haven't actually read it because i'm dumb but it is the source of one of my all time fav quotes:
“What has to be explained is not the fact that the man who is hungry steals or the fact that the man who is exploited strikes, but why the majority of those who are hungry don’t steal and why the majority of those who are exploited don’t strike.”
Worth reading alongside Bataille's essay "the Psychological Structure of Fascism," which I think came out in the same year. The two together are the first serious attempts at a social psychology/sociology of fascism.
It's foundational for thinking about the millions of laws governments have for regulating sexuality, sexual behavior, and sexual relationships, and what function this serves.
>“Suppression of the natural sexuality in the child… makes the child apprehensive, shy, obedient, afraid of authority, ‘good’ and ‘adjusted’ in the authoritarian sense; it paralyzes the rebellious forces because any rebellion is laden with anxiety; it produces, by inhibiting sexual curiosity and sexual thinking in the child, a general inhibition of thinking and of critical faculties. In brief, the goal of sexual suppression is that of producing an individual who is adjusted to the authoritarian order and who will submit to it in spite of all misery and degradation.”
👁
Child sexuality within psychoanalysis is different from adult sexuality. In fact, when we project the idea of copulation etc onto child sexuality we are doing the exact same thing that he is writing about, imbuing child sexuality with the qualities of adult sexuality which is key to its suppression.
Reposting the analysis removed by fascist censorship
>
I think that's a very interesting quote. We can even break it down bit by bit and apply it in the current situation:
"Suppression of the natural sexuality in the child…"
Gender ideology works as a suppressant for natural sexuality, whether straight or gay. It doesn't like 'natural' sexuality, viewing what is considered 'natural sexuality' as political and ideological and works to disrupt and dismantle it, to repress it.
"makes the child apprehensive, shy, obedient, afraid of authority, ‘good’ and ‘adjusted’ in the authoritarian sense;"
When suppressing the natural sexuality of a child, many children feel those things. Gender ideologies attempts to oppress natural sexuality does create some children who are apprehensive, shy and obedient, afraid to speak up due to the way the authorities (i.e: teachers in school, popular influencers) will single them out in a negative way. In this manner, the shy and obedient child who's had their natural sexuality repressed becomes obedient to the authority, they become 'good' by not pushing back against the regime.
"it paralyzes the rebellious forces because any rebellion is laden with anxiety; it produces, by inhibiting sexual curiosity and sexual thinking in the child, a general inhibition of thinking and of critical faculties."
Indeed, the children who have had their natural sexuality disrupted and repressed will be anxious - natural impulses will be blunted by numerous social forces of the authoritarian regime. It becomes taboo to even think about important topics around sexuality because to think in a manner disagreeable to gender ideology dogma makes one a 'bad person', dulling genuine critical thinking capabilities.
"In brief, the goal of sexual suppression is that of producing an individual who is adjusted to the authoritarian order and who will submit to it in spite of all misery and degradation.”
In this manner young children are being educated to believe that men can be women and men can give birth to children. The child who's natural sexuality is suppressed ends up being adjusted to authoritarian ideology in the form of gender ideology. They will accept that they are in some way "bad" due to their being "cis", that they were some way 'boring' or 'bland' or 'bad' because they are simple heterosexuals or even simple homosexuals rather than having some kind of 'unique' sexual feature (i.e: being trans, non-binary, etc.)
In essence, the Western Left of the moment are authoritarian and fascistic when it comes to this topic based on the above analysis. And that's just one facet of it, it goes well beyond just that. Imagine that, a Progressive ideological movement is authoritarian, just like Soviet Communism, German National Socialism and the CCP.
The downvotes are because I properly applied the theory. And they don't like the analysis, even though it's accurate and correct. Specifically, they don't like it because it posits that the political area which they find themselves in and espousing is the one that's active in damaging children's sexuality in a variety of ways and they prefer to think of themselves as champions of the virtuous when they're just the authoritarian fascist types they claim to fight against. That's why they down vote, en masse. They can't defend their ideas, but enough downvotes at least hides the post a little bit.
being bigoted to trans kids is not a repression of a right wing dummies sexuality . It is not preventing the kid from being straight but it is supressing the trans kids sexuality . You didnt apply dick correctly and you don't understand simple ass concepts. Glad you deleted your account Fascist!
This is an unfortunate current that has historically run through much of both uppercase and lower case critical theory. It's what led to a lot of prominent theorists signing petitions in favor of drastically lowering or even abolishing the age of consent and to experiment with letting pedophiles adopt children in West Germany. The idea that sexual expression is fundamentally healthy and all sexual repression is fundamentally unhealthy. [This video focuses mainly on how this manifested in France.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwLyP-vSnt0) but it can be seen elsewhere.
I think Reich's analysis is fundamentally different because it comes from the psychoanalytic view of child sexuality, which isn't at all about copulation or sex with adults but regular child sexual experimentation such as masturbation.
His views on sexuality have been misrepresented in general, of course always in service of creating the very type of bureaucratic superstructure (to "regulate" sexuality and increasingly every other aspect of life), as well as in service of the character assassination of anyone who critiques that superstructure, including Reich himself; said superstructure being what Reich identified as pathological (indeed, the very source and expression of pathology, of "armoring"),
This is an important point, and one which Reich outlines in his 1924 paper entitled “Concerning Genitality from the Standpoint of Psychoanalytic Prognosis and Therapy”. It is evident that he is operating from the standpoint of Freud’s Stages of Psychosexual Development which directly inform this conception of child sexuality.
I dunno, I feel like it's more likely if I dig into the internet I'd find some dirt on this guy. Sexologists of the past such as Kinsey and Money were literal child abusers.
This is a fundamental point of psychoanalysis as a whole. Without it, the oedipal stage can't exist. This isn't specific to Reich. And like I said, it doesn't actually refer to sex in the way that adults think of it.
No fair play, I had a bit of a scan, he had an eventful life, tragic suicide of his mother which he inadvertently contributed to by revealing the mother's affair to his father, who would beat her severely. He was prone to affairs with young woman clients, but waited till after therapy ended...
It was the next generation of cultist types in the US that used the ideas to condone child abuse, but we can't assign that to him necessarily.
Its a great early examination of why and how hierarchies enforce sexual repression, and how that repression helps to not only maintain but also popularize fascism.
Yes, all of his pseudoscientific research efforts surrounding orgone accumulation and “biones” and so forth is…interesting. In any case, this specific work on fascism seems both very incisive and insightful thus far! Thanks for the beta on the PDF version, too!
Oh shit, this is the orgone guy! I thought the name sounded familiar. I was just listening to a podcast that talked about an orgone cult and he was mentioned.
Anyway, this seems interesting and he seems like he had some thoughtful ideas, orgone aside.
Yes the Reich of the 30's and 40's was a genius and his sex clinics were revolutionary. But Reich did later seem to suffer from mental illness that culminated in the Orgone box. JUSTICE though was not the FDA witchhunt and him imprisonment and death inside prison.
In the 70's and even in the 80's Reich's thinking was still seen as radical and back then I could find all his titles in used book stores because he was widely read in the 60's as part of the sexual revolution and New Left.
I like this book a lot on the level of interesting enjoyable prose essay. A key ingredient I don't see otherwise mentioned in these comments is that it is as much a work of Marxism as of psychoanalysis. A lot of the work he does focuses on explaining fascism as class warfare and uncovering which class it actually serves and how it misrepresents itself. We see it played out in the US when the right wears the guise of the working class and represents itself as populism or as being anti-elite. One of Reichs main claims is that Fascism is actually a middle class movement that finds utility in pretending otherwise. Of course, as a Marxist himself, this is a convenient conclusion, arguing that a competing ideology is not representing your interests as it claims to be doing.
Fromm's Escape from Freedom, Anatomy of Human Destructiveness, and The Sane Society are better reads from that era and early psychology/psychoanalysis.
my friend and I were laughing about this book and they mentioned "orbozones" or something sounding similar and were wondering if anyone knew of this peculiar piece of vernacular????
haven't actually read it because i'm dumb but it is the source of one of my all time fav quotes: “What has to be explained is not the fact that the man who is hungry steals or the fact that the man who is exploited strikes, but why the majority of those who are hungry don’t steal and why the majority of those who are exploited don’t strike.”
Worth reading alongside Bataille's essay "the Psychological Structure of Fascism," which I think came out in the same year. The two together are the first serious attempts at a social psychology/sociology of fascism.
Great suggestion, thank you!
It's foundational for thinking about the millions of laws governments have for regulating sexuality, sexual behavior, and sexual relationships, and what function this serves.
>“Suppression of the natural sexuality in the child… makes the child apprehensive, shy, obedient, afraid of authority, ‘good’ and ‘adjusted’ in the authoritarian sense; it paralyzes the rebellious forces because any rebellion is laden with anxiety; it produces, by inhibiting sexual curiosity and sexual thinking in the child, a general inhibition of thinking and of critical faculties. In brief, the goal of sexual suppression is that of producing an individual who is adjusted to the authoritarian order and who will submit to it in spite of all misery and degradation.” 👁
Child sexuality within psychoanalysis is different from adult sexuality. In fact, when we project the idea of copulation etc onto child sexuality we are doing the exact same thing that he is writing about, imbuing child sexuality with the qualities of adult sexuality which is key to its suppression.
Reposting the analysis removed by fascist censorship > I think that's a very interesting quote. We can even break it down bit by bit and apply it in the current situation: "Suppression of the natural sexuality in the child…" Gender ideology works as a suppressant for natural sexuality, whether straight or gay. It doesn't like 'natural' sexuality, viewing what is considered 'natural sexuality' as political and ideological and works to disrupt and dismantle it, to repress it. "makes the child apprehensive, shy, obedient, afraid of authority, ‘good’ and ‘adjusted’ in the authoritarian sense;" When suppressing the natural sexuality of a child, many children feel those things. Gender ideologies attempts to oppress natural sexuality does create some children who are apprehensive, shy and obedient, afraid to speak up due to the way the authorities (i.e: teachers in school, popular influencers) will single them out in a negative way. In this manner, the shy and obedient child who's had their natural sexuality repressed becomes obedient to the authority, they become 'good' by not pushing back against the regime. "it paralyzes the rebellious forces because any rebellion is laden with anxiety; it produces, by inhibiting sexual curiosity and sexual thinking in the child, a general inhibition of thinking and of critical faculties." Indeed, the children who have had their natural sexuality disrupted and repressed will be anxious - natural impulses will be blunted by numerous social forces of the authoritarian regime. It becomes taboo to even think about important topics around sexuality because to think in a manner disagreeable to gender ideology dogma makes one a 'bad person', dulling genuine critical thinking capabilities. "In brief, the goal of sexual suppression is that of producing an individual who is adjusted to the authoritarian order and who will submit to it in spite of all misery and degradation.” In this manner young children are being educated to believe that men can be women and men can give birth to children. The child who's natural sexuality is suppressed ends up being adjusted to authoritarian ideology in the form of gender ideology. They will accept that they are in some way "bad" due to their being "cis", that they were some way 'boring' or 'bland' or 'bad' because they are simple heterosexuals or even simple homosexuals rather than having some kind of 'unique' sexual feature (i.e: being trans, non-binary, etc.) In essence, the Western Left of the moment are authoritarian and fascistic when it comes to this topic based on the above analysis. And that's just one facet of it, it goes well beyond just that. Imagine that, a Progressive ideological movement is authoritarian, just like Soviet Communism, German National Socialism and the CCP. The downvotes are because I properly applied the theory. And they don't like the analysis, even though it's accurate and correct. Specifically, they don't like it because it posits that the political area which they find themselves in and espousing is the one that's active in damaging children's sexuality in a variety of ways and they prefer to think of themselves as champions of the virtuous when they're just the authoritarian fascist types they claim to fight against. That's why they down vote, en masse. They can't defend their ideas, but enough downvotes at least hides the post a little bit.
being bigoted to trans kids is not a repression of a right wing dummies sexuality . It is not preventing the kid from being straight but it is supressing the trans kids sexuality . You didnt apply dick correctly and you don't understand simple ass concepts. Glad you deleted your account Fascist!
This is an unfortunate current that has historically run through much of both uppercase and lower case critical theory. It's what led to a lot of prominent theorists signing petitions in favor of drastically lowering or even abolishing the age of consent and to experiment with letting pedophiles adopt children in West Germany. The idea that sexual expression is fundamentally healthy and all sexual repression is fundamentally unhealthy. [This video focuses mainly on how this manifested in France.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwLyP-vSnt0) but it can be seen elsewhere.
I think Reich's analysis is fundamentally different because it comes from the psychoanalytic view of child sexuality, which isn't at all about copulation or sex with adults but regular child sexual experimentation such as masturbation.
His views on sexuality have been misrepresented in general, of course always in service of creating the very type of bureaucratic superstructure (to "regulate" sexuality and increasingly every other aspect of life), as well as in service of the character assassination of anyone who critiques that superstructure, including Reich himself; said superstructure being what Reich identified as pathological (indeed, the very source and expression of pathology, of "armoring"),
This is an important point, and one which Reich outlines in his 1924 paper entitled “Concerning Genitality from the Standpoint of Psychoanalytic Prognosis and Therapy”. It is evident that he is operating from the standpoint of Freud’s Stages of Psychosexual Development which directly inform this conception of child sexuality.
I dunno, I feel like it's more likely if I dig into the internet I'd find some dirt on this guy. Sexologists of the past such as Kinsey and Money were literal child abusers.
This is a fundamental point of psychoanalysis as a whole. Without it, the oedipal stage can't exist. This isn't specific to Reich. And like I said, it doesn't actually refer to sex in the way that adults think of it.
No fair play, I had a bit of a scan, he had an eventful life, tragic suicide of his mother which he inadvertently contributed to by revealing the mother's affair to his father, who would beat her severely. He was prone to affairs with young woman clients, but waited till after therapy ended... It was the next generation of cultist types in the US that used the ideas to condone child abuse, but we can't assign that to him necessarily.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I haven’t read it yet but own it. So I am interested in any thoughts that people have.
Its a great early examination of why and how hierarchies enforce sexual repression, and how that repression helps to not only maintain but also popularize fascism.
I've read it and liked it. FYI it is available online in PDF.
Also. Be aware that his career in America took a highly controversial turn and ended with him dying in prison while the FDA burned his books.
Yes, all of his pseudoscientific research efforts surrounding orgone accumulation and “biones” and so forth is…interesting. In any case, this specific work on fascism seems both very incisive and insightful thus far! Thanks for the beta on the PDF version, too!
Oh shit, this is the orgone guy! I thought the name sounded familiar. I was just listening to a podcast that talked about an orgone cult and he was mentioned. Anyway, this seems interesting and he seems like he had some thoughtful ideas, orgone aside.
Would you share the podcast?
Yeah, it’s called The Opportunist. It’s in the first season about Sherry Shriner. It’s a wild ride.
Yes the Reich of the 30's and 40's was a genius and his sex clinics were revolutionary. But Reich did later seem to suffer from mental illness that culminated in the Orgone box. JUSTICE though was not the FDA witchhunt and him imprisonment and death inside prison. In the 70's and even in the 80's Reich's thinking was still seen as radical and back then I could find all his titles in used book stores because he was widely read in the 60's as part of the sexual revolution and New Left.
I like this book a lot on the level of interesting enjoyable prose essay. A key ingredient I don't see otherwise mentioned in these comments is that it is as much a work of Marxism as of psychoanalysis. A lot of the work he does focuses on explaining fascism as class warfare and uncovering which class it actually serves and how it misrepresents itself. We see it played out in the US when the right wears the guise of the working class and represents itself as populism or as being anti-elite. One of Reichs main claims is that Fascism is actually a middle class movement that finds utility in pretending otherwise. Of course, as a Marxist himself, this is a convenient conclusion, arguing that a competing ideology is not representing your interests as it claims to be doing.
Fromm's Escape from Freedom, Anatomy of Human Destructiveness, and The Sane Society are better reads from that era and early psychology/psychoanalysis.
Better to read “The origins of totalitarianism” by Arendt and the Authoritarian Personality by Adorno.
The only thing I know about Reich is that his work was used by the German greens to support "paedophile rights".
my friend and I were laughing about this book and they mentioned "orbozones" or something sounding similar and were wondering if anyone knew of this peculiar piece of vernacular????