Mental Health Charities Censor PSSD
'looking for answers'
'Mental Health on the Mighty' have banned PSSD talk to multiple people, excluding the very ability to continue writing on their 'mental health charity' participation public page. Like others, They advertise to the public. In fact, they have even created 'mental health charity' whistle-blowers from loyal servant's that actually decided to quit for moral reasons from a job they loved. A former employee explains in an article she wrote for MadinAmerica.com "Why I Resigned From The Mighty", that the pushing on behalf of the pharmaceutical conflictions had just gone too far.
"“If the CEO for Abilify was in the front row right now, he’d be salivating,” she declared. She had just explained her strategic plan for monetizing the site with pharmaceutical advertising. But the plan didn’t end there. The Mighty planned to give drug companies user data that would help focus the pharmaceutical manufacturer’s marketing efforts.
After I heard this, I stood and left the room again. I had some soul searching to do."
They are easily the biggest 'mental health' ghetto platform on facebook or the web. I am not allowed to share my experiences to help others avoid sleepwalking onto the train of 'no informed-consent'.
Another beauty that I am censored from Time to Change, that seem to have enough money to advertise their drug mental health pimping posts on children's timelines every single day lately. Who do they own... China? or something.
All I want to do is share my 'mental health interviews', people of 'the lived experience'. And talk about PSSD, and how it affects people ('s mental health).
An Interview of 2 young people given PSSD of the 'lived mental health experience'
In the age of facebook on mobile phones, innocent children literally have their drug dealers phones on speed-dial. There is little in the way to protect them. From the predator of the state.
And whilst 'mental health' 'stigma' is in the hands of the accuser (and the accused in the dock), the accuser is the global pharmaceutical companies. Whilst it is not a crime yet, one wonders when the globalists will use the state as it's will, as they set up their idealistic and well funded 'mental health self-police state'.
It doesn't really stop there. NAMI regularly block my PSSD posts as soon as they can, as long as someone is working the page on duty at the time. Sometimes it is removed quickly, and other times it is 'hidden' from others, I will never know (as facebook-zurg don't inform you). I guess facebook 'forgot' that feature from their facebook and whistles. Can't be more complicated than an NSA spying grid.
Mind, the UK's biggest mental health charity (formed from sterilising the mentally ill 'public health' workers and psychiatrists in 1946) to their credit as far as I know didn't, unless you consider their ingenious soft-kill invention 'sending me Nelly the elephant' that I should talk to. Very Effectively skipping my point of PSSD. It's hard to out-sing a fluorescent drugged up hallucinating multi-coloured elephant.
'and was never seen again sounds right'
"None other than William Beveridge, the architect of the post-1945 welfare state, was highly active in the eugenics movement and said that "those men who through general defects are unable to fill such a whole place in industry are to be recognized as unemployable. They must become the acknowledged dependents of the State... but with complete and permanent loss of all citizen rights - including not only the franchise but civil freedom and fatherhood". A belief in eugenics was certainly not confined to the jackbooted far right." The New Statesmen
Now if this article is fucking confusing, well yes, this is life now it seems. Lunatic genocidal eugenics programs lefties.
"It wasn't just figures on the extreme right of politics who backed the eugenics philosophy. Some of British socialism's most celebrated names were among the champions of eugenics - Sidney and Beatrice Webb (the founders of the Fabian Society), Harold Laski, John Maynard Keynes, even the New Statesman and the Manchester Guardian. They hoped that a eugenic approach could build up the strong section of the population and gradually remove the weak. In July 1931, the New Statesman asserted: "The legitimate claims of eugenics are not inherently incompatible with the outlook of the collectivist movement. On the contrary, they would be expected to find their most intransigent opponents amongst those who cling to the individualistic views of parenthood and family economics."
Many early left-wing thinkers wanted government to direct social policy towards "improving" the human race by discouraging reproduction among those sections of society deemed to have undesirable genes. Supporters of state planning often found the idea of a planned genetic future attractive. As Adrian Wooldridge, author of Measuring the Mind: Education and Psychology in England 1860-1990, comments: "The Webbs supported eugenic planning just as fervently as town planning." Beatrice Webb declared eugenics to be "the most important question of all" while her husband remarked that "no eugenicist can be a laissez-faire individualist".
Similarly, George Bernard Shaw wrote: "The only fundamental and possible socialism is the socialisation of the selective breeding of man." Bertrand Russell proposed that the state should issue"" The New Statesmen
"This link between racial hygiene and social hygiene movements can be seen in Australia, where the Racial Hygiene Association of New South Wales is now named The Family Planning Association."