word of inclusion, but of exclusion, based on the history of the use of that word. I think African-Americans can particularly relate to that since only within the lifetime of a couple of generations have they become more that three fifths human; they can understand what it means for it to be a term of exclusion. In any case, the great reformers of madness were the ones who wanted to, as it were, cure them created what Foucault calls a whole new disciplinary matrix around madness. What that means is that the curing of them did not liberate them, it did not give them the value they had at one time, no it set up a whole series of processes within which they could be observed, drugged, analysed, re-analysed, and of course I have joked about this process. I don't want to use the strong word "madness" here but when we look at the expansion of this therapeutic zone on into the late 20th Century, we now find out that very few of us don't belong in it. I mean, if you are not on a twelve step program today, you are out of fashion. I mean who would have guessed that the discourse of madness would eventually cover the whole social field until perhaps the last growth industry we have other than making movies about sex and violence is psychiatry and running twelve step programs; this is a growth industry. This is one industry where you could, you know,