EDITORrnThomas FlemingrnMANAGING EDITORrnTheodore PappasrnSENIOR EDITOR, BOOKSrnChilton Williamson, Jr.rnEDITORIAL ASSISTANTrnMichael WashburnrnART DIRECTORrnAnna Mycek-WodeckirnCONTRIBUTING EDITORSrnHarold O.J. Brown, Katherine Dalton,rnSamuel Francis, George Garrett,rnChristine Haynes, E. Christian Kopff,rnJ.O. Tate, Clyde WilsonrnCORRESPONDING EDITORSrnBill Kauffman, William Mills,rnJacob Neusner, John Shelton Reed,rnMomcilo SelicrnEDITORIAL SECRETARYrnLeann DobbsrnPUBLISHERrnAllan C. CarlsonrnPUBLICATION DIRECTORrnGuy C. ReffettrnPRODUCTION SECRETARYrnAnita CandyrnCIRCULATION MANAGERrnRochelle FrankrnA publication of The Rockford Institute.rnEditorial and Advertising Offices:rn934 North Main Street, Rockford, IL 61103.rnEditorial Phone: (815)964-5054.rnAdvertising Phone: (815)964-5811.rnSubscription Department: P.O. Box 800,rnMount Morris, IL 61054. Call 1-800-877-5459.rnEbr infonnation on advertising in Chronicles,rnplease call Rochelle Frank at (815) 964-5811.rnU.S.A. Newsstand Distribution by Eastern NewsrnDistributors, Inc., 1130 Cleveland Road,rnSandusky, OH 44870.rnCopyright © 1996 by The Rockford Instihite.rnAll rights reserved.rnChronicles (ISSN 0887-5731) is publishedrnmonthly for $39.00 per year by The RockfordrnInstitute, 934 North Main Street, Rockford,rnIL 61103-7061. Second-class postage paidrnat Rockford, IL and additional mailing offices.rnPOSTMASTER: Send address changes tornChronicles, P.O. Box 800, Mount Moms,rnIL 61054.rnThe views expressed in Chronicles are thernauthors’ alone and do not necessarily reflectrnthe views of The Rockford Institute or of itsrndirectors. Unsolicited manuscripts cannot bernreturned unless accompanied by a self-addressedrnstamped envelope.rnChroniclesrnVol.20, No. 5 May 1996rnPrinted in the United Slates of AmericarnPOLEMICS & EXCHANGESrnOn New JerseyrnIn your January issue, you published anrnarticle (“Our Platonic Guardians”) onrn”Justice” Wilentz of tfie New JerseyrnSupreme Court by a Hamilton Townshiprnattorney named Gregory J. Sullivan. Asrna lifelong resident of the Garden State,rnI can only reaffirm what he has written.rnAnd add: what this state needs is a constitutionalrnconvention. The 1947 document,rnpenned at the high noon ofrnoptimism with respect to centralizedrngovernment, is a blunt, heavy instrumentrnin the hands of such a man asrnWilentz.rn—VVi7/ MorriseyrnRumson, N]rnOn Thomas SzaszrnSalud to Chronicles for publishing IrvingrnLouis Horowitz’s January essay onrn”Thomas Szasz Against the Theorists.”rnHis critique of Szasz is one of the best Irnhave ever read.rnProfessor Horowitz should be assuredrnthat there are a few psychiatrists who fullyrnembrace Szasz’ concepts. Some of usrnhave been his converts and admirers forrnmany years. In my case it has been forrnmore than 30 years, when as a psychiatricrnresident at Northwestern UniversityrnMedical School, I first heard him speak.rnOthers, like Dr. Karl Menninger, thernworld-renowned psychiatrist, became arnconvert only later in life, but later is betterrnthan never.rnProfessor Horowitz mentions Szasz’rn”suffering of professional obliquity” andrn”loneliness.” I am sure that Dr. Szaszrndoes not need me and perhaps others torndecrease such “suffering” and “loneliness,”rnfor I am sure he neither suffers norrnis he lonely. Like any genius, he is justrnbusy with his work, and he presents itsrnresults regardless of what the masses,rnprofessional or otherwise, may think. Hernis in very good company with himself; inrnsocial situations, he is a very affable, civilizedrnperson.rnProfessor Horowitz covers the fundamentalrntenets of Szasz well. There are arnfew observations, however, that couldrnuse clarification. Among them is thernsuggestion that Szasz is in favor of thern”humanization of treatment” of thernso-called mentally ill. In fact. Dr. Szaszrnis neither in favor of nor against suchrntreatment. What he is against is therntreatment of adults against their will, regardlessrnof how humane the treatment isrnsaid to be. Further, since mental illnessesrnor devil possession of witches arernmyth, metaphors for biological entities,rnthey cannot exist as medical illnesses.rnTherefore, one cannot treat, humanelyrnor otherwise, a nonexistent illness.rnIt is possible that I have misinterpretedrnDr. Horowitz on this point. On thernother hand, he is exactly on target whenrnhe talks about the “Politics of Psychiatryrnand Ejthics of Psychiatry.” “The TherapeuticrnState” is precisely what Szasz is allrnabout.rn—Nelson Borelli, M.D.rnDepartment of PsychiatryrnNorthwestern UniversityrnChicago, ILrnOn the Cahfornia CivilrnRights InitiativernThe January “Cultural Revolutions” byrnMichael Washburn regarding the financialrnstruggles facing organizers of thernCalifornia Civil Rights Initiative, whichrnwould eliminate government-mandatedrnaffirmative action, shows the difficultyrnfacing grass-roots organizations. Since itsrninception, this initiative has been attackedrnby liberals who want to hang ontornthe affirmative action status quo andrnpaint their opponents and American societyrnas “racist.” I witnessed a scenario atrnCalifornia State University, Northridge,rnwhere a CCRI supporter debated liberalrnCalifornia Senator Diane Watson. Watsonrnclaimed reverse discrimination doesrnnot exist, and that if the backers of therninitiative really had public support, theyrnwould be able to raise more money.rnHer apparent ignorance of “racernnorming” and other governmentrnschemes to hire based on quotas is typicalrnof liberals (in both the Democraticrnand Republican parties) who fear the imminentrncollapse of affirmative actionrnmandates. The claim that only financialrnsupport implies public support shows thernnarrow focus of entrenched politicos.rn—Caroline MirandarnNorth Hollywood, CArn4/CHRONlCLESrnrnrn