The problem isn’t that paranoid schizophrenics are disconnected from reality. In a post-Snowden world, where we now know that for a decade or more everyone has been followed – not for what they did, nor even might do, but simply, religiously, in their capacity as human beings in need of state and corporate oversight (God 2.0, I guess we could argue) – and, not only this being followed from a distance but also from up close, had their privacy savagely invaded, untold and violating times, so it is that equally we now know the men and women who said they were being tracked all these years were, actually, bang on the button.
Diagnostically speaking, then, the problem with paranoid schizophrenia as a condition – whether one’s intellectual positions lead one to see it as either mental ill-health or mental distress – isn’t that it doesn’t identify an area of human understanding which leads to daily dysfunctionality: I am not suggesting that. That people thus diagnosed are suffering and are often unhappy on a daily basis I do not reject.
My disagreement lies quite elsewhere.
For far more distractingly and inaccurately, its tools of medical comprehension lead society to judge that the so-diagnosed need medicines which may serve to stop them from seeing delusions.
Whereas in reality, such diagnoses, conclusions, labellings and medications are only really serving to hide from society the fact that the so-called paranoid schizophrenics see reality exactly as it has been all these years. And if you find this an intellectual triviality in the extreme, or – even worse – an academic idiocy, ask Edward Snowden to give you a better understanding of the networks that have been operating with the goal of subverting a proper functioning of democracy since as far back as the 1970s.
Yes. Paranoid schizophrenia does need assessing and treating: and its sufferers need considerable support. But the support they need is not one which politely informs them their battle is their need to be fighting their disconnect from truth.
The support they actually require is in working how to acquire the resilience to deal with a series of pretty goddamn evil networks of people, technologies, messages and ideologies (a concept which elsewhere I have previously abbreviated to PTMIs), designed long-term to shape society in ways that benefit their proponents.
From political parties to corporate players (and here I don’t only refer to what we understand as corporations) – and even charitable and media organisations which gather untold quantities of Big Data on their members and subscribers – they are all at it: predicting our potential futures by gleaning as much as they can from our current behaviours and digital footprints.
And in the meantime, leading the perceptions and accuracies of people like myself to be medicalised and diagnosed into conditions of unreality.
Treatment … why not? I’d love my life to be happier than it is. But treat us for getting it too right, not all wrong: give us – all! – the opportunities to use our natural and inborn perspicacities to good effect, instead of medically screwing us down on the chairs of alleged delusion.
As a research subject for the future – ie how to turn paranoid schizophrenia from a diagnosis of delusion to a condition where its sufferers are properly and far more rightly observed as exhibiting behaviours of a hyper-awareness of reality – I think I am utterly up for it.
Question is: will I find the necessary circle of trust which will allow me to develop the line of thought that will let me academically blow received medical – and security! – opinion out of the water?