We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
It explains why I believe that any shrink, psychologist (or anyone in the social sciences) should be of a Conservative bent unless they have no faith whatsoever in the human spirit (in which case they should have no faith in their own, either).
Oh, gimme a break. Maybe that's how it should be but have you taken stock of your "profession" lately? It's chock full of lefty psycho-babble BS.
"Sanctomony and pious caring"? My guess is that the lefty shrinks don't see themselves that way either. They just save up all of their blowhard BS for people with views that differ from their own.
Psychotherapy only thrives in free countrys? Well, I suppose that depends on what you call psychotherapy. Psychology/psychiatry has proved to be a mighty damn useful tool of totalitarian regimes.
And that's not to even mention the messiah Sigmund Freud...
Where is the argument and debate in the shrink community? For a group of people who are convinced that they know so much , they seem in deep denile of how messed up a significant percentage of their own numbers are.
My god. I had to read that five times, and it still makes no sense.
"It's about liberation, maturity (which means engaging Reality, not fantasy), and human dignity - and it's not about "happiness."
Question: How the hell does one accomplish, achieve all of the above without happiness? One can't. It's that simple.
"...should be of a Conservative bent unless they have no faith whatsoever in the human spirit..."
What? What does this mean? What happens when one goes to a Catholic or fundamentalist shrink and tells they about having an abortion? I still don't think I got it: '..unless they have no faith in the human spirit...' as opposed to what? Liberals who do have faith in the human spirit. ack...
Signing off before I say something ugly. my god...
I might even agree with you Meta, but I can't tell what you're saying.
As for psychology and psychiatry, much of the salary of those professions comes from government agencies and government insurance. That's a powerful reason that keeps them on the left. I have often thought that teachers would naturally tend to be more conservative without the government union connection as well.
Assistant Village Idiot
The reason you can't understand what I'm talking about is that Dr. Bliss did not repost the entire post that elicited the comments from KRW and me.
Dr. Bliss: If you're going to use our comments, kindly ref the entire post to which we responded.
Allow me to state once again that which seems to be my mantra: You cannot generalize and expect to be taken seriously.
Human beings have or do not have faith in the spirit of man. Being of a particular political ideology does not change that. I find it stunning that a psychiatrist would think otherwise.
"As for psychology and psychiatry, much of the salary of those professions comes from government agencies and government insurance."
I can't speak for psychiatrists, but if we're talking about psychology, your explanation is false.
First, most psychologists are not clinicians; they are academics. They aren't paid by government agencies or government insurance. But let's assume that you're talking about clinicians when you lump psychologists together with psychiatrists.
Those of us who earn our livelihood as clinicians largely eschew Medicare and Medicaid because there is no money in it. I don't even have a Medicare number, but I'm not losing out on much money. None of my friends take Medicare/Medicaid either.
Reimbursement for talk therapy is poor and retirees are not big consumers of psychotherapy. Likewise, the disabled and chronically mentally ill (Medicaid patients) are not big consumers of psychotherapy. Psychotherapy fees are, for the most part, paid out of pocket by working parents of children and younger to middle age adults who are in the middle income and higher income brackets.
Government agencies that do provide counseling are almost always staffed by social workers or the equivalent master's level providers--not psychologists.
Private health insurance reimbursement is unreliable and relatively paltry for psychotherapy services. So, these days, far less than half of a typical clinician's income is derived from insurance reimbursement.
Most clinical psychologists cobble a living together doing several jobs. My practice isn't unusual. I see private patients with maybe 15% of fees reimbursed by private insurance and the rest paid out of pocket. I also do private testing and assessment contracts with organizations that are not government-funded in any way. I'm also part-time on a private university faculty (a school that does not receive a penny in government funding).
I would grant that liberals are over-represented among psychologists when compared with the general population, but not when compared with our own demographic group. --mostly white people with PhD's, more women than men, with a heavier concentration living in blue states and densely populated areas.
That said, we are not as liberal of a group as many people outside the profession seem to assume.
When I was a graduate student, I was somewhat unusual as a hard core libertarian leaning conservative--although I was far from alone in my political bent. But there were probably many more liberals than conservatives among the students. That isn't unusual for graduate students and keep in mind this was before any of us were earning an income as clinicians. I should also mention that my politics was no problem in graduate school. We didn't sit around talking politics. Our classes were intense as was our clinical training. I didn't know the politics of any of my professors except for the 'diversity' class professor and that was a tiny part of our education--a class that virtually no one took seriously--basically a blow off that, I must confess, we all ridiculed because it lacked the academic rigor to which we were accustomed.
What I've also noticed is that since graduate school, I would say that my peers have become much more conservative as a group. Why? That's what usually happens to people when they get older, start families (even lesbian families), worry about things like crime, personal and family stability and retirement.
Dr. Bliss put up a post to which KRW and I responded - as you see above. KRW and I differed a bit in our comments thou matched one another in mild outrage, and the post was deleted from the blog. KRW asked BD what happened to it, and BD replied 'I sent it back for rewrite.'
I have no idea where the original post is, but our original comments to that post make up the first two comments of this thread. I might say it makes KRW and I look rather stupid. But I won't say that. It makes someone else look that way.
Good comment to you just made. While politics do, indeed, engender powerful emotions, politics don't necessarily invade the spiritual and sane human-to-human interactions that work with equally powerful emotions. If a mental health professional cannot separate politics from his work, he's in the wrong profession.