assessments of the psychiatric disorders of others.

Take, for example, an editorial published by The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law on pedophilia. Perhaps the reader could stomach a review of the statements found in the editorial titled “Pedophilia and DSM-5: The Importance of Clearly Defining the Nature of a Pedophilic Disorder,” but perhaps not:

In the face of significant criticism of its inclusion in the DSM-5, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) has stated its intention to remove the term Pedophilic Sexual Orientation from the diagnostic manual. Removing that term in response to public criticism would be a mistake. Experiencing ongoing sexual attractions to prepubescent children is, in essence, a form of sexual orientation, and acknowledging that reality can help to distinguish the mental makeup that is inherent to Pedophilia, from acts of child sexual abuse.

Essentially, the broader statement in the editorial differentiates between the individuals who merely lust after children, indulging in fantasies based on that lust through use of child pornography, and those who actually rape them. The distinction may mean to assuage the repulsion of those who are repulsed, but the implication that “just” indulging in fantasies of child rape is somehow not quite as reprehensible as child rape seems like a qualifier of insanity. Recall that the editorial was written by Frederick S. Berlin, an American psychiatrist and sexologist specializing in sex offenses. And consider that it contains many other statements.

The APA had altered its assessment of pedophilia, which it previously had classified as a psychiatric disorder, but later reclassified as an alternative sexual orientation, as Dr. Berlin pointed out. Due to controversy that arose over that questionable decision, some backpedaling occurred, and APA decided to remove the term “Pedophilic Sexual Orientation” from the manual altogether. So that makes everything all better, right? Hardly.

Read the manual, if you have the time, a handy supply of aspirins, and a strong streak of self-loathing. The reflections and observations found therein may be found by psychiatrists to be rational. And that fact is what others might classify as evidence.

Add to all this the fact that psychiatrists commit suicide at a rate at least five times that of the general public, and the image produced of psychiatrists is that of a group whose mental health is unquestionably lacking.

And yet these highly esteemed mental health professionals are those on whom America depends to assess the mental health and stability or psychiatric disorders of others.

For years, we’ve known that Cuba’s education is all about brainwashing students.  In other words, it’s the revolution first, and always first.

A new report by independent journalists confirms it:    

A few weeks after the dismissal of Professor Omara Ruiz Urquiola, Cuba’s Deputy Minister of Higher Education (MES), Martha del Carmen Mesa Valenciano, has been given the task of defining the attitude a university professor should have. Her criterion has the merit of clarity since, according to her, teachers in higher education have to behave as activists of “revolutionary politics” of the Communist Party of Cuba (PCC).

Deputy Minister Martha del Carmen Mesa Valenciano

Photo via Agencia Cubana de Nocicias

In a text published on the official page of the MES, the official refers to the case of Ruiz Urquiola without mentioning her name. Mesa Valenciano acknowledges that the professor’s complaint, which circulated in social networks, motivated her to “take a tour” of Cuban higher education and make clear the official position regarding teachers.

“You are a university professor in order teach timely, constructive, contributing and supportive criticism and to build a better society together,” says the Deputy Minister, for whom “the wrong procedures, the bad actions of cadres, officials, leaders must be fought against,” without confusing these criticisms “with disrespect or with positions contrary to ‘revolutionary principles’.”

Mesa Valenciano cites the case of another professor, again without citing his name, who, in her opinion, “initiated a strong criticism of the decisions of the” Cuban leaders, “without perceiving that, with his irresponsible behavior in the comprehensive education of his students he confused them and showed them a wrong path.”

There it is!  No disrespect for revolutionary principles!

Again, this is not new for any of us familiar with Cuba or what public education has been and is.  It is a simply a way of teaching students whatever the dictatorship wants them to learn.

So remember the next time that someone tells you that they have free education in Cuba.   Yes, it’s free as long as you learn what the regime wants you to learn.

P.S.  You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

For years, we’ve known that Cuba’s education is all about brainwashing students.  In other words, it’s the revolution first, and always first.

A new report by independent journalists confirms it:    

A few weeks after the dismissal of Professor Omara Ruiz Urquiola, Cuba’s Deputy Minister of Higher Education (MES), Martha del Carmen Mesa Valenciano, has been given the task of defining the attitude a university professor should have. Her criterion has the merit of clarity since, according to her, teachers in higher education have to behave as activists of “revolutionary politics” of the Communist Party of Cuba (PCC).

Deputy Minister Martha del Carmen Mesa Valenciano

Photo via Agencia Cubana de Nocicias

In a text published on the official page of the MES, the official refers to the case of Ruiz Urquiola without mentioning her name. Mesa Valenciano acknowledges that the professor’s complaint, which circulated in social networks, motivated her to “take a tour” of Cuban higher education and make clear the official position regarding teachers.

“You are a university professor in order teach timely, constructive, contributing and supportive criticism and to build a better society together,” says the Deputy Minister, for whom “the wrong procedures, the bad actions of cadres, officials, leaders must be fought against,” without confusing these criticisms “with disrespect or with positions contrary to ‘revolutionary principles’.”

Mesa Valenciano cites the case of another professor, again without citing his name, who, in her opinion, “initiated a strong criticism of the decisions of the” Cuban leaders, “without perceiving that, with his irresponsible behavior in the comprehensive education of his students he confused them and showed them a wrong path.”

There it is!  No disrespect for revolutionary principles!

Again, this is not new for any of us familiar with Cuba or what public education has been and is.  It is a simply a way of teaching students whatever the dictatorship wants them to learn.

So remember the next time that someone tells you that they have free education in Cuba.   Yes, it’s free as long as you learn what the regime wants you to learn.

P.S.  You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

It is often said that politics makes for strange bedfellows. The Democrats, however, are taking that truism to unprecedented levels. Jumping on the Democrat 2020 bandwagon, but careful not to make it too noticeable, are China, Iran, and the globalists. 

Media propaganda notwithstanding, the Chinese are getting desperate. President Trump is choking off their oxygen supply, which is trade. The best relief China can get is by the election of pliable U.S. president who, after some kabuki theatrics, will revert to business as usual with them. China’s dream president would be Joe Biden. One can only imagine the reams of dirt they have on Slow Joe from their dealings both with him during his vice-presidency days and their shady business arrangements with his wayward son, Hunter. 

The other Democratic presidential candidates are not all that bad from China’s perspective, either. None have made an issue of either how compromised Biden is regarding China or what Chinese economic aggression has done to the American economy. This is a clear sign that they are soft on China — certainly softer that Donald Trump.

As for Iran, the Trump administration has put the mullahs in a world of hurt. Iran wants nothing more than to have the sanctions removed and get back to the halcyon days of Obama administration when their nuclear ambitions were coddled and their terrorist activity was, if not overlooked, then at least downplayed. To the Iranians, Trump is a bone stuck in their throat. The election of any of the Democratic candidates would be a godsend to them. They would especially like Biden in the Oval Office, since he too pines for the abandoned nuclear deal. Like the Chinese, expect the Iranians to work covertly to see that President Trump is defeated.

Then there are the globalists. They would to smother U.S. sovereignty with international organizations and multilateral treaties and would render the U.S. Constitution to being a mere historical artifact. Those internationalists have played a major role in damaging the U.S. industrial base to a degree that Hitler, Tojo, Mao, Stalin and the rest could only dream of. Their fingerprints all over the labor arbitrage that exported U.S. jobs and factories to Third World countries while simultaneously importing massive numbers of immigrants. This diabolical process weakens both the American working class and the cultural core of the country. 

Paid shills for the globalist agenda dominate broadcast, cable, and print media. The titans of social media personally find American nationalism repugnant and willing place their foreign business interests ahead of America’s. In the past three presidential election cycles, the Democratic Party was their party. It will be the same this time only more pronounced. 

It is no accident that Democrats dovetail in so smoothly the internal and external enemies of our republic. That party has long since been capture by leftists who despise America’s founding, its history, its traditions, and the majority of its people. Hate oozes out of them. To the left,  America is so flawed that she must be brought low so as to be transformed into something else. One only has to listen to the twenty or so Democrat candidate to hear that message. 

Come election time, no voter — black, brown or white — should be under any illusion as to the exact nature of the Democratic Party. Readers here know the threat the Democrats pose to our constitutional republic. 

It is often said that politics makes for strange bedfellows. The Democrats, however, are taking that truism to unprecedented levels. Jumping on the Democrat 2020 bandwagon, but careful not to make it too noticeable, are China, Iran, and the globalists. 

Media propaganda notwithstanding, the Chinese are getting desperate. President Trump is choking off their oxygen supply, which is trade. The best relief China can get is by the election of pliable U.S. president who, after some kabuki theatrics, will revert to business as usual with them. China’s dream president would be Joe Biden. One can only imagine the reams of dirt they have on Slow Joe from their dealings both with him during his vice-presidency days and their shady business arrangements with his wayward son, Hunter. 

The other Democratic presidential candidates are not all that bad from China’s perspective, either. None have made an issue of either how compromised Biden is regarding China or what Chinese economic aggression has done to the American economy. This is a clear sign that they are soft on China — certainly softer that Donald Trump.

As for Iran, the Trump administration has put the mullahs in a world of hurt. Iran wants nothing more than to have the sanctions removed and get back to the halcyon days of Obama administration when their nuclear ambitions were coddled and their terrorist activity was, if not overlooked, then at least downplayed. To the Iranians, Trump is a bone stuck in their throat. The election of any of the Democratic candidates would be a godsend to them. They would especially like Biden in the Oval Office, since he too pines for the abandoned nuclear deal. Like the Chinese, expect the Iranians to work covertly to see that President Trump is defeated.

Then there are the globalists. They would to smother U.S. sovereignty with international organizations and multilateral treaties and would render the U.S. Constitution to being a mere historical artifact. Those internationalists have played a major role in damaging the U.S. industrial base to a degree that Hitler, Tojo, Mao, Stalin and the rest could only dream of. Their fingerprints all over the labor arbitrage that exported U.S. jobs and factories to Third World countries while simultaneously importing massive numbers of immigrants. This diabolical process weakens both the American working class and the cultural core of the country. 

Paid shills for the globalist agenda dominate broadcast, cable, and print media. The titans of social media personally find American nationalism repugnant and willing place their foreign business interests ahead of America’s. In the past three presidential election cycles, the Democratic Party was their party. It will be the same this time only more pronounced. 

It is no accident that Democrats dovetail in so smoothly the internal and external enemies of our republic. That party has long since been capture by leftists who despise America’s founding, its history, its traditions, and the majority of its people. Hate oozes out of them. To the left,  America is so flawed that she must be brought low so as to be transformed into something else. One only has to listen to the twenty or so Democrat candidate to hear that message. 

Come election time, no voter — black, brown or white — should be under any illusion as to the exact nature of the Democratic Party. Readers here know the threat the Democrats pose to our constitutional republic. 

Has the white half of Barack Obama gone white supremacist? Is the lavish house on Martha’s Vineyard just purchased by the former first couple one of those racist “dog whistles” that progressives so often are able to hear?

Take a look at the startling sheer whiteness of the interior of the house, as featured in The Earl of Taint:

As the Earl notes, most of the brown to be found is where people step on.

If President Trump as purchased a house with so much whiteness, you can bet that the cries of racist symbolism and dog whistles would have been heard throughout the prog internet.

It occurred to me that maybe the Obamas are planning to remodel the place with colors that “look like America.” But then I realized that the Obamas already have been renting the property, and obviously like it so much they decided to buy it.

Or, maybe they miss the White House so much that they want an nearly all-white house?But the interior of then DC White House isn’t anything at all like as white as the Vineyard estate, where you’d be advised to bring your sunglasses inside if you visit.

Has the white half of Barack Obama gone white supremacist? Is the lavish house on Martha’s Vineyard just purchased by the former first couple one of those racist “dog whistles” that progressives so often are able to hear?

Take a look at the startling sheer whiteness of the interior of the house, as featured in The Earl of Taint:

As the Earl notes, most of the brown to be found is where people step on.

If President Trump as purchased a house with so much whiteness, you can bet that the cries of racist symbolism and dog whistles would have been heard throughout the prog internet.

It occurred to me that maybe the Obamas are planning to remodel the place with colors that “look like America.” But then I realized that the Obamas already have been renting the property, and obviously like it so much they decided to buy it.

Or, maybe they miss the White House so much that they want an nearly all-white house?But the interior of then DC White House isn’t anything at all like as white as the Vineyard estate, where you’d be advised to bring your sunglasses inside if you visit.