The ethic of Wall Street is the ethic of celebrity. It is fused into one bizarre, perverted belief system and it has banished the possibility of the country returning to a reality-based world or avoiding internal collapse. A society that cannot distinguish reality from illusion dies.
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.
FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.
Is racism an illness? Psychiatrists and psychologists are debating the issue. The forthcoming Oxford Handbook of Personality Disorders, due for publication in August 2012, will include
a chapter on identifying and assessing pathological bias. This is the
form of racism that could lead supremacists to violently and randomly
maim or massacre those of another race. Meanwhile, a team of British
psychologists recently announced they had stumbled upon a secondary use for Propranolol, a commonly prescribed medication for high blood pressure. They claim it
could cure implicit bias, or the form of racism that can even occur in
people “with a sincere belief in equality.” Scientists believe the
discovery can be explained by the fact that implicit racism is
fundamentally founded on fear, and the drug acts both on nerve circuits
that govern automatic functions, such as heart rate, and the part of the
brain involved in emotional responses.
Thinking of any form of racism as an illness is very troubling.
Historically, psychiatrists, psychologists, the medical establishment
and lay people have all agreed that the roots of racism are cultural or
societal — a set of beliefs and behaviors that are learned and, as a
result, can be unlearned. If it were to ever be declared an illness that
can be treated, racists would no longer be legally or ethically
responsible for their actions. Just imagine it: a medical justification
for discriminating against, or even killing, those of another race.
Dr. Carl C. Bell, the coauthor of the Oxford University Press chapter
and a member of the APA is, nonetheless, convinced that some forms of
racism are a mental illness. He notes that many of his colleagues are
“concerned about having the conversation about racism and mental illness
because, for them, it is akin to medicalizing a social problem.” He
thinks there is some validity to those concerns but believes
that while “95–98% of racist behavior is socially, culturally or
politically determined, there is still a sliver of racist behavior that
may be based on psychopathology.”
He might be right, but how would we differentiate between socially
learned and the pathological forms of racism? Do they really present
themselves in the world looking that different, one from the other? In
addition to providing justification for behaviors currently deemed
immoral, or even illegal, medicalizing racism also reduces the pressure
to eliminate racist behavior by social and political means, a task at
which we are not now excelling. For example, as sociologist Devah
Pager’s work has made clear,
in contemporary America, black men with no criminal records, solid work
histories, and college degrees, fare no better on the job market than
do white men with less education who have been newly released from
prison. Does declaring racism an illness in any way remedy, address, or
lead us toward a solution for this inequity?
(MORE:The Problem with the ‘Some of My Best Friends Are Black’ Defense)
Though it has been asked to consider the issue several times, the
American Psychiatric Association has never recognized racism as a mental
health problem. The issue was first raised in the mid 1960s by a group
of black psychiatrists led by the Harvard professor Dr. Alvin Poussaint.
After several race-based murders in Mississippi during the civil rights
era, the group asked
the APA to have racism entered into the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-II.) The association rejected the
recommendation, arguing that because so many Americans are racist, even
extreme racism in this country is the norm — a problem for culture to
solve, not medicine. In 2004, the organization again rejected a proposal
to include extreme forms of pathological bias, such as racism, in the
new edition of the DSM-5, due for publication next summer.
And of course, there are reasons to be suspicious of the racial and
political consequences of medical and psychiatric diagnosis. In the 19th
century, enslaved black people who escaped from their owners were
diagnosed as having drapetomania, a disorder characterized by an
irrational desire for freedom. The treatment involved beating the
afflicted into submission. According to a 2010 book by psychiatrist
Jonathan Metzel, The Protest Psychosis: How Schizophrenia Became a Black Disease,
doctors began to diagnose black people involved in the civil rights
movement as having a form of schizophrenia characterized by a desire to
agitate for their rights. Those receiving this diagnosis were
institutionalized.
Race in and of itself does not dictate, or even explain behavior like
running away from an owner, or protesting for civil rights. Humanity
explains those behaviors. The same questionable thinking that led to the
stigmatization of black people who desired freedom is at the heart of
the decision to medicalize racism. It is clear that we as a society have
a lot of work to do to end racism, and almost none of it will start in
the lab.
No comments:
Post a Comment