Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 14:16:52 +0200
From: Ilan shalif <gshalif-AT-netvision.net.il>
Subject: Re: M-PSY: Libertarianianism - 2


Hi listers & Mark.

> I didn't think I was engaged in bickering.  I had the silly idea
> that I was
> replying to something that Ilan himself raised in his posting of 11
> September.

Due to my insufficient knowledge of the English language I may have
chosen the wrong word. NO offense was intended. I just think that
Freud is not relevant to Marxists and for people with modern approach
to psychology.

> Apparently as a matter of pride, principle, and (implicitly) as
> counsel to the rest of us,

Though I earn my living from applied psychology, I do it in an
alternative way. Thus, I do not do any kind of counseling - not explicit
and not implicit. I just blubbered my state of mind.

> Ilan hasn't bothered with Freud since he was 17 and
> hasn't read Marx
> for 40 years; now we discover that history, too, is beneath his
> contempt.

Well, I might  have exaggerated a bit. I did encounter a bit with Freud
around 25 years ago, at the age of 35, while learning my B.A. in
psychology... My previous negative opinion of him and his "theory" and
practice got a more serious and scientific base (look for Dollard and
Miller criticism of the 50s?).

As for Marx, I have already learnt the basics at the time (and I have a
good memory). Other parts of his opinions were in plenty in polemics of
the sixties and in modern studies about various periods in Marx life.

As for history, I am well versed with it and use it nearly daily in the
fight against the contemptuous Zionist colonialism. To my opinion it is
not too relevant to the topic I suggested... 

> What
> can I say:  I am a historian who was just caught reading Marx again
> last week,
> and who wishes he knew a lot more about Freud and post-Freudian
> psychoanalysis.

As I have wrote in a previous post, I find him a worthy topic for
historians (marxists or not marxists). I do not find him worthy topic
for either marxism or psychology.

> I guess I can only hope that in the anarcho-libertarian paradise to
> come there will be some tolerance for neanderthals.

In the libertarian communist society of the future there will be no
censorship and lots of free time for each to indulge in any topic one
wish.

I just wanted to stress that is counterproductive to involve Freud and
psychoanalysis when the topic is the contemporary "rebellion" "rebels"
and "revolution".

I can imagine that it is not  a reciprocal for Freudians who my be
interested in the above.

Even love, is sometime one sided and not reciprocal...

Ilan Shalif (Alternative Psychologist)

http://members.tripod.com/~alternativ_psy/
http://www.geocities.com/~drilanshalif/
http://www.netvision.net.il/php/gshalif
http://flag.blackened.net/ishalif/anarchy.html
http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/3150/Anarchy.html
http://www.geocities.com/~drilanshalif/content1.htm

    You CAN teach old dog new tricks BUT it takes a lot of effort.
             So pay attention to the pleasant and unpleasant
                 bodily sensations... and the troubles
                     will take care of themselves.



     --- from list marxism-psych-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---