reviews of neither left nor right
"Spot on. Insightful, brilliantly researched and written, a book that anyone who loves this nation needs to read."
-former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft
"A book that all Americans worried about the fate of this nation should read before it is too late."
-Dennis Miller
"A must read for all who value freedom."
-Penny Nance, Concerned Women for America
reviews of neither left nor right
"Spot on. Insightful, brilliantly researched and written, a book that anyone who loves this nation needs to read."
-former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft
"A book that all Americans worried about the fate of this nation should read before it is too late."
-Dennis Miller
"A must read for all who value freedom."
-Penny Nance, Concerned Women for America

The Development of Ocular Armor in Infants

In an article published in the October 6 issue of Biological Psychiatry, researchers found that infants who had poor eye contact with the mother had higher “callous-emotional” traits. “These traits include problems recognizing emotions of others,impairment in responding to distress of others, and impaired guilt or empathy.” These traits are hypothesized to be precursors of anti-social behavior found in psychopathic adults.

We know from medical orgonomy that the syndrome of callous-emotional traits described by the authors is a result of disturbances of mother-infant eye contact.
Clinical experience with patients in Medical Orgone Therapy shows that disturbances in eye contact at this early stage of development are one of many consequences of ocular armor that can develop at that time and that these can have destructive behavioral and social effects not only in infancy and childhood but throughout the individual’s life.

The Rise In People’s Cluelessness

Around 1960, a fundamental transformation in Western Society took place from authoritarian to anti-authoritarian. With the transformation, there was a change in the pattern of armor in young people. Ocular armor largely replaced muscular armor and this had destructive personal and social consequences. Emotional energy was no longer able to be bound and held back in muscular armor. As a result of the weakening of muscular armor and the increase in ocular armor, destructive emotions were expressed through intellectualized rationalizations, hatred and contempt of authority. Blame and resentment were directed at traditional authority figures in all areas of society.
Young people became more irrational and out of touch with themselves and with the world. They became more contactless. The word clueless that is in common usage today accurately describes this mental state.
Accompanying the anti-authoritarian transformation, there appeared for the first time a syndrome of symptoms in children characterized by disturbances in focusing, restlessness and hyperactivity. This condition was called Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
Today, the number of young American adults taking medication for ADHD has nearly doubled from 2008 to 20012. One in ten adolescent boys were taking a drug for the disorder.
Today’s adult population represents the children of the baby boomers that were growing up in the 60’s. From a bio-psychiatric perspective, a primary manifestation of the disorder that first appeared at that time, ADHD, are a result of ocular pathology. It is possible to treat this disorder without the use of medication by a qualified therapist.

Welcome To Democracy In The Middle East

In his article, “A Bleak Anniversary for the Arab Spring” Thane  Rosenbaum writes  in The Wall Street Journal  January 28, 2013 that while the Arab Spring may have ended the regimes of secular strongmen in many Muslim countries throughout the Middle East, North Africa and the Persian Gulf, these changes have not  brought about the desired central features of a democratic society in any of them.

The question that is never asked is how can Muslim people who have lived under extreme authoritarian rule for centuries be expected to function overnight in any way similar to people living in a modern Western style democracy?  This question, which goes to the heart of the emotional sickness of human beings, lies outside the framework of current medical and sociological thinking.  Without recognizing the emotional sickness resulting from individual and social armor that prevents people from being able to regulate their lives and function freely and responsibly in a democratic society it is not possible to understand why all Arab Spring movements must fail.

Without knowing the answer, the author does touch on this inability of people living in Muslim countries to establish a democratic society.  He finds that the only thing that Muslims in the Arab world seem to be capable of achieving is a limited, short term goal,  to free themselves of their current oppressor.  This myopic vision of the world is, in fact, an indication of the severity of the ocular armor of the masses in the Muslim world, the biophysical condition that prevents them from being able to see and find the way out of their current trapped existence.

Evasions And Distractions Contain The Most Superficial Layer Of Social Armor

We know from the treatment of individual patients that people go to enormous lengths to not face the problems that first bring them into therapy.  The same situation exists in our treatment of society’s social problems. The contents of newspapers are full of articles that are considered “newsworthy” as covering important social and political issues.  But from a functional perspective these articles actually are  evasions and distractions.  Analysis of the problems contained in them whether they are economic, social , political or whatever come down to the same source: they are the result of the  emotionally based sickness of the human race.  In fact, the more people seem to be addressing the so-called key issues as, for example, when scientists look for the secrets of life in the genetic code, the more they are actually running away from this central problem.

Why is this so? It is emotionally too painful for individuals both singly and collectively to look and feel what is going on within themselves and so they  focus exclusively on and blame the external manifestations.  This is why whenever there is a massacre such as a school shooting people are up in arms for gun control.  But it’s not guns that kill people.  Murderous impulses in people are responsible for killing people.  Until people are first capable of looking inwardly at what is happening within themselves they are not emotionally healthy enough to be in a position to really understand anything constructive about the world they are living in.  They are unable to recognize that the same murderous impulses that resulted in the massacre are there hidden in everyone.  Looking inwardly (introspectively) indicates a certain capacity to be in contact with what all people have in common, their own personal armored structures.  Therefore, a deep appreciation of the universality and function of armor in people is a prerequisite for any constructive understanding of what is going on in the world.

The therapy of individuals consists in starting on the bio-physical surface before attempting to proceed to deeper layers of their armored structure.  The same principle holds true for the therapy of social groups.  The social orgonomist starts his intervention at the social surface by  addressing people’s resistances which are expressed in their evasiveness and distractibility.  Until this defensive layer of ocular armor is successfully eliminated and people are able to feel the emotions that they they defending against there can be no progress expected in getting at the deeper impulses contained in the social armor.

This formulation is given as a preliminary attempt to begin addressing some of the social problems that society is faced with.

Why The Left Almost Always Wins In Politics

In todays anti-athoritarian society the left has almost no chance of losing in politics.  This is partly because leftists are primarily herd animals and they behave collectively in times of crisis as when they have to make political decisions.  Making collective decisions is comfortable for leftists in today’s  anti-authoritarian society because as long as they are being taken care of by their government there is little effort involved in going along with the tide of the political left’s mainstream thinking.  For many, becoming politically mindless is a way of not looking at what is objectively happening around them.

By contrast, those on the right are individualists.  They tend to stick by their principles which are governed more by their personal feelings than by group thinking.  As a result,  they often stand apart from others when confronted with social decisions and this is the reason they have more difficulty coming together as a political force when it comes down to winning political battles.

Furthermore, there are many elements in liberal ideology that conservatives are in favor of.  From a functional perspective, these are the counter truths contained in liberal ideology.  On the other hand, because of their greater degree of ocular armor, liberals are blinded and are driven by their ideology.  The ability of conservatives to recognize and be influenced by the counter truth in liberal ideology is the reason that  there are many varieties of conservatives but few of liberals.  This ability of conservatives to see the aspects of liberalism that they politically favor prevents them from mindlessly coming together as a stronger political force to oppose liberal programs.  Conversely, it is precisely their inability to see the counter truth contained in conservative ideology that makes liberals the politically stronger force.  The presence or absence of ocular armor determines much of what goes on in politics.

The Limits Of Political Conservatism

There are two reasons that conservatives are not politically effective in containing the Left’s destructive onslaught on our society.  The first involves the character armor of conservative individuals themselves and the second is related to the social armor of today’s anti-authoritarian society:

1) As a whole, individuals who are politically conservative are characterologically overly decent and civilized.  For the most part, they are unable to recognize and address the evil intent behind the agenda of leftist political radicals to destroy America.  They mistakenly give the ideologues the benefit of the doubt believing that they are genuinely interested in political compromises and constructive solutions to social and economic problems.

2) Anti-authoritarianism is based on the hatred of traditional authority which in today’s world is identified with the political right.  In today’s antiauthoritarian society all villainous people ( the “bad guys”) are believed to belong on the political right.  The politically correct indoctrinated public has a bias against seeing political villains on the left and, in general, views people who are believed to be on the political right , including conservatives, with suspicion verging on blind hatred.  This mind-set of the mainstream political left is a manifestation of socially induced ocular armor.  It is also the reason for the widely held belief that leftist politicians are the “good guys” who can never do anything wrong.

Conservatives, on the other hand believe that the solution to social problems is somehow to restore the past authoritarian social order.  However, this hope is not possible because of the breakdown of the authoritarian form of individual armor and the corresponding authoritarian morality that is based on it.  The genie is out of the bottle.

These ocular related problems of the public, a manifestation of  their contactlessness are directly responsible for the continual destabilization and disintegration of our anti-authoritarian social order.  Before social conditions are to improve, people must first be made aware that they live in a contactless state regarding social problems and how this state prevents them from recognizing the emotional plague in the solutions offered by radicals.  These tasks cannot be accomplished through political means.  They are bio-social problems that have their roots in the armor of humanity and therefore must be treated medically.

The Culture Of Political Correctness And Barack Obama

Political correctness is a manifestation of a socially induced ocular armor, the result of brainwashing of the public done by the political far  left.  It is a new way of defining right and wrong, of good and evil.  It is the expression of quasi Marxist ideas displaced from the economic realm onto socio-politics.  Having replaced the old  morality of the authoritarian social order, the morality of political correctness is based on the assumption that everything that America stands for is evil and rotten to the core.  This was the belief system of the bygone Soviet Union.

Without directly expressing it, this is also the moral system of Barack Obama.  We know this not by what Obama says but by what he does.  Almost every one of his policies, domestic as well as international, is done to undermine and destroy America’s preeminence as a world leader.  Tragically, most people are taken in by his pretense at being a loyal American.  They are fooled by his superficially wide, friendly smile, his empty words and his glib ideas.  His politically correct facade expressed in his pretending to care for the poor and the disadvantaged in America and his sympathy for all Arabs including the fanatics in the Muslim world barely conceal his underlying hatred of America.  On the other hand, since the public has largely been indoctrinated by the morality of political correctness, they  believe in the goodness of Obama and this enables him to get away with his social divisiveness and destructiveness  in front of everyone’s eyes.  What the Soviet Union failed to accomplish from the outside, the pseudo-liberal/communist is succeeding at from within America.  The emotional plague has infested the highest levels of the Federal Government.

Obama 2016: A Documentary Of One Mans Revenge

The remarkable documentary film, Obama 2016, gives an incontrovertible account of Barack Obama’s destructive political agenda for America to everyone who is able to see. What is even more  frightening than the film itself is the large number of the public who do not see him for who he  really is.  We know that complacency in the face of impending danger is a symptom of severe ocular armor.  The typical reaction of many ocularly armored Americans to Obama’s blueprint for change is denial, their obstinate refusal to look at the evidence and to see it for what it is.  Many, including the media are completely fooled by Obama’s portrayed as a Black man reaching out with a broad, friendly  smile who can do no wrong to an unsuspecting, adulatory White American public.  This skin deep facade of benignity covers up his thirst for revenge against those White people who are classified by him (capitalists, entrepreneurs etc. – the “colonialism” of the past) as the “oppressors” of the underdogs of the world.  His entire political agenda is nothing but an attempt to get even with past and present “usurpers” by equalizing everyone and all nations, rich and poor, to the same economic level.

The film documents Obama’s life-long association with communists starting with his mother and maternal grandfather who were Party members and ending with his close relationship with leftist radicals such as Jeremiah Wright just prior to running for president.  It also documents how to be effective, communist tactics of mass indoctrination must be started at the earliest time in child development.

How do we recognize Obama’s destructiveness?  Practically every one of Obama’s domestic and foreign policy initiatives has had the effect of undermining America’s strength both nationally and internationally.  Without recognizing the existence of the emotional plague, the element of evil is necessarily not part of the presentation.  However, even without this crucial element, the film does an excellent job in factually exposing the emotional plague from the left.  It is a “must see” film for everyone who has doubts about Obama’s destructive intentions and is vitally concerned about our ideals and our country’s future.

Why Can’t Some People See Barack Obama’s Threat To America?

The answer is simply that these people literally cannot see what is right in front of their eyes.  As if that was not bad enough they do not perceive that they can’t see.  Instead of using their eyes to see the outside world as it really is, they rely on their inner emotions and sensations as a substitute, replacing personal belief about Obama for reality.  On the other hand, typical of any pseudo-liberal/communist ideologue, Obama is highly skilled at pretending to be a loyal American, someone who he is not.

In my clinical work as a medical and social orgonomist, I have found that these substitute internally generated positive feelings about Barack Obama originate from two sources:

They are either the result of a fear of recognizing the hatred and feelings of revenge that Obama harbors toward  America and the American way of life or they are the result of a wish or a hope that some kind of government handout will be given to them.  (Remember that Obama panders to the public’s longing for “freedom” and “hope”).  These are defensive attitudes  on the public’s part that leaves it  feeling complacent and with a false sense of security about social conditions.  Then there is a third group of people, mostly Black Americans, who identify with Obama’s blackness and mindlessly support him simply because of his skin color.

The reason that people cannot see  evil when it is right in front of their eyes is because their eyes do not function the way nature intended them to.  Very early in most people’s lives, as a result of their upbringing, their eyes have been traumatized in one way or another, either by emotional or by physical insults.  Their eyes have become armored and this is why they cannot see things in the world as they are and why they must distort reality.

The consequences of these early ocular insults on both the individual and on society can be disastrous.  This is once more the case, as in 2008 of the relationship between Barack Obama and the voting public that is about to play out in November 2012.

Ocular armor is a poorly recognized, prevalent medical condition induced by harmful environmental practices on children such as poor emotional contact between mother and infant, noxious  chemicals being placed in the infant’s eyes at birth, harsh mechanical stimuli bombarding the infants senses and so on.  In addition to destructive effects on the individual’s personal life, ocular armor has serious environmental consequences as well. The widespread social and political irrationality that is constantly upon us is only one example of people’s ocular armor.

From The History Of The Emotional Plague: The Solution Of Christianity

The core functions of all religions are twofold: First, it provides a way of understanding the relation of humans to the cosmos from which they originate and second, it provides a way of coming to grips with people’s armored condition and it’s destructive social consequence, the emotional plague of mankind.  Because human armor is omnipresent, practically the entire human race is caught in the world-wide web of the emotional plague.  This trap includes religions movements themselves.

Christianity has had a powerful influence on Western life in it’s attempt to address  these  functions, particularly in understanding and dealing with the problem of human evil which is how the emotional plague is currently recognized in a distorted form.  Christianity  began to flourish around the fourth century A.D.  when the Roman Empire was disintegrating. People’s secondary destructive drives were responsible for this collapse and   Christianity’s primary  function was to preserve whatever remained intact of  Roman social order.

In order to do this, Christianity combined the two basic functions of religion, the cosmic element and the emotional plague element, into one comprehensive  mystical dogma: Christ, the son of God, came to earth to save humanity from it’s sins by sacrificing his life for man.  The function of this belief was to restore social order by anchoring Christian mysticism into the structure of  the armored populace.

Christianity attempted to get to the universality of human armor and the emotional plague through the irrational idea of original sin: all men and woman are sinners.  It also attempted to bring about social cohesion by converting all non-believers into Christianity since only by believing in Christ as the true savior of souls could one be saved from eternal damnation.

The act of mystical belief in Christ the savior was expected to keep impulses from the destructive secondary layer of armored humans in check.  Since Christ died for people’s sins, the responsibility for sinning (human social destructiveness) and the guilt that is associated with it is taken over in the body of Christ.  People can temporarily be relieved of the feeling of guilt that is contained in the destructive impulses in their armor by believing in Christ.

The Catholic church has incorporated into its religion the function of providing relief in the practice of confession.  The priest as the representative of Christ on earth functions in the role of confessor.  What is essential for obtaining relief from guilt is the sinner’s absolute conviction that  Christ is the true savior.

However, the Christian solution to the problem of the emotional plague was only partially successful and lasted for about a thousand years in Europe.  Consider the rampant debauchery and corruption of the  Church’s leaders during the middle ages that resulted in the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century.  The importance of the Reformation movement was to deal with the emotional plague within the Catholic Church itself.  The Reformation under Luther returned to  the earlier Christian belief that faith in Christ alone without any human intervention was sufficient for salvation.

But Protestantism also was not able to contain the build-up of energy in the destructive secondary layer since it soon was apparent that Protestants could be as cruel and as fanatical as Catholics.  Furthermore, people were growing dissatisfied with Catholicism’s rigid mystical interpretation of the natural world.  From a biophysical perspective, people’s mystical form of ocular armor was loosening.

The only other solution that armored humans had to deal with the problem of human destructiveness was to pull energy up from the body into the head and rely on the objective, not subjective,  aspects of human life.  This led to the age of enlightenment and the liberal thinkers in 18h century England.  On the one hand, liberalism was a rational attempt to deal with the  Catholic Church’s mystical view of the world and on the other, it was a hopelessly desperate attempt to deal with and control impulses from people’s secondary destructive layer  (the emotional plague) by pulling energy from muscular armor into the brain.  With liberalism, brain (ocular) armor intensified through the development of defensive intellectualism at the expense of muscular armor.  One form of ocular armor (mysticism) was replaced by another equally destructive form (defensive intellectualism). From a characterological perspective, conservative thinking was replaced by liberal thinking.

However, eliminating mystical religion created another, more serious problem in today’s anti-authoritarian society.  There was no longer a mechanism for people who had given up their faith in religion to obtain relief from their guilt resulting from the socially destructive impulses contained in their middle layer.  Since people had chronic armor they also had a chronic sense of guilt that they had to live with on a daily basis.  As a result, people developed free floating guilt feelings.  To obtain relief, it was readily acted out through advocating leftist social and political causes of every kind.

The development of free floating guilt in people who have given up their mystical faith in religion and in religious leaders is the reason for liberalism’s instability as a political movement and why it can quickly degenerate into socialism and communism.  It is also the reason  for how quickly psuedo-liberal leaders on the political left can appear on the social scene to assume the role of a secular savior of the masses who need to be led into subjugation.

Wilhelm Reich found that human beings are not born evil,  but that evilness is instilled in infants and children through a process of armoring and  that this causes them to behave destructively toward other humans.   Armoring in humans is the source of the emotional plague.  Therefore, if humans are not born evil but are made so, sinfulness can be prevented in the human race through natural child rearing practices and through the process of armor elimination of medical orgone therapy.  The emotional plague is a medical disorder and must be treated like any other infectious medical disease.

Not Seeing The Forest For The Trees

Armored people see and think about the world in bits and pieces.  No matter what subject they are studying, they are incapable of seeing the whole picture.  They have been taught to view the world mechanistically, as if it were nothing but a machine that is made up of a number of replaceable parts.  A manifestation of ocular armor, this distorted way of viewing things is endemic in every branch of science including sociology.

As an example, consider people’s view of the generalized deterioration in the quality of American life that began around 1960 and is accelerating at an increasing rate.  Some people focus on the signs and symptoms of the deterioration such as the breakdown of the traditional family, the increase in teen age  pregnancies, the degradation in acceptable forms of social behavior and so on.  Others look at the reasons for the decline.  Liberals focus on  shifts in governmental policy and economic factors.  Conservatives look at the decline in cultural values.  These opposing views result in ideological conflicts between the left and the right.  Things remain the same.  Still others are not even aware that anything at all important is happening.

There is no comprehensive picture of the reasons for the destructiveness that is happening to our society. What still remains to be generally recognized and  functionally understood are the biological determinants that govern social life.  Around 1960, the structure of Western society was fundamentally transformed from authoritarian to anti-authoritarian.   The anti-authoritarian society that we are currently living in was the result of the breakthrough of powerful impulses of sexual yearning of the younger generation which came through to the social surface with a destructive force.  The reason that they surfaced in this way at this particular time was that these impulses could no longer be held back (repressed) because of  the failure of the two opposing forces of social armor: on the one hand there was the increasing pressure behind the sexual urges of the younger generation and on the other there was the weakening of the repressive forces contained in the authoritarian social armor.  This resulted in the so-called sexual revolution.

The anti-authoritarian transformation accounts for every one of the destructive social changes that we are currently witnessing.  Now, all forms of authority, rational as well as irrational have been largely thrown overboard.  Authority in general and parental authority in particular, are viewed by many with suspicion and hostility.  Many of the younger generation today have no respect for their elders and reject learning anything that they and tradition have to offer.  This includes being personally responsible for one’s life through the ability to earn a living.  As a result, not only has the authoritarian family structure largely fallen apart but also what remained of their biological work function.  (Just 48% of working-class whites in America were married in 2010 down from 84% in 1960).

With the breakdown of the authoritarian family and having no other authorities to blame for their problems, many children of the baby boomers who grew up in the 60s are unable to earn a living, and now depend on their families or on the government to care for them.

As in the case of medical diseases, only with a clear, functional understanding of the social disease can there be a true course of treatment.

  • Email Subscription

    Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 43 other subscribers