Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

wyldwolf

(43,867 posts)
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 03:18 PM Jul 2015

Sanders: compulsory education, fluoridated water contribute to the erosion of 'personal freedom.'

From MotherJones

His early writings reflect a political worldview rooted in the fad psychology and anti-capitalist rhetoric of the era and infused with a libertarianesque critique of state power. Sanders feared that the erosion of individual freedom—via compulsory education, sexual repression, and, yes, fluoridated water—began at birth. And, he postulated, authoritarianism might even cause cancer.

Like many lefties of his time, he was heavily influenced by the Austrian psychologist Wilhelm Reich, a disciple of Freud whose work drew a connection between sexual repression and fascism.

Reich's most famous invention was a product called the "Orgone Box," a sort of hyperbaric oxygen chamber for orgasms. The device was supposed to expose users to "orgastic" energy circulating in the air. Such exposure, Reich theorized, could cure various maladies, including cancer.

In a 1969 essay for the Freeman called "Cancer, Disease and Society," Sanders, then 28, contended that conformity caused cancer by breaking down the human spirit and inflicting emotional trauma. He quoted liberally from Reich's 1948 book, The Cancer Biopathy, which, he noted, was "very definite about the link between emotional and sexual health, and cancer," and he walked readers through Reich's theory about the consequences of suppressing "biosexual excitation."

Then Sanders got to the point: "The above references, in no uncertain terms, state that you might very well be the cause of cancer." He continued:

What do you think it really means when 3 doctors, after intense study, write that 'of the 26 patients (who developed breast cancer) below 51 (years of age), one was sexually adjusted.' It means, very bluntly, that the manner in which you bring up your daughter with regard to sexual attitudes may very well determine whether or not she will develop breast cancer, among other things.

Theories about psychological causes of cancer were widespread in the mid-20th century, but never accepted within the scientific mainstream. According to the National Cancer Institute, psychological stress can have adverse health effects, but "the evidence that it can cause cancer is weak." The American Cancer Society says that "based on what we know now about how cancer starts and grows, there's no reason to believe that emotions can cause cancer or help it grow." Reich died in prison in 1957 after ignoring an order by the Food and Drug Administration to stop advertising his Orgone Box as a cancer cure.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/bernie-sanders-vermont-freeman-sexual-freedom-fluoride

39 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Sanders: compulsory education, fluoridated water contribute to the erosion of 'personal freedom.' (Original Post) wyldwolf Jul 2015 OP
And Clinton supporters releases yet another hit piece... -Bernie- Jul 2015 #1
yep! MotherJones is just full of Clinton supporters. </sarcasm> wyldwolf Jul 2015 #2
kinda like going back to Hillary's days at Wellsley bigtree Jul 2015 #10
Well, obviously what Bernie wrote in 1969 still accurately describes his beliefs. Scuba Jul 2015 #3
We can only quote Clinton going back to 2008 arcane1 Jul 2015 #5
Yeah 2002 is the dark middle ages where people could only be expected to vote for stupid wars. Exultant Democracy Jul 2015 #8
Darn those widespread but erronious beliefs from 1969! arcane1 Jul 2015 #4
This is useful because? enlightenment Jul 2015 #6
I guess the point that can be taken from this is that people change opinions and......... George II Jul 2015 #25
we've been told by many that Bernie then is Bernie now Sheepshank Jul 2015 #36
The whole super silly debate enlightenment Jul 2015 #38
that's orgastic! bigtree Jul 2015 #7
If this is all they have against Sanders then they are in trouble. nt Quixote1818 Jul 2015 #9
And all before a single debate appearance, before a single primary vote has been cast. arcane1 Jul 2015 #12
Hilarious, isn't it? nt SusanCalvin Jul 2015 #15
Actually, according to post #1 this is not the only piece the HRC group has posted. Sheepshank Jul 2015 #37
A very good article about Sanders development Agnosticsherbet Jul 2015 #11
Try again. n/t Comrade Grumpy Jul 2015 #13
At least he wasn't a Goldwater Girl. HooptieWagon Jul 2015 #14
As a Sanders supporter, thats just as silly as bringing up this stuff about Bernie. phleshdef Jul 2015 #19
Okay, so Bernie believed some stupid shit 46 years ago. phleshdef Jul 2015 #16
As did HRC as a teenager mcar Jul 2015 #17
I agree. I was about as politically foolish as they come until I hit my mid 20s-30. phleshdef Jul 2015 #18
phleshdef, you are a breath of fresh air! mcar Jul 2015 #20
Yea, I try. I was the same way in 2008. Supported Obama but would've been fine with Clinton... phleshdef Jul 2015 #21
Same here mcar Jul 2015 #34
I was a supporter and CAMPAIGNED for William F. Buckley when he ran for NYC mayor in the 1960s George II Jul 2015 #26
Now THAT makes sense. nt Bonobo Jul 2015 #28
I'm sure there's an insult there. George II Jul 2015 #29
No. I am not a Buckley supporter but it Bonobo Jul 2015 #31
No, it gives ZERO insight - that was 50 years ago, and back then Buckley wasn't an..... George II Jul 2015 #35
+1,000,000 Trajan Jul 2015 #33
The salient words here are "early writings." Vinca Jul 2015 #22
Congratulations! hootinholler Jul 2015 #23
In 1969, I believed cyberswede Jul 2015 #24
Clearly you will be held to any and *all* utterances from decades ago! Except if you're a Clinton... villager Jul 2015 #27
This is just as silly as Clinton being called a "Goldwater Girl" zappaman Jul 2015 #30
Wow, he believed some stupid things... back before I was born. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jul 2015 #32
I'll ask the obvious question... JaneyVee Jul 2015 #39

bigtree

(85,998 posts)
10. kinda like going back to Hillary's days at Wellsley
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 03:35 PM
Jul 2015

...where she graduated in '69.



"As the nation boiled over Vietnam, civil rights and the slayings of two charismatic leaders, Ms. Rodham was completing a sweeping intellectual, political and stylistic shift. She came to Wellesley as an 18-year-old Republican, a copy of Barry Goldwater’s right-wing treatise, “The Conscience of a Conservative,” on the shelf of her freshman dorm room. She would leave as an antiwar Democrat whose public rebuke of a Republican senator in a graduation speech won her notice in Life magazine as a voice for her generation."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/05/us/politics/05clinton.html?_r=0




Hillary Rodham speaking at rally at Wellesley College
 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
3. Well, obviously what Bernie wrote in 1969 still accurately describes his beliefs.
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 03:27 PM
Jul 2015

Meanwhile, Hillary's 2002 vote on the IWR should not be considered, because she's "evolved" since then.

enlightenment

(8,830 posts)
6. This is useful because?
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 03:29 PM
Jul 2015

Do you believe Sanders would push this stuff today?

I suppose I could be equally concerned that Hillary might decide to return to her Goldwater Girl roots.

Somehow, I'm not concerned about either possibility.

Silly season - gotta love it.

George II

(67,782 posts)
25. I guess the point that can be taken from this is that people change opinions and.........
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 06:02 PM
Jul 2015

.....political beliefs over time.

I hope all the Sanders supporters remember this before delving back to the archives to find a smidgen of variance by Clinton from today's opinions.

By the way, as recently as 20 years ago Elizabeth Warren was a Reagan republican.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
36. we've been told by many that Bernie then is Bernie now
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 06:50 PM
Jul 2015

That Bernie doesn't need to evolve because he's onthe right side of every issue from the get go.

For me, this speaks more to the idea that EVERYONE EVOLVES. If Bernie didn't eveolve from this silly understanding of science, then it would be freaking embarrasing.

Holding Hilary's changes and growing on certain policy matters as a bad think has always seems like such a ludicrous argument......it is normal and should be expected from all human beings.

enlightenment

(8,830 posts)
38. The whole super silly debate
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 07:12 PM
Jul 2015

going on here on DU is - silly.

I don't see the usefulness of this never-ending he said/she said/they did - no, THEY did . . . stuff.

I don't disagree with you - but I still fail to find the OP useful. Why? Because it did not say what you said - it offered no opinion about remembering that everyone changes over time. It tossed out the article, complete with added emphasis so no one missed the Really Weird Sh*t . . . and nothing else. I think that makes it "flamebait" - designed to stir up argument.

That makes it not useful - and silly.

Frankly, I don't know where people get the energy to engage in this constant bickering, but I guess discussion boards like DU wouldn't last very long if people weren't doing it.

 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
12. And all before a single debate appearance, before a single primary vote has been cast.
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 03:55 PM
Jul 2015

It's been quite a list of desperate claims lobbed against a campaign that's two months old:

-He doesn't have enough money in his savings account

-He has dual citizenship with Israel

-He has "rape fantasies"

-He's apparently a "gun nut" to the extent that he was even held partially responsible for the Charleston massacre

-He doesn't care about black people

-And now, he believed weird things... in the 60's!


Did I miss anything?

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
37. Actually, according to post #1 this is not the only piece the HRC group has posted.
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 06:52 PM
Jul 2015

so which is it...just this one, or many?

 

phleshdef

(11,936 posts)
19. As a Sanders supporter, thats just as silly as bringing up this stuff about Bernie.
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 05:07 PM
Jul 2015

We really shouldn't feed the trolls like that. Hillary Clinton is obviously nowhere near Goldwater's ideology and hasn't been for ages. I think Bernie Sanders would like his supporters to be honest about stuff like this and stay on the issues. He himself says he has a lot of respect for Hillary and that she is a friend.

mcar

(42,334 posts)
17. As did HRC as a teenager
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 04:59 PM
Jul 2015

But some here continue to bring up her "Goldwater Girl" days as if it's something very important.

I agree, it is ridiculous to bring up Sen Sanders' writings as a young man. It is also equally ridiculous to bring up HRC's teenage political leanings.

 

phleshdef

(11,936 posts)
18. I agree. I was about as politically foolish as they come until I hit my mid 20s-30.
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 05:05 PM
Jul 2015

And I'm learning new things all the time.

I'll take a President Sanders or a President Clinton. I'm supporting Bernie in the primary but I won't be upset if (and likely when) I vote for Hillary Clinton in November 2016. We really don't need to tear each other apart, especially over silly non-issues like this or Hillary's Goldwater thing. Its stupid and unproductive.

mcar

(42,334 posts)
20. phleshdef, you are a breath of fresh air!
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 05:09 PM
Jul 2015

I tip my hat to you.

I will happily vote for our Democratic candidate, whomever he or she is.

 

phleshdef

(11,936 posts)
21. Yea, I try. I was the same way in 2008. Supported Obama but would've been fine with Clinton...
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 05:25 PM
Jul 2015

....but this place gets super nasty around primary season. It can get to be embarrassing.

mcar

(42,334 posts)
34. Same here
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 06:40 PM
Jul 2015

But in reverse. I supported Hillary but was delighted to support Obama. My then college student sonnwas so excited about Obama and volunteered many hours for his campaign. I loved the fact that people were getting involved.

Bonobo

(29,257 posts)
31. No. I am not a Buckley supporter but it
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 06:26 PM
Jul 2015

Does provide some insight into your anger at the support Sanders is getting to the detriment of Hillary.

Some things change but even then some things don't change. And I imagine the conservativeness you once had in backing an establishment figure like Buckley is now expressed in backing an establishment figure like Hillary.

The Dem party is a big tent and you and I are simply on opposite ends of it. One of us probably will get squeezed out and I think that would be a good thing.

George II

(67,782 posts)
35. No, it gives ZERO insight - that was 50 years ago, and back then Buckley wasn't an.....
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 06:42 PM
Jul 2015

...."establishment figure". And as I've said elsewhere, I'm not angry but I'm annoyed at the attitude of many, maybe even most Sanders supporters on this site who do what you've done above - make uninformed assumptions about people without knowing much about them at all. And if you're not a Sanders supporter you're not a true Democrat (by the way, has Sanders enrolled in the Democratic Party yet????)

Would you be making these same comments to Elizabeth Warren if she was participating in this discussion? She's the darling of many here and she was a conservative up until 30 years AFTER I changed my philosophy while still in high school.

As for your last comments, since we're on opposite ends of the tent, you're a conservative Democrat?

cyberswede

(26,117 posts)
24. In 1969, I believed
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 06:00 PM
Jul 2015

...that babies were born wearing dresses or pants, and that's how their sex was determined.

 

villager

(26,001 posts)
27. Clearly you will be held to any and *all* utterances from decades ago! Except if you're a Clinton...
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 06:14 PM
Jul 2015

...and have moved to the right of your previous rhetoric, since then.

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)
32. Wow, he believed some stupid things... back before I was born.
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 06:35 PM
Jul 2015

I love the fact that the folks who don't want Bernie are trying to dig up scandals from 45 or so years back. Too bad HRC's scandals are far more recent.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Sanders: compulsory educa...