THIS TEXT IS BUT A BEGINNING ...

 

III    Development of SPK-history

6.    The University’s Psychiatric Policlinic being a service of ruling science

During the last years the University's Psychiatric Policlinic Heidelberg had received a change of its tasks and of its getting along with work, the impulses of this change coming from some doctors there and was brought to an end by casting out of this department about 60 patients and their psychiatric and psychoanalytic doctor who treated them at those times, in February 1970 there were also about 180 more patients.*

* Note from January 24, 1995: In fact, it was about the following: expulsion of 180 patients and of their doctor, Dr.med. W.Huber, from the Psychiatric Polyclinic. Ban of entering the clinic and No-go zone (Bannmeile) for 180 patients, practically all of them treated by Huber. Around 60 patients heard of this coup during the weekend. The others still didn't know about the shock (the bad news). Rector Rendtorff had been informed by the patients about the impending disaster. Even today, he pretends to have learned about all of this only afterwards.

All doctors, as far as they were involved in this department until this moment, had experienced by their practice from day to day, that the traditional manner of working had become more and more insufficient, regarding the psychiatric mass alienation [Massenverelendung] permanently increasing and growing. The function of a policlinic like that mainly was and is still a such, which might be compared to a transship-place, to a distribution station for "sick-commodities", meanwhile tied to its secondary function as a place for education and as a stage of career for specialists. "Cases" which are too difficult to be resolved by common physicians and privatly practising specialists who, in spite of that, hesitate to put those patients behind bars of a "State Hospital" ("Heilanstalt", "HEIL-Anstalt", note Heil-Hitler-Anstalt), are transferred by those doctors to the Policlinic in order to be investigated and labelled and from there they are transferred once more to the wards in a psychiatric-bed-clinic [Hauptklinik] – or, because there is mostly a lack of beds for panel patients – those patients finally are yet transferred behind the named bars. Therapies are only done if the patients seem to be qualified enough to merit a treatment. The determination of the respective qualifications result from the doctor's interest regarding the purse or the "scientific" exploitability of illness in the patients. The choice criteria regarding a psychotherapy were orientated to the age of the patients and to their educational standard. This is even so to the extend, that patients who are over 35 years or who lack a matriculation are to be rejected. The Policlinic work therefore is in no way formed by the needs of the greatest possible number of ill people, but is orientated following the profit- and career-interests of the only few doctors and following the strictly hierarchic system of the so-called public health. This hostility against patients, far from being only confined to the Psychiatric Policlinic, is also a mark of the whole "health" apparatus starting from private physician to loony bin. In the Policlinic, being a selection-ramp (Selektionsrampe like for example at the concentration camp of Auschwitz) for the manifold institutions of this apparatus, inhumanity of capitalist System becomes focally exposed.

7.    The Policlinic as a service, treating ill people

This function of the Policlinic became significant for those who were willing for confrontation to this problem and who noticed the hostility against patients being involved into the researches of a Policlinic doctor and consisting in hurting what is the primary order for each physician and that is to say it is to do "primum nil nocere" ("primarily there is to be avoided any kind of impairing") (Note 19).

In the course of the struggle between the patients and the clinical establishment it became also quite clear that those, who were responsible were neither blind nor uninformed regarding the problems named above. But that they are quite on the contrary always well prepared and ready to sacrifice patients on the altar of their "science". And so we were able to take down, what the medical assistant director Blankenburg (Note 20), supported by the clinic director von Baeyer told the patients in February 1970 quite frankly: "Of course, science calls for its victims. If there is emerging a conflict between research and the treatment of illness there can be no question at all, that heads may well have to roll". "The heads of the patients in this case!" was what we replied, and each of both the clinic-lords showed, instead of an answer, only a cold smile.

The conflict between the top management of the clinic and some of its doctors who were no longer willing to obey to the patient-hostile dictatorship of their chiefs, but who had taken the needs of the ill people to the starting point of their therapy, this conflict was exploited by some "fellow-doctors" for their egoistic profit interests. Those psychiatric doctors who were on the side of the patients instead of being on the side of profit, were fired.

So the medical director of the Policlinic, Dr. Spazier, in May 1969 lost the possibility of habilitation, already promised to him. The medical assistant Dr. Rauch* who was also under the threat of measures of repression, could only be rescued by means of negotiations, done by Dr. Huber, who finally achieved that his colleague came under the protection of an infamous chief but nevertheless undoubtable chief of another clinic department, for the latter had been a Nazi-psychiatrist in researching the brains of children, killed by injections and gas.

* Additional note of 2019:

Not to be confused with Prof. Dr. med. Hans-Joachim Rauch, together with Carl Schneider, both acting from the Heidelberg University Psychiatry, responsible for the murder of children for the study of their brains in the context children’s euthanasia in the "Third Reich". Until 1978 head of the Department for Forensic Psychiatry of the University of Heidelberg .

Another was Dr. Pfisterer. The doctors Pfisterer and Rauch had been saved thanks to the negations conducted by Dr. Huber, with the result that they got a job in other departments of the clinic. Otherwise, they would have lost their jobs, which means that they would have remained involved in the open confrontation, in which they had taken up a position in favour of the patients and of Dr. Huber.

And Huber himself, second medical director and successor to Dr. Spazier, was fired last not least in February 1970, together with his hundreds of patients, not to forget the putting him under prohibition and off limits concerning the Policlinic in the Psychiatric Hospital at the University of Heidelberg where up to this moment he had also been engaged in philosophic research in psychiatry under the psychiatric assistant-director Prof. Tellenbach and with night-duty several times a week and of course very often on weekends – a measure of the clinic management, aiming to stop his political activities against capitalism and Righties at the University and elsewhere (taken from the first original manuscript by the translator).

The ruling relations do not provide for doctor and patient coming together to fulfil their task jointly, for quite on the contrary the relation between doctor and patient is determined by the distance and by a great deal of indirectness devised for the purpose of separating them from each other [Mittelbarkeit]. The doctor being accustomed to consider his patients only as a case, as nothing but a thing, has to learn to cease classifying the ill population and their forms of expression by diagnostics and labellings, and to grasp [begreifen] these expressions instead as being quite equal to that what they live as their reality, that's to say suffering under repression. To develop a proletarian consciousness as a principle and as a tool and instrument for a progressive therapy on a mass-scale this is only possible under the one condition, that the doctor as a person is willing to abolish his therapeutic leadership. Therefore he has to realize that the supposed subject doctor is an object of the ruling relations himself! The requisite know-how for a therapy, orientated to the needs of patients cannot be learned by a doctor neither during education, nor during conferences, seminars and congresses, but only in the daily struggle side by side with the patients and their reality, taking part in their misery and their repression. What is situated opposite to this reality is a – self-righteous – system, consisting of a petrified hierarchy in the form of public health for which the patient is forced to pay by social contributions being imposed.

Academical conferences with colleagues who know and treat the ill people only being labelled by diagnoses before, are by no means useful, make grow only the waiting list and the waiting time of the patients. And so Dr. Huber was fired under pretext to have sometimes directly refused to leave his patients and to let them wait instead of walking five or ten minutes to this kind of conferences, in the morning, which lasted sometimes only a few minutes, sometimes only a few hours, and the chiefs fishing for a pretext had also forgotten that Dr. Huber always had been well informed about all results of those conferences, if there ever had resulted anything, informed by other colleagues who had taken part and by telephone. For what actually was the cause had been his therapeutic work for and together with the patients, and this work had reached a level to constitute a critique by practice against the institutions of the health apparatus and its expropriation of illness.

In the hospitals of the University the public health involves, and if it were only by tendency, the possibility of becoming socialized in a progressive sense. This means also that for all doctors, being occupied there, exists the mere duty to offer those privileges to the population (from whom they are paid, last not least).

University hospitals enjoy certain privileges in which they differ from all common physicians and from hospitals which belong to a State or to a community:

  1. The doctors who work in a University don't depend directly on fee or on the health insurance certificate of the patients; they earn a salary, let it be small sometimes. The management and the equipment with all medical tools and instruments is provided by the hospital's government.

  2. The prescription is free and that means, that it is not controlled or restricted in any way by sick-fund or by some unit of panel-doctors. This "freedom of prescription" is caused and mediated by the research tasks in University hospitals: pharmaceutic research in order to ensure the profits of pharmaceutic industry which is favoured by means of the money of the patients.

8.    Organization by the patients themselves

Consequently the patients were not willing further more to get administrated worse than beasts transferred and fobbed off. They called for their right of therapy and they began to organize themselves. So the first patients' plenum in the history of medicine took place in the Psychiatric Policlinic at the University of Heidelberg on 5 February 1970. All patients who had come together there voted to demand the dismissal of the new director of the Policlinic, Dr. Kretz (Note 21), for the named doctor, since his coming there in October 1969 had ordered to abolish several therapeutic groups, especially those groups which had been formed by invalid and very old patients, most of them having moved from far away to Heidelberg in order to get help and protection in the Policlinic against being menaced day and night and again and again and finally forever by some "therapeutic" imprisonment, provided for them by other doctors. Furthermore, as regards the few doctors who quite in contrast to Dr. Kretz really worked in the Policlinic, Dr. Kretz started substituting them one by one by his own "team", especially Dr. Huber he substituted at last. The patients of the latter one meanwhile had done day after day and during several weeks statistic investigations in the waiting room of the Policlinic unnoticed by the new director, and from those investigations resulted that Dr. Huber in the average worked together with 12 patients, while Dr. Kretz, being most time absent, cared for nothing but sometimes for only 1 patient. Furthermore the patients resolved to found committees in order to give a constitution to the Policlinic due to satisfy their needs. In the entrance-hall there was attached an information board on the wall with informations from and about the patients, but only a few days later the new boss, Dr. Kretz, who happened to pass by, run an assault against this board, tore it down while hurting a sick woman who was occupied in reading the patients'-informations and who bursted out into a crying fit.

For the hospital government the patients who had begun to emancipate and to organize themselves were not to be tolerated furthermore. Those patients who had finished to be handy for each purpose had become quite useless for "science". Once more the patients had organized a teach-in, which took place in the auditory of the University's Psychiatric Hospital and there took part amongst some hundreds of people, including newspapers, broadcast and television, also the medical director of the University's Hospital Prof.Dr. Walter Ritter von  Baeyer, Prof. Braeutigam (Note 22) and also medical assistant directors and scientific assistant doctors like Dr. Huber, and this was the teach-in on which some hundred persons out of the ill population called once more for the taking back of the dismissal against Dr. Huber and for the resignment of Dr. Kretz. Only half a day later there followed the cast-out of Dr. Huber combined by the off-limits, mentioned before.

After having occupied the office-rooms of the management director of the University's Hospitals in Heidelberg by hungerstrike, which lasted 1 1/2 day – and it were the patients and Dr. Huber who together made this hungerstrike –, the rector of the University, Prof. Rendtorff felt obliged to provide means and measures in order to enable the continuation of the therapy and the self-organization of the patients: rooms in the University, money and unrestricted prescripture, necessary yet to be forwarded regularly. In that consisted the so-called compromise which happened on 28 February 1970 and to achieve this compromise there have taken part leading members of the Faculty of Medicine (the Deans Schnyder and Quadbeck) (Note 23), the Psychiatric Director von Baeyer and also students of the project-group medicine. This compromise had been done between the patients and Rendtorff, Rector of the University of Heidelberg. From the beginning Dr. Huber had refused to recognize this compromise. But he declared, face by face only to the patients, to continue his working together only with them, excluding explicitly any collaboration with somebody else.

By this act, which involved for the patients and also for Dr. Huber the having become an autonomous work-group with own rooms in the University, there had been achieved that the whole University, represented by the University's Rector, had affirmed that the Faculty of Medicine in totality was an incompetent one. But nevertheless also the University in totality had shipwrecked from the beginning in fulfilling the compromise:

  1. the working-rooms being unused since half a year and this nevertheless by subvention of the taxpayers, firstly had to be done up from ground to top and there was nobody to care about, except the patients themselves.

  2. The free prescription which also had been assured by compromise-contract was sabotaged by the Psychiatric Director von Baeyer and by his assistant medical director Oesterreich in a criminal way (Oesterreich: "Nobody can be willing to allow Huber to prescribe medicaments, for we have to assume that Huber might prescribe dynamite!"): some patients went to von Baeyer and tried to speak with him about how to resolve the problem of prescription. But this Psychiatric Director ordered instead of free prescription policemen who casted the patients by violence out of the University's Psychiatric Hospital and later on, like Dr. Huber before, they were also banned from entering the Psychiatric Hospital campus all around. Assistant medical director Oesterreich continued the common strategy by ordering a prescription-blockade to all chemists' shops and pharmacies of Heidelberg and there followed that all patients were also rejected in each chemist's shop if they presented a prescription with the signature of Dr. Huber. One of the patients, invalid from the last war, also rejected by a pharmacist, achieved the latter pharmacist to call up Dr. Oesterreich, in order to ask what to do, because his case was even obviously for the pharmacist very urgent. But the assistant medical director Oesterreich, looking down to the patient and to the pharmacist, did nothing else except recommending the pharmacist to transfer the invalid one to the juridical prorector of the University, Prof. Podlech (it is of some interest in this context to note that the psychiatric doctor Oesterreich at those times was preparing a scientific piece for his habilitation about war-invalids and senile people). The same patient who was very heavily damaged yet had had to suffer another injury by Dr. Oesterreich, the latter addressing Dr. Huber in the mentioned teach-in: "This illness is only the result of your work, Mr. Dr. Huber".

  3. From March to July the University's Rector never paid a penny of the lump-sum which he had assured by contract to the patients. Quite on the contrary he did not cease to menace the patients by the blockade of telephone and by requesting them to leave their ("his") University's work-rooms. More and more it became clear for the patients that the University's top management beside all contract, compromise and negociation secretly had resolved to catapult out the patients' collective until 30 September, even by force and violence, be it necessary or not, but to make an example for all coming times. To achieve their purpose they turned again to Dr. Huber requesting him to signify that after the 30 September none of the patients should need qualified therapy any longer. The Rector and his management, a pressure group now, also used the means of a hunger-blockade against the patients' self-organization: they refused to pay the money promised to the patients by compromise-contract. Well, it got also quite clear for all patients that the named "compromise" had been nothing but a measure of dictatorship directed against the self-organization; that the treatment of ill people by compromise unmasked itself as a further step of the annihilation-strategy directed against the patients.

9.    The Socialist Patients’ Collective

Meanwhile the patients had struggled for four months against repression, starving-out, both permanently inflicted on them by the University's Rectorship, it finally was too much for them. On 6 July 1970 they occupied the University's office of the headmaster Rendtorff.

The challenges and demands of the Socialist Patients' Collective, directed to the headmaster of the University, were:

  1. Control of all treatment of patients by patients themselves; abolition of all foreign determination as it is exercised in the health sector by industry and army etc.

  2. The domiciliary authority in the hospitals has to be controlled by the patients.

  3. Money, which circulates in the hospitals has to be transferred to the organized patients. Instantly as a first step money has to be turned round to the common University's cash-box.

First measure to fulfil these demands is:

  1. Leaving a house to the patients unlimited and free, in which they are protected against all attacks of persons who don't belong to them. There have to be at least 10 rooms in this house. All instruments as far as necessary for the patients and all current costs are to be provided by the University. Two persons, able to fulfil medical functions [Traeger aerztlicher Funktionen] getting around with illness in the patients' collective are to be paid by the University. Also the financial means for clerk work and activities in case-working are to be provided.

  2. One house more with at least 10 rooms has to be left to the patients instantly, unlimited and free of charge, destined to those patients who are, caused by the ruling repression, in danger in a specific manner and this demand is a necessary one in order to protect those patients against more damages, rising from the established psychiatry, its mere existence being a permanent menace against those patients.

  3. Until the new rooms can be used, the SOCIALIST PATIENTS’ COLLECTIVE remains where it is until now, that is in the Rohrbacherstraße 12.

All the costs which came together until March, prospectively up to our moving into the new rooms are to be paid by the University – less the costs yet paid by the University resulting from the compromise-contract. All outstanding debts are to be transferred instantly (Note 24). As the patients are the respective producers they require now the power of control and disposal over the means of production, they require all material and basic starting-points [die materiellen Voraussetzungen] which are necessary to turn this University of capitalism into a university of the people. This demand was for the rest in congruence to the constitution of this University for in § 2 of this constitution the University is defined as a place, in which there has to be produced "science for the human beings" ["Wissenschaft fuer den Menschen"]. As first step to fulfil a wide program like that the patients also required to institute the SPK at the University by law and to provide rooms in the University being apt to this purpose and respectively all other means being necessary for the patients' self-organization.

On 9 July 1970 the management council [Verwaltungsrat] of the University decided to institute the SPK as a part of the University and ordered three well-reputed scientists to make a report about the work and the function of SPK (Note 25). These scientists voted in favour of the SPK as to become an institution of the University.

Until to this moment, the defamation of the patients and the causation of discord (incitement of the public) against the patients and their relatives was mainly done by the Faculty of Medicine (Assistant Dean Dr. Kretz) and the Fachgruppe (study group) Psychiatry / Psychosomatics (acting head Dr. Kretz) by means of press releases to the print media and radio stations. The latter also published every kind of letter to the editor and every public correspondence of these doctors as desired by them. But now the defaming and the causing discord against the patients and their relatives were followed, strengthened and reinforced by publications of the Ministry of Culture (Ministry of Education and the Arts) of the government of the state of Baden-Wuerttemberg. These christian righties (CDU) did it in the same style and manner quite comparable to the mostly social democratic doctors and the leaders of the University and every kind of formerly dissent between those members of those two opposite political parties disappeared as if it had never existed, since the instigation against the patients became a common enterprise for those doctors of the Faculty of Medicine and for the ministers of government, facing a short victory of the patients' group, resulting from their having occupied the University for more than a week and favoured by the decision of the University's council who couldn't but decide in that way, regarding the three reports with their good result for the patients. This in spite of Prof. Dr. Wilhelm Hahn of the Ministry of Culture of Baden-Wuerttemberg who joined now the enemies of the patients, supporting their campaign in press and broadcasting by all means of his governing party CDU (Christian democratic underground, as the patients called it, CDU = Christlich Demokratische Union). For them the reactionary press of the bourgeoisie was diligently open every time for all inciting pamphlets of those who usurped quite arrogantly competence in the name and instead of the patients, meanwhile the same so-called free press refused to accept any kind of publication if it was done by the patients themselves (corrections, declarations and so on) except those which the press editors themselves had tried to rewrite either adding them up to mere nonsense or to shorten and to abbreviate them to common places, thus preventing them from taking effect.

On 20 July 1970 the Minister of Culture of Baden-Wuerttemberg published by press and broadcast that the decision of the University's top-management (to which he belonged himself, see before) was in his opinion "in the highest measure a criminal one" and he added in his speech by broadcast, that all patients of the SPK "urgently have to be submitted to that kind of treatment, which they have deserved and which they need bitterly" ["schleunigst der Behandlung zugefuehrt werden, die sie verdienen und die sie dringend noetig haben"] and finally he prohibited by his decree of 18 September 1970 against the University to realize and execute the decision of its management council, the yet named decision which favoured the patients. All those instigation tirades from the doctors, favoured and supposed by the Minister of Culture, were also able to influence the work of the patients: on the one hand they made quite clear the enmity by all medical and academical institutions against patients; on the other hand the patients, who worked in the SPK also had to suffer from the reproaches at their homes and families and at their jobs, reproaches of bosses, wives and husbands or children who now believed to realize what SPK actually was, raising from the doctors' and from the politicians' hate and enmity against SPK as published by press and broadcast. Sometimes those family-members and those bosses were successful against one or the other of the patients who then dared no longer to join the SPK which those bosses and family-members knew only by press, resulting in more repression against those patients aiming to intern them, thereby the bosses in family and job tried to regain their secretly or openly expressed most comfortable way of life. But the patients, in misery, were suffering the risk of death permanently before their eyes, being poisoned and tortured by forced treatment in a hospital, especially under the label to be a risk of security everywhere, imposed to them by press and broadcast, invented and cast against them by doctors.

This experience shows in a manner, which you can grasp by hands what is the connection between the bourgeois consciousness, that is the so-called good human common sense and between the reason of capitalism and his efficiency.

10.    The eviction sentence and the Senate’s order

Another attempt to annihilate the SPK was the eviction sentence against the patients (technically against Dr. Huber) on 4 November 1970. On 9 November 1970 the Minister of Culture Hahn declared directly (with the eviction sentence in his pocket) that the patients of the SPK were "a wild growing, which was no longer to be beared and has to be weeded out as soon as possible by all means being at hand".

Just in the same evening of this day, Rendtorff, the top master of the University, bound himself by a written document to the SPK to withdraw the eviction action which had been initiated by the University automatically and by the ministerial decree of the Ministry of Culture of 18 September 1970 as well, on which this action was based, and to prepare steps against the attacks from the Ministry of Culture by challenging it before the administrative court, and further Rendtorff declared by his signature that he was willing to refer the question of the formal establishing of the SPK as an independent institution of the University to the Senate of the University by calling on his three experts, Richter, Brueckner and Spazier.

But the first step of this University's Rector, after having done his declaration, was that he turned to the Senate of which he was the president, and caused the senate to make his signature invalid (putting himself under tutelage). Therefore, the patients turned to the administrative court and applied for an interim disjunction against the pogrom-incitement of the Minister of Culture Hahn and they also filed a suit against the decree of the 18 November 1970, by both means appealing to fundamental rights, especially on the right of every person of remaining unhurt and the right of freedom of research and education. But the court achieved to delay this complaint until to January 1972 and then rejected it, combined with the order that it were the patients who had to pay all costs.

Finally on 24 November 1970 in a secret assembly to which the experts named above were not invited, but instead of them Prof.Dr. Dr. Heinz Häfner, expert in money-making by exploiting the ill population, the Senate resolved, based on the request of the Faculty of Medicine (Schnyder, Kretz) "that the SPK was not to be established as an institution at and by the University". This resolution, put in the hands of the Dean of the Faculty of Law, a former Nazi named Prof.Dr. Leferenz, and instigated by the members of the Faculty of Natural and Mathematical Sciences, was to be executed by the chancellor of the University "as an act of management to which had to serve also the executive forces of the State", and all this as urgent as possible. Nevertheless Dr. Huber, believing evidently, if not in delusion, in the signature of the theologist Rendtorff, had submitted an appeal by means of his lawyer against the eviction sentence which was in force and could be executed since the 4 November 1970. On 13 May 1971 there came another eviction sentence executable at once and at any time against the patients (resp. against Dr. Huber). And the court, appealed for protection against the execution of this sentence (stay of execution), not even took notice of this petition aiming at the mere survival of the patients.

11.    The eviction

And as a matter of fact, as we may conclude from above, the eviction took place on 24, 25 and 26 June 1971, combined with a sudden and arbitrary detention of SPK-patients, subjecting them to examination, applying violence against bodies, search of their domiciles (without any permission of a judge, of course), menace and taking hostages (Note 26) during an armed operation. This military action, performed by police, supported by helicopters, police-dogs, submachine guns and several hundreds of police officials, some of them in uniform, others disguised, came to performance in the context of ideas and constructions prepared by the persecutors and the police in a manner which is called in psychopathology of systematized delusions "fishing for self-invented relations" [Beziehungssetzung ohne Anlass], one of the best applied methods of doctors in psychiatry, used day and night against patients in order to get them prepared for forced therapy by means of labelling them in a manner which noboby else can give any effect or credibility as a proof unless he is a psychiatrist among other psychiatrists. And this construct was tied to – in order to gain be it only the chance of credibility – the shooting out caused by the police on 24 June 1971 and two until now unknown persons parking in the street in front of a pub in a little village, an event, which had taken place about half a mile near the house in which Dr. Huber was living, ready round the clock to be visited by all SPK-patients who wanted to see him.

All of about a dozen patients who were detained in those days got free again within about 48 hours except of two more patients. Against those two SPK-patients, who were forced to remain in prison there were finally bungled two warrants of arrest, which were based on the suspicion that they could be taken for being members of a criminal conspiracy. All demands to visit them (even if they were asked by husbands, for the time being) were refused by the judges who took every request for a visit permission for the clear proof, that the demanding person also belonged to the "criminal" SPK. The persecutors and the judges also refused until nowadays even to read a medical report in which was exposed the urgent necessity for about 40 patients more of the SPK to get visit permissions, 40 patients, who had worked together in personal and group agitation with the two SPK members and who needed very urgently to continue the proceeding of this relation, which had worked as a very efficient therapy for them until now, quite as it was usual for newcomers in the SPK.

And just one day before the announced eviction of the SPK rooms, prospected by the judges who had worked out this eviction order, on 21 July 1971 in the early morning another assault took place, performed by several hundreds of policemen who rushed up with submachine guns and dogs against the SPK work-rooms which we had strategically left one week before on 13 July while spreading messages to press, broadcast and television and also to every kind of administration, announcing that the SPK-rooms as work-rooms for the patients since that time were closed for everybody, because the danger to the patients, starting from terror and violence executed by the police, instigated by the doctors and supported by the government, had reached a level which was outside of every responsibility and no longer compatible regarding the security of any patient who ever had been in any way connected to the SPK and be it only by suspicion of somebody else ready for denunciation. Meantime 10 dwellings of patients were searched by the police once more, most of them not for the first and not for the last time, casted again and again in chaos and disorder. Nine more SPK-patients came into prison, each of them in another prison, each prison far away from another one and from one end to the other of the state of Baden-Wuerttemberg, and inside each prison every SPK-patient was strictly isolated from all the other imprisoned inmates but therefore always and permanently exposed to police examination, medical interrogation and every kind of nasty trick and repression. And also the persecutors had made, that 9 of the 11 prisoners had lost their lawyers: a lawyer of the imprisoned SPK-patients was taken for guilty to have favoured his clients, disregarding that against those clients until this moment didn't exist any charge at all. The lawyer was rejected by prohibition every time if he tried to enter the prison in which was one of the SPK members or if he tried to establish a contact to them in any other way. The proceedings of the persecutors were totally determined by their fear, being confronted with extraordinary prisoners, although the prisoners were kept in distance behind strong walls. This prohibition of defence was practised permanently and in every case of SPK during one month .

Until to the moment in which this book appeared 9 of the 11 patients got free, all of them on conditions, some by bail. Quite significant the two SPK members wanted for ring-leaders from the beginning of SPK are yet in prison, the two Dr. Huber, physician and physiologist and mother of three children the wife, physician in research and psychiatrist Dr. Huber himself (Note 27).

12.    The dominant illegality, the lack of rights, and the patients

Dropped out concerning all civil rights, patients which we are, all power we got consists only in this mere fact. All civil society consists basically of the connection between possession and law, for being a person means nothing but the right to dispose of the things you possess. The only possession of which the workman disposes is his capacity of work.

As ill persons those ones are defined by the Public Health who are incapable to dispose of the capacity to work, which is a commodity, whether for some time or forever. Having lost their commodity of working capacity (labour force) they also lose all their rights, which they had as possessors of an average commodity of workcapacity in the former time, be it only in a formal manner, and in any case all their rights are of no use for them, because they are practically suspended. The persons who have lost their ultimate possession – the commodity capacity of work (labour force) – have ceased to be "within their rights" ["Rechtssubjekte"]. But from this it follows that, if the right is used against us, and this is in fact through every time, this right doesn't concern persons but meets only outlaws! This right has only to do with ruins of human beings [Menschenwracks] who in a common sense possess no kind of power, even not about themselves, much less about others. But a right against somebody who is out of the right [gegen Rechtlose] is an absurdity [Un-Ding], is an illegality [Un-Recht] which we are in no way allowed to observe, for it isn't made for us at all.

To deprive us of the rooms being necessary for the self-organization, to deprive us of all tools and instruments, to take away from us the financial crutch and last not least to deprive us of our lives in our eyes can represent nothing but the challenge for self-defence. And because the deprivation of means of production and the destruction of life concerns everyone who possesses nothing but the commodity of labour force, all those who are expropriated can only realize their right for life in a practical manner by means of self-defence in collectivity.

Only as persons being subjected to the criminal law, as those we are gaining relevance in rights. Our "rehabilitation" consists exactly in having passed from the status of patients to the status of convicts resp. to the status of prisoners on remand, and from the status of having no rights we objectively have passed to the status of being relevant within the existing system of rights.

Fortunately, the violent criminals of the University never did enter in a struggle of competition to contest the privilege of the patients to have no rights. Quite on the contrary. Rector Rendtorff and his appendage persistently reminded the patients again and again of their status of rightlessness, in which the Rector and his appendage saw not only their legitimation for the use of weapons against the ill people, but also an eyesore. However, as to the fact that the patients belong to the University and that they are a part of it, there can be no doubt in any case. If this were not the case, what on earth would become of the clinic directors and their income of millions and their being as fond as possible to remain what they are, and what would become of those who aspire to succeed them, both not stopping at nothing and walking over the dead bodies of the patients?

The law, as protecting only the interests of capitalism, for the patients is just the same law, no matter whether before or after the becoming effective of the new University's constitution [Grundordnung], the University's law [Hochschulgesetz] in Heidelberg. In so far as they are patients they are not allowed to ask for anything. Everybody knows – and in that consists also the being proud in every kind of democracy – that in the eye of the law all persons should be equal. This means for example, that everybody and indeed everybody in the frame of formal right is allowed to take liberty of acting out themselves as does, let’s say Mr. Axel Springer (german newspaper-king of the righties, the so-called Zeitungszar); for concerning the laws they must obey there has to be no difference between Mr. Nobody and Mr. Springer. But the reality is quite another one. Certainly not everybody is allowed to incite the people to hatred, as does Mr. Axel Springer to the best of his ability, regardless of the fact that by law of the free-democratic state under the rule of law everybody is turned into an Axel Springer, whether he wants or not, though only potentially. For in reality all Nobodys remain mere objects of those Axel Springer as long as they live. Or take the right of "freedom of education and research"; also a right for everybody. Even some students occasionally could make use of it, if they could pay the costs. But meanwhile, as everybody knows, this right only can be used by the liga of professors "League of Scientific Freedom" ["Bund Freiheit der Wissenschaft", an association of reactionary professors and intellectuals, some of them known for their Nazi past], directed against the mass of all other persons who are interested and involved in this context.

Quite evident: everybody and be it only formally is situated within the laws. This is not so for patients. Neither at the University nor somewhere else they have got a right on treatment. Quite on the contrary, in some cases they are subject to the violence of being treated by force (vaccination, check up in a health center etc.), without any possibility constituted by a law to exercise any influence on the contents, circumstances and so on. Everybody suddenly can fall into illness, all are patients by possibility; you easily can realize that, if you cast a glance on the social security taxes, you are obliged to pay.

This free-democratic State based on the rule of law [Rechtsstaat], the necessity of which the capitalist management again and again tries to justify by the argument that each person as a such one needs it for his protection as bitterly as nothing else – in fact doesn't provide any protection for those who are forced to sustain it. From a State, that answers the claims of those who need protection by means of laws against them, if, nevertheless, they dare to express their claims, from a State that reacts in such a way against those whom it alleges to protect, from such a State you need to be on your guard!

On the rightlessness of the patients as it became manifest for the SPK in a concrete manner:

  1. Who is ill has as of right no business being in the University's clinic. Those people, in the same way as somewhere else are at best nothing but tolerated there. And even that only by restriction and only on the condition that they don’t cause any trouble to their expropriators and profiteers and only so far, as they are willing and even yet grateful to bear all what the profiteers will do to them and what seems to be useful for the purposes and the plans of the expropriators.

  2. For the medical men in the University applies, that they are allowed by their chiefs in the University's management to kick the patients out of the clinic. This valorization of "sick commodities" and other waste products is, concerning the law in this State, completely correct.

  3. The University's rector is allowed to kick the doctor out of the University. If this is requested by other medical men who have kicked patients out of the clinic, it does not diminish the Rector’s legal standpoint.

  4. If the doctor brings an action against his dismissal before the Administrative Court claiming for that, what is guaranteed to him by the constitution, the viewpoints above 1), 2) and 3) shall not be affected.

  5. If patients bring an action before the Administrative Court claiming for that what is guaranteed to them by the Constitution in order to protect them against the assaults against their lives and physical safety, the viewpoints above 1), 2) and 3), of course, shall not be affected as well.

But in spite of the fact that the juridical situation was all clear, the governmental administration (Ministry of Culture) was compelled to file one more action of eviction via the Rectorate: The patients, after having been kicked out of the University, had successfully struggled to gain the domiciliary authority for other rooms in the University. In order to break the resistance of the patients, the responsible managers around the Rector resorted to a private property lawsuit for eviction, which was formally only directed against Dr. Huber, who had never been willing to accept those University's rooms as his civil property. In this behaviour of the University's top-management you can realize the accumulated lot of cowardice that they are not willing to present their odd means to the eye of public; certainly the causes are for sure not psychologic ones. Because the expropriated population
– who is insulted by those means, the ill people of course – could not do anything but shake their heads. May be some of them would lose their inhibitions and then ask themselves: "That’s all of it, nothing more to our rights than that?" – "Whose right is that anyway? To whom belongs this right at all?... To whom is it useful, this, our right?" and at last: "How can we protect ourselves in the most effective way against such a right?"

Everybody knows that there is governed permanently against the people. But the class struggle of all ill people yet has begun. That the political power of the reactionary class has to hide itself behind the mask of a private property lawsuit for eviction, that is a fact in which those circumstances find their nevertheless true expression, be it only in a transitory manner. The proletarian dictatorship aims to get away all capitalist relations of production and at the abolition of all deformation, stunting and crippling performed against human beings. This proletarian dictatorship therefore aims at things that are of public interest. And what this public interest needs least of all are the legal titles of the reactionary class. But all available means of self-defence are urgently needed. The kind of those means of self-defence is determined by the violence potentials of the enemies including all its gaps and breaches.

Concerning the University: There is no need of any special effort to outline now quite clear the form of the conflict:

More and more politically conscious patients have organized themselves in the SPK in order to direct the University towards its most elementary purpose, the content of which are the interests of the population, of proletarian people, determined by illness [unter der Bestimmung Krankheit], what means to do science now: make, that nature and science should work for everybody. This attempt represents a breach of law in a double sense: firstly, because following the University's constitution and University's law exactly patients have no business being in University.

Secondly, because the Ministry of Culture as supervisory authority has to take care that scientific efforts that want to put science and nature at the service of everybody are to be stopped in any case of emergency, and this emergency has obviously happened in its point of view, observable by the withdrawing of money and rooms.

Therefore in every case the University was obliged to deploy an action of bailiffery and of police against the demands of the patients – which could be as well founded as possible – realizing University's autonomy, of course. There was provided in University's law and in University's constitution that patients, regardless of their notorious status of being out of law, existing anyhow, less than ever had anything to demand from the University. Imagine if you can! – the Minister of Culture should have called for establishing the SPK instead of the removal, the University's rector would have been obliged, may be against his will and with bleeding heart, to take juridical action against the Minister of Culture because of the law, which calls for University's autonomy. For the University is obliged by right and law to defend its autonomy against the population, especially if it is a population under the determination of illness. Thanks to the eviction-notice this sidereal hour passed by without having noticed us, for the University's rector was on his guard and never sent a self-denunciation to the court because of having abused University for the good purpose, to get better living conditions for all by means of University or to intend something like this. Shall the University serve the mob? For heaven's sake! It’s exactly the other way round: the mob is welcome, if it serves the economy, and if it submits itself to the natural violence of the State machinery which acts quite charitably by pistols, cudgels, by drug-poisons and electroshocks! This way of problem-solving, the way of the expropriators, pure extract (quintessence) of all their laws, simply is made in a generally accepted way and is generally applicable.

The situation is a bad one, having developed from the survival-struggle of the patients, which thanks to the violence – apparently coming to light – applied against the patients by medicine, University's management, State government and law made it possible to unmask a quite absurd system because of the "fortunate" coming together of all those power-components, against which everyone needs to preserve and to protect himself using every kind of means being at hands. There exists a highly organized society with all possibilities of which this unit can dispose. And on the other hand and opposite to this social unit there exists a structure of violence, outdated by history, a violence which has the appearance of right at its side.

This false appearance is of essential importance for the violence so that violence can easily be confused with "nature" and applied against everybody in a reckless manner. Therefore violence takes the mask of right and justice, namely the mask of a right and of a justice, which this violence itself has created, being based only on its efficiency. Revolutionary violence quite on the contrary is useful only if it serves to protect those who apply it. Revolutionary violence is applied by a human being, while reactionary violence stands behind an only so-called right. Right and violence don't originate from the heads of human beings, but they originate from capitalist relations of production. Revolutionary violence in contrary originates from suffering which has turned into consciousness and which now takes the same place which was formerly occupied by a crippling, patiently suffering because of being excluded from consciousness, but now being turned into relations, knowledge and tools, useful to protect its owner and useful to pull forward the necessary evolution of collective practice.

What is right in the capitalist system is only that, what fills the abyss between population and University with the dead corpses of those ones who, without a clear consciousness, did express their passive resistance against capitalist labour, the University being unable to get them repaired, but instead to get them ready and adapted to be killed and overkilled in the one or the other kind of capitalist final solution (kapitalistische Endloesung; not long ago Auschwitz-gas chambers e.g.).

In the SPK's history the ruling right being violence by form and structure one could realize as follows: in order to destroy the self-organization of the patients mainly the managers of the health-system brought into action against the sick persons the following compulsive acts and violences using and abusing their juridically masked rule of grammar (rule of speech): "Dismissal without notice and off limits concerning the scientific assistant Dr. Huber as an official and as a member of the clinic" until now:

  1. Deception and exploitation of the patients regardless of their being human ruins without any right in the view of their enemies, based on capitalist forms of production by means of a "free" private doctor’s practice with its possibilities of common profit-maximation useful only for the involved physician, meantime depriving the patients of all the advantages they had gained and defended by their struggle in the privileged Policlinic such as: unconstrained prescription, no forced liquidation, use or refusal of modern medical methods by all patients (e.g. X-rays, electrical diagnostics of brain as electro-encephalograms, laboratory methods and so on); all these advantages being now again off limits for the patients by means of the just mentioned pseudo-juridical formula concerning Dr. Huber; and instead of all these advantages now the "offer" of a "free" private medical practice, which, in order to make it more attractive – according to the suggestions of Rector Rendtorff – should be controlled by a "Kuratorium" (board) composed of University’s members, that is some kind of club which, for the rest never had come together to constitute itself, a "curatorium" which is even as a juridical matter of fact a complete nonsense, for being in no way provided for in the basic law of the University.
    From all the beginning University's bureaucracy aimed at the marginalization of the self-organization of the patients forcing it out of the University as a disturbing factor in order to expose and to deliver it directly to the executive violences of the Public Health Department (health-police), guardianship-courts and to every kind of policemen. All these measures of University's bureaucracy being seconded by diffamation campaigns of the practising neurologists, which, on the one hand, aimed at instigating the Public Health Department to make some more attacks against the SPK and, on the other hand, aimed at snatching single patients in order to get them again under their "private" power of control.
    Dismissal without notice and ban on entering the house therefore aimed at creating a situation against the patients, in which there remained for them only the two possibilities, either to become crushed by the millstones of a "free" private medical practice or by those ones of the University's Psychiatry showing the same crush and the same bruise from both of the millstones.

  2. By the sudden breaking off of the empoisoning treatment with psychotropic drugs, unobjectionable only with regard to the ruling relations, the most important entrance-doors were widely opened to death, for since most ancient times blood-circulation and respirating functions are commonly taken for the "atria mortis" (entrance-doors for death) and they are defined as such ones; and the sudden withdrawal of medicaments is always closely related to the danger of a so-called withdrawal-delirium, being menaced by death in the form of a break-down of circulation and respiration (Note 28).

  3. von Baeyer, Haefner etc., who set themselves up as judges about the criminals of physicians during the Nazi-regime (Note 29) handled "those past times" in such a way, that they hurried up the most sick and war-damaged patients, who had asked them for medicaments, prescribed by Dr. Huber, from institution to office and from office to institution, exposing those patients by this to bodily most dangerous strain.

  4. Starving out (March until July 1970 and December 1970 until July 1971 the necessary money was withheld from the patients) and for years (1970 till 1971) permanently repeated menace of forced lock out (Note 30)

  5. Suicide = murder: Internal bleeding to death by crash from the top of a tower (Note 31), the more "humane" murder by poisoning with pills being blocked by the situation created from the enemy's side.
    Thursday before Easter (Holy Thursday) in the year 1971 in a forest near Heidelberg there was found the dead body of a female SPK-patient on the pedestal of a tower. From the autopsy resulted: death by internal bleeding out. From the police-report resulted, that there had been distributed on the scene of crime quite a lot of pills, nevertheless neither the post-mortem examination nor special forensic examinations could achieve to approve be it only the vestige of using pills. And from that it became quite clear therefore, that the pills by the now dead female SPK-patient had not been taken, but quite on the contrary rejected before dying. The labour force, which is a commodity (K. Marx), that had ceased to be sold, had been brought to an end by being shattered.
    (The criminal investigation department had taken down at the end of their report as a conclusion, that the death of the girl never and in no way could have been caused by any other person else).

  6. The organized patients had to suffer heaviest loads caused by encroachments from enemy's side as there were open terror, defamation against patients, police-spies, threat of murder, supported by secret as well as powerful forces (Note 32) – the police almost didn't care about a threat of murder against the main carrier of medical functions in the SPK (Dr. Huber), which the parents of a SPK-patient, who were namely known to the police, casted by telephone or by letters, murder threats which, surprisingly and unusually, in the eyes of the police were not even worthy to be registered in their "files", for none of the lawyers later on could only find a trace of them in those "files". And the same happened with those documents of Ministries, of corrupt medical men and so on, which had served to prepare the here mentioned murder-menace and defamatory campaigns.

Doing a summary based on the analysis of the power interaction in this context there results and there remains the following:

There is nothing else behind the facade of our enemies, behind their front, which seems to be in reality quite perfect and unassailable in juridical as well as in economic regard, nothing but destruction, destruction of the tissues and of the sticking together of human beings, destruction which can be measured in volt, toxical units, meterkiloponds and calories or joules. This reality of economy and law got to be proved in a twofold respect. On the one hand by its effects, as they are listed above point for point in the upper section, but nevertheless far away from pretending to aim at a complete summary. On the other hand the proof of our conclusion is situated in the fact, that we had set up our claim for the basic necessary support in order to fulfil our scientifically assured, urgently necessary and useful tasks and our claims on rights to all relevant addressess quite urgently and again and again. The apparatus of violence, which they have directed against us, presented to us the only one face to consist of nothing but of destructive violence against human life, destructive violence apt to be measured in volt, toxical units, meterkilopond and calories and joules. After having attacked this violence, no longer under the signature of right but under the claim of life, so e.g. by means of the hunger-strike in February 1970 and with the occupating of the University Rector’s office in July 1970 we have earned not only our right, but also and in the same way nearly without any trouble else the money from which they had deprived us up to that moment.

Thus there exists neither a right for nor a right against ill people. Rather there exists only violence against but just as well also violence for sick people. What is called right is nothing but the destructive violence, if we leave it to our enemy. Revolutionary violence is the right for one's protection of life against destruction. Ill people got no rights. Therefore it is intolerable from the standpoint of law, that they organize in plenums, that they, being struck, start a control against braked murder (reactionary illness) or and at least that they form a mass-organization aiming at the end to abolish illness as a productive power (force of production) for the capitalism, for it's only illness which in the isles of prosperity pulls forward production and consumption and therefore, and what is the same thing, also the profit business by mass murder (wholesale murder) in each part of the world.

Chapter IV