Fwd: [APsaA OPLN] : In case anyone missed this

[ARNOLD RICHARDS]

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Henry J. Friedman via connect.APSA" <Ma...@ConnectedCommunity.org>
Date: July 5, 2020 at 9:16:36 AM EDT
To: arn...@aol.com
Subject: RE:  [APsaA OPLN] : In case anyone missed this
Reply-To: fried...@aol.com



Yesterday, the Fourth of July, began for me with Beverly Stoute's inspiring personal story about listening to and/or reciting Frederik Douglas's...

Openline Re: In case anyone missed this Jul 5, 2020 9:15 AM Henry J. Friedman Yesterday, the Fourth of July, began for me with Beverly Stoute's inspiring personal story about listening to and/or reciting Frederik Douglas's Fourth of July speech challenging the patriotic celebration of a holiday without the acknowledgment of slavery.  Douglas spells out what it means to be a slave in the United States, with the horror involved in being owned, existing as property and having no part of freedom.  We analyst's have been educated by our members who can talk authentically about racism in their lives, Dorothy Holmes has been in the forefront of challenging us as an organization to be aware of just how white we are and to think of why that is, Beverly Stoute has made it personal, she has brought her feelings and passion to our attention with great impact, making even the enlightened among us to join her with a passionate response to racism, internal as well as external, Dionne Powell has contributed an incredible JAPA article on racism and Anton Hart has been central to our efforts as an organization to repair the past.  So, there is much to appreciate in what our members can mobilize in those of us who have less reason to think about racism every day of our lives.  And then I read this quote from Barry Childress: n the 60's LBJ's war on poverty fractured the married black families with mothers marrying the Government rather than the actual fathers of their children. Children's education suffered having performed well before LBJ, et.al. saved them. Father's disappeared from home, school lost much of its importance, and drugs and crime increased. I was incredulous.  How could any individual post, presented as fact, this version of what Lyndon Johnson actually achieved during his Presidency.  A President who passed the civil rights act and the voting rights act within one year is presented as someone who destroyed the black family with the supposed nightmare that Ronald Reagan introduced into the political sphere.  This is not just an interpretation, it is libel disguised as historical truth.   Nothing is presented that would support such an assertion simply because there is no possibility of truth being involved here.   The author of this scandalous assertion then informs us that the responses to what he posts are so negative that he will stop writing to the members list as if to punish us for our rejection of his ideas.  He becomes a martyr to what he sees as the politically correct among us and in so doing denies the validity of challenging such expressions of free speech because they appear to be racist.  Of course, and to be cautious, I would add that I don't know what is in the author's mind or heart.  For all I know he is a member of the NAACP but the words do count and they are perverse and corrupt, turning history upside down as they do.   What do we allow on our members list?  Are we like Facebook and insist that free speech makes it imperative that we post everything that any member writes.   It has already been decided that tone can be chastised by a committee if they see it as too harsh or damaging to another member.  But what about content, is there no requirement for reality and truth.  Can LBJ really be blamed for a decline in black life in the USA?  This reminds me of the time in the early 2000's when it became clear that Charles Socarides was leading a discussion group on Homosexuality despite the fact that we as an organization had disavowed his pathologizing of homosexuality and homosexuals.  We had gay members and candidates and yet he was continuing to teach his toxic ideas about homosexuality.  A decision was made to attend his discussion group and report back to the Program Committee as to its content.  Socarides died before the investigation could be completed but I would hope that if he were advocating prejudicial ideas about homosexuality that we would have asked him to stop teaching asap.   But, are we going to allow untruths to be promulgated on our lists?  This is not a matter of suppressing different political or psychoanalytic positions, it is merely a plea that attention be paid to racist, homophobic and patriarchal postings when they go over the top.  We may not refuse any member the right to post but we can denounce untruths and harmful assertions in the strongest and direct terms.  Henry J. Friedman   Reply to Group by Email   Reply to Sender by Email   View Thread   Post New Message by Email   ------------------------------------------- Original Message: Sent: 7/4/2020 4:47:00 PM From: Barry L. Childress Subject: RE: In case anyone missed this Learned something today and will get to that as I sign off. Slavery was legal in both England and France when we established our country under the Declaration's clauses of all being created equal and endowed by our Creator with the rights to life. liberty and pursuit of happiness. These 13 states  all had their own perspectives to protect. Slavery, for and against, was discussed from the times of our Continental Congress and compromise had to be found under these introductory clauses in our Declaration for there to be a Union of these 13 original states ––. France played off and on with slavery until 1834 and England out lawed it in on the books in 1848 almost 30 years before our Civil War. Most of the current slaves in the world (about 45 million) are now largely in India with runners up in China, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Jules, as when you emailed me back channel yesterday, I agree that Lincoln was not an abolitionist but, rather, was focused on saving our Union while the Democratic secessionists were planning to secede to maintain their right to own slaves to protect their agricultural economy.  After the secessionists were beaten, Democrats established the KKK and the Jim Crow "separate but equal" Laws. They resisted Republican attempts to integrate the school until the 60'when the Feds stepped in (and school choice is still resisted). In the 60's LBJ's war on poverty fractured the married black families with mothers marrying the Government rather than the actual fathers of their children. Children's education suffered having performed well before LBJ, et.al. saved them. Father's disappeared from home, school lost much of its importance, and drugs and crime increased. Now Blacks were back on the Democrat welfare plantation where votes were harvested. What I learned today from your post is that you don't love America-you discredit American patriotism and favor "humane international globalism" which I could never do. This may be the basis for my disagreements with some posters here. I am not a proponent of Internationalism nor Socialism. Members of the IPA post here and some may not be citizens of America, "We are all Americans" may not be accurate. Doesn't matter but helps me understand the board better, and I suspect this will be my last political post here. I wish everyone a happy 4th of July as I'm pretty sure there is one of those in every country. B ------------------------------ Barry L. Childress M.D. Austin TX ------------------------------ You are receiving this message because you followed the 'In case anyone missed this' message thread. To unsubscribe from this message thread, go to Unsubscribe. Update your email preferences to choose the types of email you receive Unsubscribe from all participation emails

[Patrick McEvoy-Halston]

I like the work of Socarides very much, but am glad he was waylaid for the therapy he said he wanted was in the movement that found his work abhorrent. I am glad for Friedman's writing here, and agree. Thank you. 

[Carol jaxson-jager]

Harry,

The IPA members who post to this site, are adults who do not all think alike, nor are they required to do so.  If someone posts an opinion you do not like, it should not mean that they can no longer post on this site.

Your "untruth" about LBJ can be your opinion, while in truth, welfare and ADC (Aid to Dependent Children) checks were sent to primarily Black women only if she was not married.  Social workers would visit the home each month, and if a man was found to be living there, the checks were withdrawn by the government.  Ultimately, the more babies she had, out of wedlock, the more money she would be given by the government. Some feel that the government made whores out of Black women, as they were paid to have illegitimate babies, who ultimately grew up in a one parent home, which is not advocated in White society.  The more babies, the more money.  Bill Clinton, president in the 1990s, drastically reduced the baby production to only 5 babies per woman.  Today we still have the government dollar at work, as primarily Black women will produce exactly 5, and only 5  children, to receive money to support her family, as she has no husband, and no income, and is not allowed to work, because she has children, and.........

The breakdown of  Black family structure is a truth produced by government leaders, that reduces Black citizens nearly always to the poverty level, which is the preferred status assigned to Blacks in America.  The Black living standard today, and yesterday, is the result of systematic, undemocratic  and inhumane tactics to keep them controlled, and limited, so that Whites can succeed.  Are Whites really successful if they must diminish others to get what they want?

Dr. Childress, please continue to post, as there are a variety of opinions, and don't turn away from the ones with which you don't agree, but stand up for the ones that are meaningful to you.

This post has not heard the last from me,

Carol Jaxson-Jager Ed D Ed Sp NCC LPC CST CCTP

--
<><><>
To post to this group send to: clios...@googlegroups.com
Clio's Psyche is sponsored by The Psychohistory Forum. For questions visit: cliospsyche.org
Digest is available on request and sends no more than 1 email a day.
Home: http://groups.google.com/group/cliospsyche
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clio’s Psyche" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cliospsyche...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cliospsyche/B3D35AD4-29C5-462D-B211-15E914AAFE22%40aol.com.

[Alice Maher]

Thanks, Carol and Judy, for your very thoughtful posts in response to the controversy around my project. Arnie brings up a good point - one that I think Paul is alluding to when he says Clio isn't the place for it. (Am I reading you accurately, Paul?) Is it acceptable to give voice to ideas that many people would consider to be wrong or offensive or ....ist? I sincerely believe that, if the ideas are contained in a respectful dialogue with the goal of communicating across ideological divides, it's essential. I learned a lot from Barry's post and Carol's reactions to it. I would never have heard that perspective if I resided forever in a group of like-minded people arguing one truth and only one truth.

But if this isn't the arena for that kind of charged dialogue, that's fine. I won't push beyond the comfort level of the group. Writing alone is not the arena to contain the regressive-aggressive reactions to difference anyway. That's why our meetings will be face-to-face (on Zoom).

Alice

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cliospsyche/CAM_PD3in-zKQ-%3DgtAqR9KjKorOp4wYLVybebbc-K8OFCL_Ccjw%40mail.gmail.com.