Philosophical Debate On The Biopower of Electronically Targeted, Psychotropic Torture, and Treatments In Addiction
I am going to attempt to illustrate the pervasive difference in the philosophical logic behind biopower. My point is to prove how traditional political appearances play into what we perceive as “sickness.”
What is the difference between a woman who has persistently battle with re-occurring forms of cancer, who, in her moment of desperation, ends her life because she sees her life as a form of drudgery and angst against a monster she can’t fight? And the woman who, using alcohol or drugs, uses persistently to battle the in-equality that has been set before in re-occurring forms of abuse and neglect uses these substances to help her better “bear her cross.”
This sets up a somewhat complimentary order of “sickness” in the philosophical positions to decide whose life is more “valuable” and whose life is “not valuable.” Now, for the sake of all fairness, philosophically speaking both lives are valuable as each life holds their own hopes, dreams, desires, and loves, and, furthermore, these women are “valuable” to those who love these women. But to those who do not love them, their lives are merely just “other lives.”
Some might take the position that the woman battling re-occurring forms of cancer is in her right to take her own life because of the pain and suffering of the disease. That she is entitled to “death with dignity.” Yet, the woman who uses drugs and alcohol persistently may be perceived as “less deserving.” Why? Is it because I placed a woman in this philosophical discussion and not a man? Is it because it is most likely to be a “younger woman” using as time affects rates of recovery and this makes her more likely to be a promiscuous female? Is it because promiscuous females are perceived as “prostitutes?” This is where I feel, as both a philosopher and a woman, the bias begins. That is, with the perception of “prostitute.” Is it because I also used the term woman in the cancer schema and this sends even the slightest perception that it is more likely a middle-aged, mother, as these women are most likely to be battling re-occurring forms of cancer? Or, perhaps the cancer patient is an elderly female who has lived a wholesome and fruitful life because cancer is more likely to strike the middle-aged and elderly populations as time is a factor when it comes to lifestyle behaviors. One might ask the question, “Did the cancer patient smoke?” How does that lifestyle behavior affect perceptions? Does this make it possible these populations of women are more deserving of “rights” over less aged populations? Or is it because the younger woman has more time attached to her life with more possibilities for successful outcomes, and THAT possibility makes her life worth saving even more so?
“Time washes everything clean. Don’t it now.” ~Sheryl Crow, Riverwide
I have observed the philosophical tenants against young women and many substances abusing young women are, not only perceived as “prostitutes,” but actually are by occupation. I also believe there is a stereotypical bias against these two types in people who have never had either phenomenon touch their personal lives. That is, knowing someone with addiction or the disease cancer.
In order to have an adequate debate, each of the above-answered questions must be argued. Of course, I didn’t outline the level of addiction in the “addicted woman schema.” So, to be clear, I want to address the level of addiction as this:
“Addicted Woman Schema”
The woman uses every day, but mostly after work hours, and has suffered long-term sexual, physical, and emotional abuse by her loved ones. There are times this woman drinks to excess which sends “red flags” to healthcare workers regarding her “problem.” As if what she has been going through hasn’t already been “intense.” In addition, this woman has been claiming she is being “managed” by a biopower politic that might involve the healthcare industry which she claims has forced her to use smaller quantities of drugs and alcohol every day. But it appears because of her past history of use, it may be someone whom she knows or is surrounding her in her environment. The healthcare professionals have labeled her “schizophrenic” and point out she needs to “call the police.” The woman has stated that she has contacted the police but because of the invisibility of the assaults, it makes it impossible to adequately ascertain the guilty party.
“The Cancer Patient Schema”
The woman who has battled re-occurring forms of cancer simply does not want to go through another round of chemotherapy. It’s draining and fatiguing and the process is beginning to wear her down. She first battled breast cancer at 61 years of age. She then battled thyroid cancer at 69. She is now battling re-occurring forms of skin cancer now at stage four. She’s 79 years old.
Both women have undergone systematic punitive assaults, just in different ways. Both judges handing down sentences are silent, invisible, and tenacious.
Now, my entire point in this whole philosophical discussion which I am not adequately addressing because I’m not going to answer each posited point, point for point, is this. Mentally ill people have historically been seen as “less deserving” and “unvaluable.” Their lives have been frequently deemed “unlivable.” Yet, this position furthers the original causes of the disease and why these people use in the first place. They were part of a precarious and abandoned population. A song to consider is printed below regarding abandoned love which the healthcare industry is trying to make up for through the deployment of electronic targeted physical assaults. They not only use this technology on their psychic patients while they're in the “holding area” where their future fate is to be decided but also when these people walk around in public; at the grocery store, at the libraries, at other public locations. I ask, “Is the healthcare industry safe for psychiatric patients?” HELL NO!
RIVERWIDE by Sheryl Crow
I spent a year in the mouth of a whale with a flame and a book of signs
You’ll never know how hard I’ve failed trying to make up for lost time
Once I believed in things unseen I was blinded by the dark
Out of the multitude to me he came and broke my heart
When the dash in the field has flown
And the youngest of hearts has grown
And you doubt you will ever be free
Honey, don’t bail on me
River is wide and oh so deep and it winds and winds around
I dream we’re happy in my sleep, floating down and down and down
And the tide rushes by where we stand
And the earth underneath turns to sand
And we’re waiting for someone to see
Honey, don’t bail on me
Tell Ma I loved a man even though I turned and ran
Lovely and fine, I could’ve been, laying down in the palm of his hand
Laying down in the palm of his hand
Laying down in the palm of his hand
Staying down in the palm of his hand
In the morning you wait for the sun
And secretly hope it won’t come
But time washes everything clean
Honey, now don’t bail on me
Don’t bail on me
No, don’t bail on me
My thesis is this. Electronic targeted physical assaults and psychotronic torture force a person to “lay down in the palm of man’s hand, staying down in the palm of his hand.” It can be analyzed by theories in subjection and subjugation by both Nietzsche, Hegel, Butler, and Foucault. As a woman, I find its deployment not only offensive but abusive because this phenomenon stipulates sentences and punishes without trial or jury those who are deemed as possessing “unvaluable lives” and possess “unlivable lives” by an abusive judge reigning over them. These schemas usually involve some loss of money and finances as part of the conspiracy.