© Signs of the Times
The modern totalitarian state is the psychotherapist for the whole of society. It acts on the elitist principle that it knows everything and the people deserve to be mind controlled and brainwashed for their own good. Defenders pf the totalitarian system demonize their democratic critics as insane, and target political speech with the mental weapons provided by modern psychological expertise and mental health research.

It does not matter what perverted ideology that the totalitarian power-seekers hide behind. It could be Communism, Nazism, Islamism, Neoconservativism, or Environmentalism. Every "ism" is a thought-control prison. Citizens are suppressed in the same manner under every totalitarian hellhole by their mental overlords.

Anti-democratic elites in all totalitarian prisons use the language of mental health to dismiss dissenters and enforce their dogmatic beliefs and totalitarian policies on an unwilling public. In 2009, Brendan O'Neill of wrote a powerful essay called,"The Psychologisation of Dissent: The Global Warming Skepticism Mental Disorder," about how the West is following in the footsteps of the Soviet Union. O'Neil wrote:
"The idea that 'climate change denial' is a psychological disorder - the product of a spiteful, willful or simply in-built neural inability to face up to the catastrophe of global warming - is becoming more and more popular amongst green-leaning activists and academics. And nothing better sums up the elitism and authoritarianism of the environmentalist lobby than its psychologisation of dissent. The labeling of any criticism of the politics of global warming, first as 'denial', and now as evidence of mass psychological instability, is an attempt to write off all critics and sceptics as deranged, and to lay the ground for inevitable authoritarian solutions to the problem of climate change. Historically, only the most illiberal and misanthropic regimes have treated disagreement and debate as signs of mental ill-health."
In the West, the mislabeling of dissent as "paranoia" and "crazy" has been taken to an extreme. People who believe there should be government transparency and media accountability have been exiled out of the mainstream political community.

It is a joke on the public that the very same people who speak for the totalitarian system in America and accuse their democratic critics of mental illness and mental retardation are half-retarded themselves. Examples include former President George W. Bush, and Secretary of the Department of Human Slavery Janet Napolitano. To be accused of being retarded for not believing official government propaganda by these retards is so funny. I think it is better to laugh than to get mad at these half-baked clowns.

But it gets more serious when we learn that the power-mongers who are throwing around terms such as "mentally ill," "conspiracy theorist," and "retarded" to describe their political opponents are secretly devising government programs to exterminate not only their critics, but also the general population. They want to get rid of the "mentally unfit," in society like Hitler wanted to do. And who is defined as mentally unfit? People who question the pseudo-science of climate change and the official fairy tale about the 9/11 attacks that has been used to destroy civil liberties and the rule of law.

The voices in the academic community, media, and politics who defend the science of climate change and the validity of the 9/11 story view themselves as the leaders of human evolution. But most often than not, they appear to be the most mentally backward, psychologically screwed-up, and retarded-looking individuals. One such individual is Professor Norgaard of Oregon University.

Paul Joseph Watson wrote an article called, "Climate Change Skepticism a Sickness That Must be "Treated," Says Professor," about Professor Norgaard's insane and despicable idea to shut-down critics of global warming hysteria by accusing them that they suffer from mental sickness, psychological devolution, and social regression. Watson:
Comparing skepticism of man-made global warming to racist beliefs, an Oregon-based professor of sociology and environmental studies has labeled doubts about anthropogenic climate change a "sickness" for which individuals need to be "treated".

Professor Kari Norgaard, who is currently appearing at the 'Planet Under Pressure' conference in London, has presented a paper in which she argues that "cultural resistance" to accepting the premise that humans are responsible for climate change "must be recognized and treated" as an aberrant sociological behavior.

Norgaard equates skepticism of climate change alarmists - whose data is continually proven to be politicized, agenda driven and downright inaccurate - with racism, noting that overcoming such viewpoints poses a similar challenge "to racism or slavery in the U.S. South."
John Aziz also criticized Professor Norgaard's deranged, anti-human, and totalitarian beliefs in his insightful article, "The Face of Authoritarian Environmentalism." Here is an excerpt:
Isn't pathologising dissidents a hallmark of authoritarianism? Weren't dissidents under the Soviet Union often sent to psychiatric hospitals to be "treated" for their behaviour? Hasn't Norgaard read Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago?

And really "doubters" could mean a lot of things. Does it solely mean those who believe climate change is not happening? What about climate agnostics? Does it mean those who believe that climate change is happening but that it is not man-made? Does it mean those who believe that it is happening, but who disagree with Norgaard's proposed solutions?
If we use Norgaard's logic, then people who doubt the science that 9/11 was an act of state terrorism by the United States and Israel are mentally sick and racist.

The labeling of a different opinion as "mentally ill," and "anti-rational" is very dangerous, for obvious reasons. Abuses of power occur when a society accepts mental health labels to set the limits on discussion on any given subject, but especially those that have lethal social and political consequences.

In a collectivized, totalitarian society such as America's, those in government can get away with mass murder of innocent people, horrific, atrocities and crimes against their own population by painting their critics as insane and marking the line that separates legitimate political speech from illegitimate and crazy political speech.

Those in power who want the people to think that questioning the official 9/11 story and criticizing climate change propagandists are examples of mental sickness are obviously hiding an evil agenda. They do not want people to be informed and educated, but brainwashed and stupid so they can shove whatever they want down their throats.

I'm surprised they haven't accused 9/11 truth-tellers of being witches so they can go ahead and burn us at the stake. The crazy psychotherapists in the government and media might decide one day to put the hammer down and crush brains with the old-fashioned method: brute force.

The situation has gotten so bad that black slaves in 1776 were more free than all Americans are today. If George Washington, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson were alive today, they would be accused of being mentally ill conspiracy theorists and dangerous extremists. Thomas Jefferson would pen a global declaration of mental independence from totalitarian tyranny. And Washington would fight to make all drugs legal in America.