|
CounterPunch
February
27, 2003
Psychologists and War
An
Open Letter to Psychologists and Mental Health Workers
by Dr. RICHARD LICHTMAN
While we live out our lives as students, staff,
therapists and faculty, engaged in the activity that most interests
and excites us, the United States is hurtling furiously toward
war in the Middle-East. All the engines of government are harnessed
to the goal of establishing subservience to authority at home,
and terror and intimidation abroad. With the attack on the Trade
Center in New York on September 11th of 2001, a perfect justification
was provided the United States for a violent move to the right,
an accelerating flight toward fascism and disaster. Some of
you may find this language extreme and hyperbolic, but many of
you did not live through the McCarthy period which now appears
a prelude to a more monstrous distortion of American life both
domestically and in international affairs.
This is not the time to review the history
of the United States from the inception of the nation. But one
tendency that cannot be overlooked is the contradiction between
exalted American ideals and the reality of actual power. From
its beginning, America has staked out land beyond its original
borders and moved inexorably across the globe, gaining economic
and technological power in the process, until today it stands
as the most powerful nation on earth. But it is not yet satisfied
with its position and the challenge of its own stagnation and
the competition of other geo-political blocks in Asia and Europe
mean perpetual competition for natural resources and particularly
for oil. Hence the profound interest in Middle Eastern and the
"desirability" of acquiring the fields in Iraq. Every
effort is currently being made to draw Iraq in such a light as
will justify an attack on that country and the inclusion of its
natural wealth in the orbit of American power. So we were witness
to the spectacle of Secretary of State Colin Powell's flimsy
and mendacious performance at the United Nations and Tony Blair's
theft of an outdated graduate student's thesis on the Gulf War
in a speech that was actually designed to persuade an intelligent
audience. The more the administration blusters, the less it
persuades anyone of the logic of its argument.
However, given the decency of America's
stated values, nothing so egregious can be undertaken abroad
unless the American populace is terrorized and deceived at home.
Whether or not the Administration had reason to believe that
an attack was imminent before 9/11 it is perfectly clear that
plans to curtain civil liberties were in effect (remember the
process of removing supposedly prior felons from the election
roles in Florida, a move without which the current administration
would not have come to power) even before the tragic catastrophe
in New York that bright and blue September morning. The Patriot
Act was rushed through Congress with few members of that body,
by their own admission, ever having had the time or temerity
to read the document. Only one member of the congress, Representative
Barbara Lee of Oakland, refused to give the President the near
total power he demanded to destroy "evil" on behalf
of "good." And now it has been revealed that the Administration
has been preparing plans for an extension of the original Patriot
Act that would only serve to curtail such civil liberties as
currently obtain. We are in serious danger of losing the freedoms
that permit us to breathe and think and live as free human beings.
To refuse to act now is to relinquish the responsibility we possess
as human beings, and consequently, as psychologists and therapists.
But, it may be claimed, our responsibility
is to our individual clients and not to some set of political
ideals that separates us from each other and about which we will
reasonably disagree. We are purportedly dedicated to objectivity
and neutrality, and not to some political agenda to which we
have never pledged our allegiance. Furthermore, it will be maintained,
it is not a question of political position but of political terrain;
many will seriously commit themselves to individual protest but
eschew the same activity as an aspect of professional life.
These views are intelligent responses and have a long history
in American political and social life. But they are inadequate
replies in these circumstances; they do not tell the whole story,
which includes a dimension of commitment all of us have apparently
claimed and generally forgotten. It is remarkably easy for professional
people, psychologists included, to avoid risking the comfort
and affluence of our individual success for the sake of a political
demand upon our privilege.
Let us remind ourselves of the Ethical
Principles of Psychologists of the American Psychological Association.
A number of pronouncements call attention to themselves:
"Psychologists'....goal is to broaden
knowledge of behavior and, where appropriate, to apply it pragmatically
to improve the condition of both the individual and society.
Psychologists respect the central importance of freedom of inquiry
and expression in research, teaching, and publication. The also
strive to help the public in developing informed judgments and
choices concerning human behavior. (Preamble)
"Psychologists accord appropriate
respect to the fundamental rights, dignity, and worth of all
people. They respect the rights of individuals to privacy, confidentiality,
self-determination, and autonomy...." (Principle D)
"Psychologists are aware of their
professional and scientific responsibilities to the community
and the society in which they work and live. They apply and
make public their knowledge of psychology in order to contribute
to human welfare. Psychologists are concerned about and work
to mitigate the causes of human suffering." (Principle
F)
Now it will also be noted by those who
wish to separate human from professional obligations that the
introduction to the document makes reference to the proviso that
"This ethics code applies only to
psychologists' work related activities, that is, activities
that are part of the psychologist's scientific and professional
function or that are psychological in nature. It includes the
clinical or counseling practice of psychology, research, teaching....
social intervention....and other activities as well."
But what exactly is not "psychological
in nature?" And in circular fashion, defining the professional
and scientific responsibility of the psychologist in terms of
the need to "mitigate the causes of human suffering,"
how can psychologists be excused not only from their human social
responsibilities but from their professional responsibilities
as well? And how can these be so neatly divided?
And, as The Code of Ethics of the National
Association of Social Workers claims regarding " The Social
Worker's Ethical Responsibility to Society:"
"The social worker should promote
the general welfare of society," which requires that:
"The social worker should act to
prevent and eliminate discrimination against any person or group
on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, religion,
national origin, marital status, political belief, mental
of physical handicap, or any other preference or personal characteristic,
condition or status."
I will not cite the complete set of these
provisos but simply add:
"The social worker should advocate
changes in policy and legislation to improve social conditions
and to promote social justice."
Some profound contradiction festers not
very deep beneath the surface of these ideal pronouncements.
Of course, we understand that the social function of these self-congratulatory
exhortations is to grant the profession an ideal justification
for its monopoly power while protecting it from the actual labors
that its legitimization would impose on it.
Finally, even were the formal principles
governing the activities of psychology and therapy not violated
by the professional tendencies of its members, its moral intellect
would still be clearly compromised. For it is obvious that no
set of formal principles can direct concrete activity, either
in the area of theory or practice. No code of conduct can determine
the specific work that will be carried out, nor explain the recent
paucity of studies directed to the understanding of propaganda,
the authoritarian functions of "patriotism," or the
pathological consequences of alienated labor or social mystification.
There was a time when these were regarded as essential aspects
of any viable social psychology, but they now seem terribly absent.
The prevailing work in psychology and therapy today seem mired
in the privatized realm of individual functioning and mal-functioning,
while the vast currents of war and domination are left to the
work of others, who, of course, pass them on in turn.
The code of ethics bears the same contradictions
to our larger society that were earlier alluded to: between a
careful desire to protect one's status and property, and the
recognition that psychology, as an engagement with human beings
for the sake of their well being and emancipation, individual
or social, is primarily a "calling," and only then,
a profession. For we are not primarily psychologists but human
beings practicing psychology. In this age of segmented humanity
and technological manipulation, it will certainly appear "natural"
to separate the two. But a psychology that is not clearly rooted
in our deepest humanity will degenerate into a weapon of corporate
and state bureaucracy. Psychologists have by and large abandoned
a commitment to emancipatory inquiry, an understanding of the
foresees in modern life and internalized personality that lead
to destruction or liberation. It is too easy to immerse one's
self in career advantages and leave the ultimate obligation to
human fulfillment uncared for. However, no body of workers should
better understand the nature of denial, which is an essential
ingredient in all defense, whether it be "individual"
or social.
If this contention does not move one,
consider how the present military budget starves the public realm
of needed funds and services to the mentally impaired, a process
that is only likely to suffer further disintegration. If psychologists
cannot unite to oppose this government for the sake of a fuller
humanity, certainly we should be able to organize for the sake
of our professional interest in providing for our clients' well
being, in the narrower sense of that term. Furthermore, in this
age of domestic repression, it may not be too long before the
state will intervene in our purported privileged privacy to acquire
the records of those who are held to be "enemies of the
state." The Patriot Act and its proposed extension point
in this direction. The theft of the records of Daniel Ellsberg's
psychoanalyst at the time of his publication of the Pentagon
Papers may well become official policy, with this exception;
we may never be informed that this perfidy has taken place.
It should be obvious that the commitment
of any teacher, psychologist or mental health worker to a social
or political policy does not provide that person with any justification
for compelling or coercing the action of others. Political positions
are freely adopted or are worthless. Neither, however, can
we remain silent in the face of an approaching catastrophe. We
put forward a position that may be readily countered by the contrary
positions of others. Psychologists are living human beings as
are our students, subjects, clients and patients; we cannot
appropriately deny our responsibility to our humanity, nor theirs.
We understand that there will be disagreements among us. Such
is the necessary condition of a democracy. So, we take the first
and most basic step of human engagement; we initiate a dialogue,
but a dialogue that is more than a casual conversation, since
it occurs at a moment of history that is pregnant with the prospect
of abysmal grief and irreparable waste.
Dr. Richard Lichtman is a philosopher who specializes in the relationship
between the social and psychological dimensions of human life.
His approach is broadly interdisciplinary: he has taught in departments
of philosophy (University of California, Berkeley), humanities
(San Francisco State University), sociology (University of California,
Santa Cruz) and psychology (The Wright Institute, California
School of Professional Psychology, etc.) and is currently a faculty
member of the Council on Educational Development (CED) program
at the University of California, Los Angeles. His books also
indicate the range of his interests: Essays
in Critical Social Theory covers a broad range of topics
in economic, social, and political theory, while The
Production of Desire is a detailed analysis of the works
of Marx and Freud.
He can be reached at The Wright Institute,
2728 Durant Avenue, Berkeley, CA. 94704 or via email at: rlichtman@counterpunch.org.
Yesterday's
Features
CounterPunch Exclusive!
Ann Harrison
Mistrial?
Rosenthal Jurors Say They Received Outside Legal Advice
Carl Estabrook
Israel
and the US War on Iraq
Ken O'Keefe
Diary
of a Human Shield
Ray McGovern
Colin
Powell's Blurry Pictures: A Former CIA Man Asks If Intelligence
Analysts Are Still Free to "Tell It Like It Is"
William Hughes
Mona Charen: a True Enemy of Freedom
Linda Heard
Sharon's Bitter Dream of Empire
Fran Quigley
The
Survival of Both Peoples
Paul Dean
The Infallible Opinion Poll
Alexander Cockburn
Crowds
and Panic; Hitchens and Booze; Lomax and Son House, the Rip-Off
Continues
Tom Wells
Peek-A-Boo with Duct Tape
Edward Teague
An Open Letter to Tony Blair: Stand Tall, But Tell the Truth
Jack McCarthy
Press Ganging Sami Al-Arian
Website of the Day
Rummy
and Saddam: the Handshake
Keep CounterPunch Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
CounterPunch Available Exclusively
to Subscribers:
- CounterPunch Special:
The Persecution of Gershon Legman by Susan Davis: Smut, the Post Office, Commies
and the FBI;
- Reeling Democrats: Is Pelosi the Answer?
- Gandhi v. Hitler: the Secret Race for the Nobel
Prize;
- Sullying Mario Savio's
Memory;
- Lynching Then and Now;
- Earn While You Learn: Chris Whittle and Child Labor;
The Case of the Pompous
Professor;
- The Class Struggle in
Boston: All that
Effort, But What Did They Get?
Remember, the CounterPunch website is
supported exclusively by subscribers to our newsletter. Our worldwide
web audience is soaring , with about seven million hits a month
now. This is inspiring, but the work involved also compels us
to remind you more urgently than ever to subscribe and/or make
a (tax deductible) donation if you can afford it. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe
Now!
Or Call Toll Free 1 800 840 3683
home / subscribe
/ about us
/ books
/ archives
/ search
/ links
/
|
February 22
/ 23, 2003
Laura Flanders
Security Threat?
Bernadette Devlin McAliskey Barred Entry to US
Alexander Cockburn
The Trouble with E-Bombs
Kathy Kelly
Letter from Baghdad
Tight Squeeze
Subcomandate
Marcos
A Universal
No to the War of Fear
William Cook
Armageddon Anxiety
Jo Freeman
Conservative Women
Michael Colby
Howard Dean is No Green
Ben Tripp
Fact-Checking the Constitution
Joanne Mariner
Pets Unite!
Richard Falk and David Krieger
Iraq and the Failures of Democracy
Uri Avnery
War Crimes and Sharon
Ian Williams
John Bolton in Jerusalem
Michael Wolff
How Sanctions Destroyed Iraqi Education
William Hughes
The Zev and Ari Show
Susanna Sonnenberg
Boxing Missoula
Michael Ortiz Hill
Peace and Humility
Anis Shivani
When Kafka Aligns with Orwell
John Mihelich
The Hidden History of Butte's
Working Class
Rich Procter
Bush and His Fabled Gut
Adam Engel
Voice of the Nation
Becky Johnson
The Hopscotch Rebellion
Krieger, Tripp, Ashley
Poets' Basement
Website of
the Weekend
The
Pedro Martinez of Palestine
February 15
/ 16, 2003
Alexander
Cockburn
Colin
Powell and the Great "Intelligence Fraud"
Rep. Dennis
Kucinich
The Whole World is Watching
Edward Said
A Monumental Hypocrisy
Wouter Hijink
Report from Amsterdam
"War: Do Not Feed!"
Linda Heard
At Last! Proud to be British
Lawrence Ferlinghetti
Taking a Stand on Iraq
Robert Fisk
The Case Against War
Lev Grinberg
Lessons from Israel
A War Without Legitimacy
Chris Floyd
Cold Fronts:
Bush War Profits
Ahmad Faruqui
Stepping Back from the Brink of War
Norman Madarasz
French Kisses from the Citizens of France
Adam Lebowitz
Scott Ritter in Tokyo
Kurt Nimmo
Bring Us the Head of Osama bin Laden
Forrest Hylton
The Revolt in Bolivia
Col. Dan Smith
Irrelevance and Credibility:
Bush, NATO and the UN
Wayne Madsen
The Lies of Tom Lantos
Ranjit Hoskote
The Invisible Modernities of the Islamic World
Emily Zitter-Smith
Who's Safe Now?
An American in Cairo
Rich Procter
Anybody Remember the Powell Doctrine?
Poets Basement:
Eliot
Katz, Scott Handleman, and Bruce Tomczak
Website of the Weekend
Anti-War
Posters
Read
Whiteout and Find Out
How the CIA's Backing of the Mujahideen Created the World's Most
Robust Heroin Market and Helped to Finance the Rise of the Taliban
and Osama bin Laden
Whiteout:
CIA, Drugs & the
Press
by Alexander
Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
|