In this article Bruce E. Levine writes:
Anti-authoritarians question whether an authority is a legitimate one before taking that authority seriously. Evaluating the legitimacy of authorities includes assessing whether or not authorities actually know what they are talking about, are honest, and care about those people who are respecting their authority. And when anti-authoritarians assess an authority to be illegitimate, they challenge and resist that authority—sometimes aggressively and sometimes passive-aggressively, sometimes wisely and sometimes not.
I’ve never thought of myself as an anti-authoritarian – looks like a label to me, and I dislke labels.
I also prefer pro- to anti-, and consider myself to be pro-responsibility.
Therefore I …
- question whether an authority is legitimate before taking that authority seriously
- assess whether or not authorities actually know what they are talking about, are honest, and respect people who are respecting their authority
- and when I assess an authority to be illegitimate, I challenge and resist that authority—sometimes calmly, sometimes aggressively, sometimes wisely and sometimes not.
Which has brought me a world of problems from mental health care authorities.
And, looking back over the past 25 years, I would have done the same, even if I knew what was going to happen and how I was going to be harmed by Authority for rejecting It.
Because …?
Because I have been giving myself who I am all the time, even if authoritarian harm caused progress to be glacial at times.
If I had chosen instead to be compliant? A “good patient”?
I think I would have been long dead.
And this, to me, is a misery wrapped in an enema: “Live free or die” in a context of mental health care.
Mental health care seems to require unquestioning compliance.
And …
Can unquestioning compliance be mentally healthy?
Can unquestioning compliance be mentally healthy?
BEYOND THE PALE 