The Anti-authoritarian Degeneration On College Campuses

The anti-authoritarian social order has invaded every area of social life.  None more so than on our college campuses.  The reason for this destructive turn of events is never asked because the answer lies outside the framework of conventional mechanistic-mystical thinking.  It has to do with the push of sexual energy in these young people and their incapacity to achieve genuine satisfaction because of armor.  The resultant undischarged  sexual energy gives rise to all sorts of pathological symptoms including, in some students, acting out social disturbances on college campuses.  Today more than ever the emotional basis of these symptoms is consistently ignored.

In the past authoritarian era society was well ordered.  Personal problems of individuals were dealt with on an individual level by those who were authorized to handle them.  In today’s anti-authoritarian society, personal problems have become politicized as social issues and are dealt with not by individuals but by groups of people, committees and so on.  Individual authority has been replaced by collective authority.  It is at this point that the current administration  as Big Brother regularly enters to “solve” the problem, in this case, by providing  federal “guidelines” on what is considered to be proper (politically correct) social behavior on college campuses.

This example illustrates the tactic typically used by pseudo-liberal/ communist politicians in their attempt to achieve control of American society: To seize upon any current social problem or create one where none exists and then to provide a centralized, government-sponsored solution for it.


  1. Let me start by saying that I am in complete agreement about the sexual repression and how it manifests in unforeseen ways. But how are you so sure that this particular manifestation is a destructive turn of events though? Perhaps it is merely an intuitive move on the part of students to realize something that the system does not provide. Are you saying that if this sexual energy were not so repressed, there would not be these social problems? And responses to these problems?

    Also, there is nothing that says that anti-authoritarianism, whatever its driving force, does not play a healthy role in a society as diverse as ours, whatever you want to call it politically. In any healthy society, we need a mixture of both authoritarianism and anti- authoritarianism. There will always be an oligarchy and the consequent struggle to forge a path independent of its rule, whether socially or individually. Failure to achieve genuine satisfaction seems to have much more to do with the lack of energy spent on things that are inherently meaningful as opposed to just a release of this energy. Failure to achieve genuine satisfaction is what sustains the corporate consumer culture and is not likely to go away until our worldview is radically altered. What about times when mutual-aid was the norm, before government stepped in to authorize people to do such and such in the first place? This type of interdependence naturally sustains meaningful social relations. Perhaps we need certain things which force us to be dependent on each other. I agree with your politics, but question your reasons listed above.

    • Most college students have no interest in becoming involved in campus social causes. They are there simply to learn so they can get on with their lives. Some college students because of their particular armored structure lose touch with why they are there and become involved in campus social issues. When these people are successfully treated in medical orgone therapy and achieve a capacity for genuine (not neurotic) sexual satisfaction, they lose interest in social causes and other forms of destructive behavior and are able to focus on learning. Heterosexual satisfaction is the primary deterrant of every form of pathological behavior and this why it is the central indicator of a person’s health.
      Anti-authoritarianism does not mean the absence of authority. It mean the transfer of authority from individuals to groups and ultimately to the State (Big Brother). There is nothing constructive that can come from anti-authority.

      • Sorry it took me a while to respond back, but I still have a few questions after your reply. I can concede that you are probably correct on the first point – that treatment and therapy to encourage genuine sexual satisfaction can help eliminate an unhealthy attachment to “social causes” which before college one did not care a lick about. I must push the point though and play devil’s advocate. I am in a relationship with a beautiful and very intelligent black woman. Forty years ago this would not have been possible. What has changed? People have fought for social progress in terms of both sexual and racial tolerance. This is a very good thing, one which might not have come about had individuals not taken a stand and become involved in “social causes” (they became anti-authority so long as the authority oppressed inter-racial relationships). Am I wrong? Is this not a very good thing that perhaps came about as a result of sexual dissatisfaction?

        I was also wondering why you inserted the qualifier “heterosexual” into the statement above, since there are certainly many homosexual/bisexual relationships that are not in any way neurotic or unhealthy? There is no reason why these relationships cannot also be genuine, loving, and satisfactory.

        Next I wanted to ask you to elaborate on your conceptions of authority and anti-authority. It seems like you are confusing the two in your response above (or maybe the wording is just confusing to me).

        I also would like to know what you think about a distinction being made between positional authority and personal authority? Positional authority comes with a badge, title, or office whereas personal authority comes from within. People are drawn to the personal authority despite his or her lack of positional significance. In my experience, being anti-positional authority seems to be a very good thing since positions have no inherent guarantee that the person possesses real meaningful knowledge. Real and meaningful knowledge has an energy to it. It draws people to itself. I know many tribal cultures operate/d in this way and it seems they did/do so with very good reason. Personal authority is responsible and creative, whereas positional authority usually crumbles under pressure. The first is highly principled. The latter is not necessarily. I would greatly like to hear your thoughts on this matter.

      • You are right. It was tragic that the Constitution of the United States could not apply to all races when it was first adopted as the law of the land in 1787.. It took a Civil War and the Civil Rights social movement to make it possible to have racial equality under the law and bring about a more genuine democracy in America.

  2. I was disappointed that you did not address all the questions in my prior post. I would really like your insight on these.

    • Many of your points are correct. Answering other points that you have raised would take us far afield and cannot be satisfactorily addressed in a blog. I suggest reading my upcoming book, Neither Left Nor Right, which will be published in the near future. .

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

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

    Join 137 other subscribers
  • Follow Charles Konia, M.D.’s Tweets on Twitter

  • See Charles Konia, M.D. on Amazon

  • See Charles Konia, M.D. on Facebook

  • American College of Orgonomy