Please click the following links
2. An appeal by Prof. Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi,
a most prominent epidemiologist speaking in English
2. Concluding Remarks on the International Network of Freud Critics (INFC)
At the end of 2003, the Canadian literature professor Robert Wilcocks, the French child psychologist Jacques Bénesteau and I, as a German psychiatrist and psychotherapist and GEP representative, agreed to create a three-part joint platform for the publication of current Freud critiques, in order to make it easier for the widely scattered critics to publish their critiques in their three languages. We shared the view of Sir Peter Medawar (Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1960): „Psychoanalytic theory is the most stupendous intellectual confidence trick of the twentieth century and a terminal product as well-something akin to a dinosaur or zeppelin in the history of ideas, a vast structure of radically unsound design and with no posterity“. However, the INFC did not get beyond the publication of a few weighty articles by prominent authors. Soon illness – Wilcocks has since died – and, as in the case of Bénesteau, political intrigue led to insurmountable difficulties. Soon this section of our website could no longer be maintained, and its German part, too, fell into neglect.
The previously lively communication between the internationally connected critics also broke down. However, this was no reason for the GEP to abandon the external framework of our website, especially since Freud criticism in the world has not died out. A number of other such objections have appeared in English and French, including Michel Onfray’s ANTI-FREUD (2011), in 2015 the German translation of E. Fuller Torrey’s FREUDIAN FRAUD: FREUDS BETRUG, in 2017 the new work by Frederick Crews FREUD along the same lines, and other books. No Freud criticism, however, even the most factual, has found resonance in Germany since ’45. It was certainly in time now that we could give expression to it on the GEP website for a while, the antidote and disillusionment against bogus science.
On the whole, however, we believe that things have quietened down now, even abroad. Through Freud and his disciples, who gave the 68 movement its momentum with the promise of „liberation“ and „health“, the old Marxism with all its deprivations and millions of cruelties largely disappeared from public view. On the other hand, the political content of neo-Marxism or Freudian Marxism, created by Trotsky, the cruellest of all Soviet revolutionists, came to the critical attention of many other people for the first time. It was Trotsky, being exiled in 1927 by Stalin, who started neo- or Freud-Marxism which has been propagated subsequently in the West crumbling Western proven values and traditions. We assess today’s „Red-Green thinking“ and the belief in man-made climate change in the general public, to be his heritage. It is widely spread over different parties in the general public, now, but it is not the answer to everything. The WEF billionaires around Schwab, Soros, Rockefeller etc. have good prospects to further enforce their communist-corporatist New World Order (NWO). Kept in fear by widespread Corona bluster, the population is still going along with them due to their endless propaganda. But there is growing resistance. Well-founded scientists contradict the green narrative. Fortunately, the future is not completely lost on them.
The principle of unilaterally recognised Freudian pseudoscience has been established in Germany in the 1970s with the “Psychiatrie-Enquête” obviously for political purposes. Freud never cured a single one of his famous show cases, from „Dora“ to the „Wolf Man“. The principle of impressing is now further applied in the political handling of the Corona problem. Scholars who don’t agree with the government are ostracised or even slated in Germany, just as Freud critics were handled for decades. The population is still bowing to the Corona politics as Germans like to obey their government. At the same time, however, scepticism is spreading against a system that, under the democratic label, uses its means against its citizens, from science-bending information to the use of brute state force. If, along with the GEP, the INFC ultimately contributed to this growing resistance, it was worth the effort.
Dr. med. Friedrich Weinberger, GEP 22.9.2021