Eminent psychiatrist makes case ideology is mental disorder
WASHINGTON – Just when liberals thought it was safe to start identifying themselves as such, an acclaimed, veteran psychiatrist is making the case that the ideology motivating them is actually a mental disorder.
"Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded," says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book, "The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness." "Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave."
While political activists on the other side of the spectrum have made similar observations, Rossiter boasts professional credentials and a life virtually free of activism and links to "the vast right-wing conspiracy."
For more than 35 years he has diagnosed and treated more than 1,500 patients as a board-certified clinical psychiatrist and examined more than 2,700 civil and criminal cases as a board-certified forensic psychiatrist. He received his medical and psychiatric training at the University of Chicago.
Rossiter says the kind of liberalism being displayed by the two major candidates for the Democratic Party presidential nomination can only be understood as a psychological disorder.
"A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity – as liberals do," he says. "A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which over-regulates and over-taxes the nation's citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do."
Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:
- creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;
- satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;
- augmenting primitive feelings of envy;
- rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.
"The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind," he says. "When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious."
What is it about a first kiss that makes everything else fade and disappear? You feel it, the anticipation, the butterflies in your stomach. Then suddenly there it is, and even though it feels like you've been waiting for it forever it's still a surprise. It makes you forget your bad day at work, it makes you forget that you haven't eaten all day, and it makes you forget that you're worried about being able to pay the bills. A good first kiss is one of those moments that demands to be enjoyed, it forces you to focus on what you feel and nothing else. Then when you think on it the next day it refuses to not let you smile. It has such a powerful impact it leaves you thinking "how does it do that?" And then you realize that you don't care how, you're just glad that it does.
The latest evil, heinous contributor to global warming is ... television advertising. Australia has determined that television advertising produces as much as 57 tons of carbon dioxide per hour. And the 30 second commercials are the worst offenders.
A consulting firm has been doing the study. It claims that carbon emissions are particularly high during high-rating programs, which happen to be reality TV and local news. It is trying to become the first company to standardize the measurement of the carbon footprints of advertising.
Now .. haven't I said repeatedly that this idiotic global warming nonsense is really a campaign being waged by anti-capitalist leftists? What can be more capitalistic than advertising? If your true goal is to hamstring the free market, why not go after advertising?
How sad that so many people have bought into this bullshit. But then ... consider our education system.
I can't believe Figma is going to do that same promotion again, this time with Saber! The design is radically different from the traditional long blue dress that Saber usually wears, and it looks way, way cooler! Its called "Lily Saber" or "White Saber", because she's wearing a white dress from another design. They added armor elements to give it a unique and custom appearance.
Ugh, the geek in me is spilling all over the page...
Instead of writing a giant-sized, lengthy review of The Dark Knight with potential spoilers, I figured a short one-shot sentence would be enough. This is already the best review I've read of the movie; it captured everything I wanted to write and more. Summer isn't over yet, but the best movie to grace the box-office theatres is here, bar none. I've personally already watched it two times, and plan and re-watching it over, and over, and over...
Oh, and coincidentally. I lol'ed at this:
Finally, even though the movie's still running in theatres across the country, there's already speculation and hype on the third potential movie. Movieweb.com recently ran an interview with director Christopher Nolan, and while the prospect of three isn't on his mind at the moment, Gary Oldman hinted that the next villain might be the Riddler. Other sources hint at Robin making his debut in the saga.
Where I can't decide if I want to scream, cry or just go to bed and dream of tomorrow.
blah.
Why do I find scientific conferences overwhelming and uninspiring?
Talk after talk after talk of people, who are not good public speakers, reporting on what they've already done.
I first attended a scientific conference back in 1996. 12 years on, I am still sitting there befuddled, stuff going over my head, in one ear, out the other. Now though, I have the option of sitting with my wi-fi-enabled laptop and publish my thoughts on the internet right away.
Over lunch some delegates shared humourous anectodes on previous conferences. Did you hear the one about the Las Vegas conference? Only the chair and the presenters were in the session, everyone else was out gambling. Once a presenter finished, they didn't even have the courtesy to attend the other presentations. They were out the door - find them at the roulette table.
Did you hear about the Hawaii conference? Delegates were sitting bare-chested in shorts and flip-flops on back tables. They wouldn't even sit on the chairs. If a talk wasn't interesting, they went out the back door to join their families on the beach. 'I'll check again in ten minutes.'
What makes a presenter unengaging? Is it fear? That same person, over dinner, can explain his work to you beautifully, but in front of an audience, he turns rigid and halting.
Is it defensiveness? One presenter was the epitome of defensive unhurriedness. He did not even look at us. His eyes were always looking to the side. Ask him a question and he starts. by. repeating. the. earlier. definition. that. he. gave. Ask him another question and he misunderstands you and answers another question - you wonder if he is deliberately doing so. Ask him again, just to clarify, and he goes: "what?" and looks at the session chair, as if to say "okay. we have a troublemaker here. wanna step in?"
The themes need to be focussed a lot more. We should get more discussion forums and more 'challenges' than the reporting system we have currently.
Still, it's a holiday.
My suggested follow-up to Sleepless in Seattle: Tittle-tattle in Seattle.
This is a city clearly designed for a car. I thought it'd be prettier in terms of infra-structure. But it is nature that is very pretty here. I have not seen much of Seattle yet, but whatever I've seen indicates a genteel, pretty (by nature) town. It neither feels nor operates like a major city.
The University of Washington (Udub) is exceptionally inspiring. It is big, green, elegant and I'd love to work here. :-)
I do not know if saying you come from London has this effect on people, but whoever I've talked to so far is a little defensive about Seattle. Saying you live in London often has this effect on people. In South Africa, people would even ask: "and how do you find it here?" - with a defensive tone. Seattle people are not as defeatist but they're not particularly enthused about their town either.
I have a nutter of a hotel receptionist and he's been filling me in on all things Seattle: "people here don't tan, they rust". (Because of all the rain.)
I have also been struck by how not particularly friendly people are. The bus drivers seem clueless about the other routes. Most of them just shrug and go "I don't know" - not their problem. One of them yelled at a fellow Japanese delegate: "do you speak English?" (He does, but he's very shy about it.)
I am known to mangle my speech but almost everyone I have met in Seattle asks me to repeat what I've just said. Then they stare at me.
It's a small town, really: Seattle.