Source: Bigstock

Founded by the proud eunuch John Gartner, Duty to Warn “is an association of mental health professionals and other concerned citizens who advocate Trump’s removal under the 25th Amendment on the grounds that he is psychologically unfit.” Signed by more than 60,000 “mental health professionals,” Gartner’s petition states:

We, the undersigned mental health professionals, believe in our professional judgment that Donald Trump manifests a serious mental illness that renders him psychologically incapable of competently discharging the duties of President of the United States. And we respectfully request he be removed from office, according to article 4 of the 25th amendment to the Constitution, which states that the president will be replaced if he is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.”

In addition to the cries of these yelping poodles, there is the bluestocking Bandy Lee’s The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President. Wise in their own conceit, the authors seek to advance the progressive agenda by means of pseudoscience. Their book, in Theodore Dalrymple’s words, is

so obviously partisan that only authors blinded by their own shining virtue and the self-evidence of the correctness of their own outlook could have imagined that they were writing anything but rants. Insofar as they correctly describe the public persona of Donald Trump, they do so in terms that would any reasonably intelligent and articulate 16-year-old with access to publicly available material might employ, and their vaunted psychological expertise adds nothing whatever. On the assumption that each of the authors has received 30 years of education and training, the book represents a very poor return on 910 years of instruction.

Dalrymple, himself a retired psychiatrist, quotes a biography that is representative of the contributors:

In a previous social justice career, she was a women’s specialist…. She also founded the People’s AIDS Project and was an assistant regional manager for Feeding America. She has directed agencies addressing food aid. Domestic violence, apartheid, low-income housing, and LGBTQ.

And he comments: “Without social injustice, she would hardly know what to do with her time. I am not sure that I would want to be impartially investigated by her.”

Indeed, it is a fair question whether the woman is capable of impartiality. Besides, as Dalrymple writes,

it is rational for a country to seek control of who comes into it; it is rational for a country to impose an economically advantageous tax regime; it is rational for a country to abandon administrative obstacles to progress. None of this means that any particular policy is indisputably the best: in complex situations, there is rarely any policy so excellent that it has nothing whatever to be said against it. But Mr. Trump’s policies, being rational despite his bizarre and distasteful pronouncements by Tweet, must be assessed according to normal political criteria and not as if they were mere emanations of psychopathology.

Unwittingly working in concert with globalist capitalist idolaters (many of whom think they are conservatives), the useful idiots who make up progressive academia are gradually turning America into a third-world country. We who oppose this vile endeavor should be especially wary of people who call themselves psychologists and psychiatrists. Many are pure products of rotten academia, and quite unaware of the destructiveness of their ideas. Moreover, from Nazi Germany to Communist China, doctors and “mental health professionals” have a long history of serving evil ends.

From the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders to the projects of Gartner, Lee, and the like blockheads, much of what purports to be scientific psychology is sheer quackery. The world’s great psychologists are the philosophers, poets, novelists, and religious sages. For the most part, what is called scientific psychology produces moral confusion while blinding us to our own agency and responsibility. The best case here is Dalrymple’s book Admirable Evasions: How Psychology Undermines Morality. With characteristic elegance, gravity, and wit, Dalrymple uses his analytical genius to construct an absolutely devastating takedown. Psychologists and psychiatrists emerge as hardly more credible than astrologers and alchemists.