Or:
Why am I reproducing excerpts of Zweig’s book?
In the other thread Kurwenal asked me:
Would it not be more enriching to find out why Rosenberg considered Nietzsche to be one of us rather than to discuss which Jewish author gives a more or less faithful account of Nietzsche’s life and theories.
I see your point, and let me say that this blog has paid due homage to Nietzsche in that sense. See these entries:
• “Nietzsche on the Aryan race”
• “Nietzsche on the institution of marriage”
Kurwenal again:
By the way, if you can spare one hour of your time, I have tried to summarize the importance of Wagner and Nietzsche for our cause [links to Counter-Currents added].
I am a huge fan of Richard Wagner too. A couple of days ago for example I had to do some driving in Mexico City and the only way I could protect my mind from the nasty surroundings was precisely by listening the complete Second Act of Parsifal. It worked! I didn’t feel so depressed even when navigating in a sea of non-white troglodytes.
But there’s something more as to why I am excerpting Zweig, and it is so important that I will promote this response as a separate blog entry.
The reason that many years ago I read Zweig’s book and Ross’ and Janz’s biographies of Nietzsche has nothing to do with the discussion in this thread. It has to do with my quest about why Nietzsche, and many other people, lost their minds.
Before arriving to the nationalist camp my field of interest was advancing a counter-hypothesis to the medical model of mental disorders, insofar as I believe that biological psychiatry is a pseudoscience. That’s what, originally, moved me to read thick volumes originally written in German about Nietzsche’s life.
One of my dreams is that, if an ethno-state is formed in North America, their architects will do tabula rasa on the fraudulent professions of mental health (a “therapeutic state” as some critics of psychiatry say). White people will have to rediscover a field of research that the current System started to bury since the late 1970s, and especially in the 80s and 90s. Presently very few remember the trauma model of mental disorders (I started a Wikipedia article under that title). And my big hope is that this model, which unlike biopsychiatry is not unscientific, will be considered very seriously in the new white nation.
The gist of this model is that biographical narrative is pivotal to understand the personal tragedies that drive some people mad. That is the reason why I am adding chapter excerpts of Zweig’s The Struggle with the Daimon. It has nothing to do with a desire to pathologize Nietzsche. As you can see in my linked posts above, he obviously had great insights on important subjects. But we also got to understand why some people with perfectly healthy brains suffer permanent psychotic breakdowns.
This is a “software” problem of the human mind, not a “hardware” problem as the current System wants us to believe. (See my book Hojas Susurrantes for a full explanation of it.)
7 replies on “A response to Kurwenal”
Chechar,
1.) “See these entries…”
Let me congratulate you on the blog. I like most of the entries and enjoy paricularly its aesthetics.
2.) “I am a huge fan of Richard Wagner too. A couple of days ago for example I had to do some driving in Mexico City and the only way I could protect my mind from the nasty surroundings was precisely by listening the complete Second Act of Parsifal.”
I can feel your pain. I had to live in La Paz (Bolivia) for a couple of years and have travelled extensively in South America. Parsifal is a good mental barrier!
3.) “…my field of interest was advancing a counter-hypothesis to the medical model of mental disorders…”
You are probably on to something. Since in the case of human beings it is so difficult to unravel the feedback loop that exists between nature and nurture, the most reasonable course to follow for the etiology of mental disorders would be IMHO to combine some kind of “trauma model” and what you call “biopsychiatry”. In the case of Nietzsche, it is legitimate to think that A/ he was genetically predisposed to develop cancer, and B/ some trauma provoked the manifestation of the brain tumor.
I can read Spanish well. Do you have a link to the original text of “Hojas Susurrantes”?
No: presently it’s only available from Lulu.
Kurwenal: Try to understand what I said.
My book is more than 700-page long. But you can for the moment read the article in English linked above in my words (“I believe that biological psychiatry is a pseudoscience”). It is pivotal to even understand what I’m trying to say because you haven’t understood me yet.
I’ll try to explain my point with a single example. You said:
This is dangerous swallowing of what the System keeps telling us 24/7. Just imagine that a dissident from the Soviet Union in the 1970s escaped and tried to tell the West that he was diagnosed as schizophrenic and underwent the medical torture of forced drugging with neuroleptics (so-called “anti-psychotics”). Would you tell the poor man that, unlike what happened to him under Brezhnev’s regime, to understand his plea we in the West must “combine some kind of trauma model and what the Soviets call biopsychiatry?
Of course not! Any Western person who resorted to that “reasonable” explanation of a psychiatric labeling as a previous step to medical torture of the Soviet dissident would be simply siding the perpetrator’s ideology!
Now this is happening in the West. There’s absolutely no difference between the political use of psychiatry in the Soviet Union and the political use of the same fraudulent profession in the West, with the exception that the target group is different—political dissidents in the East / those who have had conflicts with their parents in the West.
And I’m talking about not only of millions perfectly sane, white children legally drugged in the West with psycho-stimulants, but of cases of genuine mental disorders like what happened to poor N, whose brain was probably as healthy as yours or mine (i.e., no biomarker for a neurological disease).
If you believe what you said and I quoted above, that can only mean that, like millions of other westerners, you are still sleeping in the Matrix of the anti-white System. You must wake up, Kurwenal (I’d say the same to my other readers who also believe that Western psychiatry is a real science)!
Although the whole of my book Hojas Susurrantes is only available in printed form, if you want to read in Spanish the second part (my book consists of five parts), precisely the part that demonstrates without doubt that biopsychiatry is pseudoscientific, please read it in here:
http://biopsiquiatria.wordpress.com/
P.S.
In my above list of N’s articles I missed this one—:
• “N on Christianity”
—perhaps because it’s a little too harsh for Christian ears. In that entry I re-introduced the italics that appear in the original German text; italics that are missing in the Penguin Books translation of The Antichrist.
Hope you’ll like it too.
Chechar,
I have just finished reading both chapters of “Hojas Susurrantes”. Congratulations! The book is well-written, very touching and controversial (in a positive sense):
-“El Retorno de Quetzalcoatl”: Spine-chilling… I had nightmares last night. But also fascinating! Especially everything related to psychohistory and the evolution of consciousness. There is lots of interesting information in this chapter. Yet, I would like you to clarify what seems to be a paradox – probably due to my being new to many of these terms: if European modern societies are basically the most evolved pshycoclass, as far as child-and-women-care is concerned, how come they are in obvious decline and so vulnerable when in contact with more primitive psyco-classes? And what are the Monsters of the Id? It would be interesting if you could post, for all neophytes, a basic summary of how this knowledge can help foster the next step in human evolution, the arrival of the Superman.
-“Biopsiquiatria”: Many thought-provoking ideas. I need to meditate on it, though. I agree that any biological reductionism is wrong when applied to human beings, that the pharmaceutical lobby is very powerful and in the liberal “globalization” in which we live generally harmful, that the modern systems that regulate mass-society (USSR before or the “Therapeutical State” in the West now) have a tendency to impose conformity and scrutinize the life of the individual as never before, but not only with the instruments of science and medicine but also with any other source of power, particularly soft-power (media, entertainment industry). Nevertheless, completely disqualifying psychiatry as quackery sounds to me quite a bold statement. I am not an expert in that field, so I just follow my intuition. Based on the rather personal experiences I had with two acquaintances (one who was diagnosed schizophrenia and the other, suffering from delirious episodes) I have difficulties imagining that in their case there was no chemical or genetic cause and that it was all or mostly due to child abuse or some sort of psychological trauma.
I am glad that you liked the English translation of my “Quetzalcoatl” in Hojas Susurrantes, but did you read the sections in Spanish of the same book where I pass the microphone to various professionals of mental health that believe that psychiatry does not qualify as genuine science (in “Cómo asesinar el alma de tu hijo”?) I ask you this because the answer to your doubts is there, analyzed to incredible detail. I find it a little awkward to discuss a subject so huge and so heretical for the current academia in a blog thread. But I’ll try.
As you can appreciate from Psychohistory, survivors from infanticidal modes of childrearing have schizoid personalities:
http://youtu.be/lgydILJq2lg
When (non-infanticidal) parents abuse horribly a young child in Western society, the emotional toll is about the same, even when both Amazon survivors and our schizo friends don’t speak to everybody about the experiences that destroyed their minds. (They only speak about it to their intimate friends.)
As to why contemporary westerners who do care of their offspring have paradoxically produced a suicidal psychoclass, I think that deMause won’t answer that, since he’s an ultra-liberal and we have to ponder over these issues by taking over his field of research for us.
My educated guess is that many Liberals of the kind that want to destroy their race and their culture had no good parenting, but are transferring the hatred they feel for their parents onto their parents’ culture. I’ve written an autobiographical essay about it: here.
Oh such a complex subject! The only way to approach it is thru a multidisciplinary way, using Kevin MacDonald’s model on the psyche of pre-historical whites and more…
Regarding the bogus nature of psychiatry and its chemical approach, here is a relevant quote (Breggin, Peter, and David Cohen. Your Drug May Be Your Problem. Perseus Books, Reading MA, 1999, p. 41):
You will be surprised but that very book was a gift from Breggin’s wife when I used to do anti-psychiatric activism. 🙂