Endgame - Compulsory mental health "treatment"

boymonkey74
Also even If you are right do you think the people working in the field would just go along with it?

I know I already responded to this post once but I wanted to respond specifically to this point. I would say that the people working in mental health certainly would go along with it if they wanted to keep working and didn't want to be labeled as being crazy themselves.

I encourage you to read the links I posted earlier in the thread about what happened in the Soviet Union, for example. It could not have happened without cooperation. Many of the mental health workers might be willing to go along for the simple reason that they figure someone is going to be doing it even if it isn't them.

Also, many of them probably just see what they do as a job and nothing more. There are many people working in many fields who have no sense of moral responsibility at all. These people are not necessarily going to be any more ethical or moral than anyone else. And they certainly are less likely to follow their own ethical code if they have pressure placed upon them from higher ups to do unethical things. People have a tendency to just follow instructions. They don't ask too many questions when they know they aren't supposed to.

reply to post by shells4u


Was there a particular point to that post?

reply to post by BrianFlanders


You've got it all wrong. They're going for euthanasia on the grounds of "culling genetic defectives."

Of course, your call just might be the liberal compromise.

soficrow
reply to post by BrianFlanders

 

You've got it all wrong. They're going for euthanasia on the grounds of "culling genetic defectives."

Nah. I don't think they have any intentions of being that blatant about it. Their whole deal here (the big idea, so to speak) is stealth totalitarianism. The vast majority will not see anything wrong with it because they will pretty much leave you alone as long as you obey and don't ask questions.

People who rock the boat will be dealt with systematically (just as they always are in totalitarian states) but they will make it appear as if it's medical treatment. In reality, it's just a modified gulag. Even if they eventually set things up so the "patients" are allowed to walk around (seemingly freely) they will be monitored electronically every minute.

reply to post by BrianFlanders


They're already euthanizing old people - don't want to/can't pick up the cost of care. But I think you're right about "stealth totalitarianism" - 'cept it will include euthanasia, sterilization and a few other healthcare non-options. ...People are already convinced that everything "is genetic" - not to far to go now.

soficrow
reply to post by BrianFlanders

 

They're already euthanizing old people - don't want to/can't pick up the cost of care. But I think you're right about "stealth totalitarianism" - 'cept it will include euthanasia, sterilization and a few other healthcare non-options. ...People are already convinced that everything "is genetic" - not to far to go now.

Well, I think that when it comes down to it, authoritarians, statists and their ilk are not a lot different than everyone else. That's to say they have goals but they don't necessarily have the means to the ends all planned out decades ahead of time.

Naturally, this leads (as it generally does) to a lot of confusion and mistakes and bad moves. Like a novice chess player, they gradually learn from their costly mistakes. They're determined and failure does not mean they won't try again. It virtually guarantees they'll try again.

So what have they learned? They've learned that overt totalitarianism is it's own worst enemy. They've learned that bad PR is what really kills dictatorships. So one of the keys to establishing and maintaining a totalitarian state is to fabricate a perfect excuse to neutralize your critics.

I have 2 family members on meds and to be honest I don't think it's good for them. You know what? I think people want these meds more than the industry wants to exploit it. It's not a select group of insiders who're seeking world domination by giving everybody pills, it's the people themselves who want them!!! Pills aren't a weapon being used against us, they're an an easy answer we seek out. People don't want to take responsibility for their own actions and the pills are the answer. Bleeding hearts and collectivists naturally are compelled to meet this need for more pills.

I don't think leaders are trying to get our guns, but I do think we have insecurities. I wrote in a previous post that I think technology has enabled a lot of this. it's not just psychological. In the process, we're becoming more like machines. They're going to make new programs, no doubt, to search for and find people who're potential shooters in the making. Some of this will be done through mental health programs, but I don't think controlling peoples minds is the goal. They just want to get rid of the shooters, but at what cost? How secure do we have to be as a nation? I don't think it'll ever end. More and more rules. Human-machine hybrids.

Double

jonnywhite
I have 2 family members on meds and to be honest I don't think it's good for them. You know what? I think people want these meds more than the industry wants to exploit it. It's not a select group of insiders who're seeking world domination by giving everybody pills, it's the people themselves who want them!!! Pills aren't a weapon being used against us, they're an addiction we seek out.

Obviously, I disagree.

What kind of meds are they on and why. Are they being forced to take them despite their wishes? What I'm talking about is moving into the territory of forcing these meds on people who don't want them. People who might be a little whacky but are harmless. You can say you think someone needs meds but if they don't want them and they aren't hurting anyone, it's really none of your business. And it's creepy to force them. It's easy to abuse that kind of power. How do you prevent that? If you are paying attention you know TPTB absolutely will abuse this.

There are people who would force you to "get treatment" just for posting here. How do you feel about that?

You mention about forcing people on meds? Well parents can do something like that by putting their children on meds, if the child is properly "diagnosed". In my mind, that's essentially medicating them through force, since a child cannot speak for themselves. I think it's very likely they'll be able to narrow down on certain mental disorders in the shooters and they'll look for that in children.

There's a lot of research out there being done on criminal minds and they're looking at the brain and they're narrowing it down bit by bit. I don't think ti's a stretch to suggest these mass shooters have a brain dysfunction similar to criminals.

In fact, I'll give you a trail...

Read: The Anatomy of Violence by Adrian Raine:
www.amazon.com - The Anatomy of Violence: The Biological Roots of Crime...

Research goes back a ways. It's coming for your child! (spooky music)

reply to post by BrianFlanders

DON'T BE DAFT....IF YOU CANT UNDERSTAND THEN WE DON'T SPEAK THE SAME LANGUAGE...

jonnywhite
You mention about forcing people on meds? Well parents can do something like that by putting their children on meds, if the child is properly "diagnosed". In my mind, that's essentially medicating them through force, since a child cannot speak for themselves. I think it's very likely they'll be able to narrow down on certain mental disorders in the shooters and they'll look for that in children.

1. We are not children. We are free human beings with a right to an opinion.

2. They can only look for patterns and try to look for the same patterns in other people. Human beings aren't machines. Even if two people have similar thinking, they might not (probably won't) do everything exactly the same. One crazy dude might go on a shooting spree while 50 million other crazy dudes never will. It's justified to impose involuntary procedures and medications on 50 million innocent people because of the actions of one (or even ten)?

3. You still haven't admitted that this has an enormous potential for abuse. Nor have you acknowledged that we have a fundamentally abusive government that seems to abuse every special authority that is granted to them in one way or another. How is this any better than just living with the occasional shooting?

There's a lot of research out there being done on criminal minds and they're looking at the brain and they're narrowing it down bit by bit. I don't think ti's a stretch to suggest these mass shooters have a brain dysfunction similar to criminals.

You're (of course) assuming that the biggest liars on the planet are telling the truth about their motives and intentions. I remain highly skeptical. Evidently, you didn't read any of the links I posted. I don't care what they claim they're doing. I contend that they're lying. And there's plenty of room for this claim because it's not exactly a popular sentiment. If you disagree, then don't worry. My objections will fall on deaf ears anyway and you will get to enjoy a world where people don't ask questions soon enough.

Can you tell me why the same thing that happened in Soviet Russia (and many other such places) can't happen here?

"Ideological intoxication" sounds exactly like the kind of thing they'd come up with if it wasn't already soiled with the stain of totalitarianism. But stay tuned because it won't be long now before they start accusing conspiracy theorists of being dangerous and in need of involuntary treatment. You could at least bother to listen to what they're saying before you just write this off as paranoia.

BrianFlanders

boymonkey74
reply to post by Daughter2

 

And it isn't?
The problem is mentally unwell people do not seek out treatment because of the stigma attached to it and then it can get worse.

Not really. These incidents are still quite rare and when they do happen, they are always blown entirely out of proportion.

unless you are one of the victims - then they are blown away.

Or one of het victims relatives. then they are just reacting all out of proportion I guess.

Aloysius the Gaul

BrianFlanders

boymonkey74
reply to post by Daughter2

 

And it isn't?
The problem is mentally unwell people do not seek out treatment because of the stigma attached to it and then it can get worse.

Not really. These incidents are still quite rare and when they do happen, they are always blown entirely out of proportion.

unless you are one of the victims - then they are blown away.

Or one of het victims relatives. then they are just reacting all out of proportion I guess.

Completely missing the point. A couple of murders cannot be the justification for ignoring the rights of millions of innocent people.

50 murders cannot justify that. I don't pretend that it isn't painful for the victims or their families. I don't excuse people who exploit them for political purposes either.

reply to post by BrianFlanders

Here's what I think are the main contributing factors in my posts here:

1. The brain can have "disorders" that yield a different mental "matrix" than an average normal brain
2. Society spends extensively on security programs - it's instinctive
3. People WANT pills and psychiatric care because they perceive them as an easy answer, sspecially when their life is in dire straits
4. Parents can force their child to receive psychiatric care if the child is properly diagnosed - easy to reach mental health resources are needed
5. Mass shooters (and criminals in general) exhibit evidence they have mental disorders

So what does it all mean?

a) There're many people getting pills who probably shouldn't
b) Society will deal with mass shooters in childhood through psychiatry or mental health programs
c) Society will add more and more rules - as technology and understanding allows - to increase security

Where in that does it say society is classifying people who dissent as having mental disorders? If anything, it's implying people who threaten security are being classified as having mental disorders, but it isn't classifying everybody who threatens security as having mental health problems. However, who knows? Perhaps new mental health programs will emerge to reduce other threats to the nations security. Maybe you're right and they'll start hunting down children with extreme ideology susceptibility.

The goal isn't to control people it's to increase feelings of security. I don't think there's an evil overlord pushing buttons and pulling levers. I think it's instinctive. It's a deep seeded fear in every person and it's expressing itself today in our pursuit of security.

My other comment about human-machine hybrids is kind of off topic maybe. The increasing amount of rules and machine-processes is making us more machine-like. In order to use these rules and machine-processes effectively we have to adopt some of their traits. We become more controlled and predictable within our human framework. Machines don't like unpredictability - everything needs to be precise.

reply to post by BrianFlanders

...So one of the keys to establishing and maintaining a totalitarian state is to fabricate a perfect excuse to neutralize your critics.

I agree with much of what you say. Also know that in business, "Everything is an opportunity," and "There are no problems, only solutions." It's all about flexibility and redundancy in contingency planning.

Most of what is in the DSM comes down to people acting in ways that is politically inconvenient to the elite's ideal of how society should be run.

Modern living causes various stresses which activates anti-social, compulsive, and impulsive behaviors. We call it disordered, but really the order is outside of our minds. They're saying we're not adapting to the order within society. So what?

I have no doubt that more measures will be taken to cleanse those deemed unfit for the 21st century.

reply to post by BrianFlanders


i live in a state that emptied out the loony bins and dumped everyone on all the state's cities' main street.

we now have a large population that can't take care of themselves and are prey to all kinds of criminals.

in our building a retarded person's appartment, paid for by the state, has a crack dealer for a roomate.

last year it was an old lady with aids whose appartment was the largest crak house in the neighborhood.

in the past three years i've seen how these people have become victims as the criminal element adjust to this new and easy prey.

some people need protection which cannot be given in general population housing.

the present system is a disaster, imo.

BrianFlanders

Aloysius the Gaul

BrianFlanders

boymonkey74
reply to post by Daughter2

 

And it isn't?
The problem is mentally unwell people do not seek out treatment because of the stigma attached to it and then it can get worse.

Not really. These incidents are still quite rare and when they do happen, they are always blown entirely out of proportion.

unless you are one of the victims - then they are blown away.

Or one of het victims relatives. then they are just reacting all out of proportion I guess.

Completely missing the point. A couple of murders cannot be the justification for ignoring the rights of millions of innocent people.

50 murders cannot justify that. I don't pretend that it isn't painful for the victims or their families.

That was certainly the impression I got from the post I replied to - perhaps you could be clearer in het future.