The Drug War Blog




Up abolishthedea.com

September 10, 2021

Wrong Way of Looking at the Wrld

The Drug War is not merely wrong, but it represents a childish and superstitious way of looking at the world, one that reeks of the self-assured hubris of the Conquistadores as they disdainfully dismissed the spirituality of native Mesoamericans as devil worship. It is the triumph of common law (indeed the most common of common law) over natural law, of fear over fact, and of demonization over scientific research.

The drug war as we speak is impeding our search for cures for everything from depression to Alzheimer's disease, it's leaving phobias and addictions completely untreated when we know of plant medicines that have every prospect of curing them almost miraculously. It's forcing clinicians to use brain-damaging electroshock therapy in cases where botanical godsends could work wonders. It's turning police into prying busybodies arresting plant users for the sort of "precrime" of possessing substances that could expand and improve their mental outlook.

It's a Christian Science war against plant medicine.

To learn more about how the American Drug War has bamboozled the world, check out my ever-growing Encyclopedia of Drug War Idiocy.



Up abolishthedea.com

August 31, 2021

Greta Envy

I wish I was a kid again so I could pull a Greta Thunberg and stay home from school in protest of the Christian Science Drug War. Then again, America's youth have been so thoroughly propagandized on this topic that I'd probably be the only one to protest -- thereby earning the righteous enmity of my parents, teachers and peers.



Up abolishthedea.com

August 31, 2021

Blowing Up Arkansas

In 1980, the Air Force almost blew up 1/3 of the country with a thermonuclear weapon, a weapon created because the US and Russia were committed to hating each other. Today, the US nuclear weapon stockpile still contains 7,000 warheads, many of them insufficiently monitored according to Eric Schlosser, author of "Command and Control." Yet this same country outlaws all entheogenic medicines, psychoactive substances such as MDMA and psilocybin, that could bring the world together in universal love.

Something is wrong with this picture.

Will it take a thermonuclear bomb blast in America, accidental or otherwise, to teach us that psychoactive medicine should not be feared but rather used to take the world off its one-way trip to Armageddon? In a sane world, we would not be outlawing drugs like MDMA but rather prescribing them for leaders of countries in advance of summit meetings -- and using them as therapy to treat all the crazed hot-heads of the world who might otherwise shoot up a grade-school.



Up abolishthedea.com

August 30, 2021

Drug War Self-Censorship in Psychiatry and Journalism

an open letter to Atlantic magazine author Olga Khazam

Hi, Olga.



As a 62-year-old who has spent a lifetime on expensive Big Pharma meds, I wanted to share some feedback on your interview with Laura Slater.

Laura Slater, like most authors (even those at the Atlantic) write about depression as if we're working from a natural baseline in America in attempting to conquer the condition (or "disease," if you must). That is just not true. The United States is under a kind of Christian Science sharia that has placed an unprecedented ban, not merely on using psychoactive plant medicines, but even on studying them. We call it the War on Drugs. In light of this wholesale ban on the use of nature's pharmacopeia, I believe we can draw no conclusions about the supposed intractability of depression. That would be like discussing the seeming intractability of headaches in a country that outlaws aspirin. How do we know what the thousands of outlawed psychoactive plant varieties could actually do for humanity were they free for use and placed in the hands of a psychopharmacologically savvy empath? The soma plant inspired an entire religion. The psychedelic-fueled Eleusinian mysteries gave Plato his views of the afterlife. And mushroom-based religions flourished in Mesoamerica before Columbus forced folks like the Taino (whom he enslaved) to use alcohol instead.

So when Laura Slater says that Big Pharma antidepressants work, it begs the question, what does she mean by work? Does "work" mean that they goad the user on to self-actualization in life and give them visions of greater truths, or does it mean that they tranquilize the users and make them comfortable with second best in life? In my experience, Big Pharma pills do only the latter, whereas I once used a demonized plant substance that opened my eyes so widely to the possibilities of life that it made me cry, in mourning for all the time I had spent in sleepy-eyed self-doubt. Big Pharma pills never make me feel anything of the kind. Meanwhile they also lead to sexual problems and weight gain -- as Laura herself points out in her book "Blue Dreams." (Richard Louis Miller writes of a Prozac fan who became disillusioned after he found he could not cry at his mother's funeral. Did Prozac "work" for him? Or did it work all too well?) And yet Laura stands by those meds, despite the fact that those same kinds of side effects would be reviled to the ends of the earth were they produced by the godsend plant medicine that anti-scientific America has banished from use -- and from public discourse.

It's amazing to me that Laura has such tepid criticism for Big Pharma antidepressants. We are living in the time of the biggest addiction crisis ever, after all, the psychiatric pill mill, thanks to which 1 in 4 American women must use a Big Pharma med every single day of their life till death do they part. That's a nation full of Stepford Wives. And yet Laura is blind to that mega-problem, as is Gabriel Mate. Like that latter "addiction specialist," Laura wants to medicalize and moralize the problem of depression, while ignoring the role that the drug war has played in getting us where we are today.

As a lifetime "patient" of Slater's psychiatric system, I say enough. I believe that science should butt out of the field of mood medicine entirely, that all plant medicine should be re-legalized in conformance with natural law, and that psychiatrists should morph into the sort of psychopharmacologically savvy empaths that I mentioned above, folks who are conversant with the various ritual uses of drugs and know ways of transferring the insights of such usage into compassionate and effective protocols for westerners -- not just to "cure" depression but to inspire creativity, ease pain, provide insight, cure addiction, and even just simply give a troubled mortal a few hours of relief from the madness of modern life. If America adopted this treatment protocol, the very concept of "mental patient" would disappear, and we'd all be mere human beings again, each looking to maximize our human potential with the help of godsend plant medicine.

Until that time, I wish that writers and psychiatrists would place a footnote on all articles of this kind, pointing out that the views it contains are premised on the existence of a Christian Science Drug War -- for the drug war's suppression of free scientific research is not going to end as long as we pretend that such suppression does not even exist.



Best wishes,


PS The Drug War is not content merely to ruin my own life. The drug war now makes my mother's life a hell by outlawing all of the godsend plant medicine that shows such great promise in treating Alzheimer's disease. And yet I won't hold my breath for the Atlantic to write an article about how the drug war quashes research that might cure Alzheimer's. Like most American writers, the Atlantic's staff are blind to the Christian Science self-censorship that they perform every time they write on such subjects. They take the drug-war ideology as a given and then proceed to write, the drug-war ideology that says we must fear psychoactive medicines rather than learn about them.

Sorry if I'm rambling, but your interview with Slater has shaken the hornet's nest of bogus assumptions that the drug war mentality has foisted on Americans. While I'm going with the flow, I might as well end by pointing out that Sigmund Freud considered cocaine to be a godsend for his depression, a drug that Slater doesn't mention in her enumeration of depression cures. This begs another question: why should I not be allowed to use cocaine to treat MY depression? The typical psychiatric answer is that cocaine is a "crutch," but that statement presupposes that psychiatry has a "real" cure on offer, which it does not (despite its attempt to foster the myth that antidepressants fix a chemical imbalance that's responsible for all the sadness in the world). Indeed, why can't I use morphine? That drug helps one have an almost supernatural appreciation of mother nature, something that no antidepressant can claim. (See Poe's story "Tale of the Ragged Mountains.") And as for addiction, psychiatry does not have a leg to stand on in telling me to avoid substances upon which I might become dependent. I already have to take expensive meds every single day of my life. Why can't those "meds" be ones that foster the mental attributes that I truly desire?

Nor would such use be without precedent. One of the founders of the Johns Hopkins Medical School, Dr. William Stewart Halsted, was a lifelong user of morphine. When the drug warriors found out after his death, they wondered, "How could he have done so well and yet have been on bad evil morphine?" They never contemplated the possibility that he did so well precisely because he WAS on morphine. But then merely to think of that possibility is heresy in the age of the Christian Science Drug War.



Up abolishthedea.com

August 26, 2021

Open Letter to Tara John

I was motivated to write the following letter to CNN reporter Tara John Letter after reading her 2019 article entitled: British PM hopeful: 'I deeply regret' taking cocaine.

Why not do a story about how the drug war demonizes plant medicine instead of teaching us how to use it wisely for humankind, how the drug war is really the enforcement of Christian Science as a state religion, and a violation of Natural Law (insofar as Jefferson was rolling in his grave when the DEA confiscated his poppy plants in 1987).

I was motivated to write after reading your story about Michael Gove's use of cocaine, a plant-based medicine that Freud considered to be a godsend for his depression. And yet, of course, the Christian Science, beer-swilling west sees it as pure evil and wants to remove Gove from office for having anything to do with it. Worse yet, politicians like Gove cave entirely to the Christian Science hysteria and fall down on their knees, cravenly begging the hysterical public's forgiveness for his Christian Science heresy.

Meanwhile, our Imperialistic drug war is causing a civil war in Mexico and empowering a self-proclaimed "drug war Hitler" in the Philippines. Moreover, it is outlawing the mere research of plant medicine that could have helped my mom's dementia.

When are newspapers going to realize that we should be learning about psychoactive medicine, not demonizing it based on propaganda and lies?

How about a story showing how the drug war is an anti-scientific Christian Science outrage?



Up abolishthedea.com

August 20, 2021

Documented Nonsense

Curiosity just added a 2020 documentary on singer Blind Melon, hyping it as a story about "the tragedy of addiction."

Nonsense.

The tragedy is the drug war, which teaches us to fear substances rather than to learn about how to use them safely, and actually outlaws research on such substances. In a country where all plant medicines were legal (again) and in which we learned about the good and bad qualities of them all, we would have no addiction problem. One might decide of choice to use a specific plant medicine every day -- but America has no leg to stand on in grousing about that. As I type, 1 in 4 American women are addicted to Big Pharma meds, but drug war America does not even notice.



Up abolishthedea.com

August 17, 2021

Open letter to the Drug Policy Alliance

My final comments in the survey got "cut off" because I inadvertently hit a combination of keys that submitted the form prematurely.

For what it's worth, I wanted to add one comment.

While I love the work you do, I think that the focus on marijuana laws has a bit of a racist overtone to it. Laws about marijuana are changing, it seems, because white European-Americans are now deciding that the drug is not so bad after all. That's all well and good, but we should be fighting the drug war on first principles. When we select one drug for special legislation, we are inherently prioritizing the rights of the communities that tend to use that specific drug, which are often white in the case of marijuana.


The drug war is wrong root and branch and should be attacked as such, not whittled away at to make it progressively less troublesome for whites. We must expose the drug war as a religion, i.e. as Christian Science, and as a violation of natural law. If that's not enough reason to attack the drug war from first principles, remember that the drug war actually criminalizes scientific research on the substances that it demonizes, thereby making it impossible to decisively refute the superstitions that the drug warrior attempts to pass off as facts, such as the completely ahistorical idea that most psychoactive plant medicine has no therapeutic value whatsoever.

This criminalization of research is a largely unrecognized problem today, and yet it is every bit as evil as the church's censorship of Galileo. Indeed, it is worse, because Galileo recognized that his work was being suppressed for religious reasons, whereas most researchers today never mention the drug war, as if they're working from a natural baseline when it comes to their investigations into such subjects as consciousness, depression, and the treatment of addiction, etc. They're in denial that the drug war has taken away their freedom. They need to be reminded that their research is being censored – in the hopes that they'll become furious enough to join us in ending America's unprecedented war on plant medicine, a war in which we legislate ignorance on so-called drugs by putting them out of reach of mere factual investigation.

And the best way to fight back is on first principles, which, to recap, are: that the drug war is a violation of natural law, that the drug war is the establishment of the Christian Science religion, and that it entails a censorship of academic research every bit as pernicious as that by which the church attempted to muzzle Galileo in his writings about the solar system.

PS One practical step someone should take would be to organize writers to review drug war movies on sites like IMDB, where drug war movies like "Running with the Devil” receive high ratings, merely because no one even notices the pernicious messages that they send. In the latter movie, for instance, DEA agent Natalie Reyes shoots a "drug suspect” at point-blank range while she herself is smoking a cigarette. This is after she had already tortured a "drug suspect” by hanging him from a meat hook in his Speedo's. And yet Natalie is supposed to be the "hero” of the film. That movies like these get applause is a terrible omen for American freedom, and someone has to start firing back with reviews that remind moviegoers of this fact.


As we speak, there is a group of dedicated materialists who keep updating Wikipedia to ensure that scientific and philosophical articles feature their reductionist point of view. Although I disagree with their viewpoints, I think that the DPA should imitate their strategy by creating a sort of "writing club” of DPA members who are encouraged to post movie reviews on sites like IMDB, in order to remind moviegoers that films like "Running” contain drug war propaganda, above all the idea that substance demonization has become so important that we must now celebrate those DEA agents who "take matters into their own hands.” For today Americans actually come away from such movies rooting for the murderers – and someone has to set them straight about the evil drug war premises by which these viewers have been bamboozled. A great way to effect change in this area would be for the DPA to ensure that such movies are reviewed with an eye toward the anti-American (anti-scientific and anti-minority) messages that they send in the name of America's unprecedented war on plant medicine.



Up abolishthedea.com

August 14, 2021

Common Nonsense

when will Common Sense start flaggin Drug War Lies in movies?

comment submitted to Common Sense

When are you going to start warning kids that the movies they're watching feature DRUG WAR PROPAGANDA? In "Running with the Devil," DEA agent Natalie Reyes shoots a "drug suspect" in cold blood and at point blank range. Why? Because he was selling PLANT MEDICINE that has been used responsibly by other cultures for millennia. Hypocrite Natalie was fiercely puffing away on a cigarette when she shot the man. Earlier in the movie, she had tortured a "drug suspect" by hanging him from a meat hook after stripping him down to his Speedos.


Why are you not warning kids that these movies promote despotism and tyranny as part of an unscientific campaign to demonize plant medicine??


PS Please add a note to your contact page that warns us about a word limit in your comment form. That way folks like myself won’t waste time to write a long letter that your form won’t even accept. As it is, your system only warned me about the length of my message after I had spent one whole hour writing it!



Up abolishthedea.com

August 4, 2021

An open letter to Drug Warrior Biden




We throw out one tyrant, only to have Joe Biden don the bad-guy helmet yet again to prosecute the disastrous Drug War. Here's the letter I sent to the White House on this matter today to protest.


Please, please, please end America's outrageous racist-motivated War on Drugs. It is a violation of Natural Law. (ask Jefferson who rolled over in his grave when the DEA confiscated his poppy plants!) It is the enforcement of the Christian Science religion. It is anti-science. it actually FORBIDS STUDY OF GODSEND PLANT MEDICINES THAT COULD CURE ALZHEIMER'S! It is RACIST! It turns the nation into a police state and has fostered CIVIL WARS OVERSEAS and empowered Duterte, the DRUG WAR HITLER, in the Philippines. REPLACE THE DEA with the Drug EDUCATION Agency. Legalize THE PLANT MEDICINES THAT YOU NEVER HAD THE RIGHT TO CRIMINALIZE IN THE FIRST PLACE UNDER NATURAL LAW. END THE BLOOD SHED. END THE RACISM. END THE IMPERIALISM that makes the US go overseas to burn plants -- when by the same logic, ISLAM should be able to come stateside and burn our grape vines! STOP DEMONIZING PLANT MEDICINE WITH THE POLITICIAN CREATED PEJORATIVE TERM OF “DRUGS." Start learning about substances instead in order to find new cures and prevent misuse through education. End the Drug War -- so that my mother can be cured of Alzheimer's and scientists can be freed again to do their work without government interference.

THE DRUG WAR IS AN OUTRAGE. GET ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY. KILL IT DEAD AND STOP TURNING AMERICA INTO A POLICE STATE, WHERE GOVERNMENT CHECKS FOR CHRISTIAN SCIENCE HERETICS VIA EXTRA-JUDICIAL DRUG-TESTING AND IN WHICH CITIZENS CHEER ON MOVIE DEPICTIONS IN WHICH THE DEA GLEEFULLY VIOLATES THE US CONSTITUTION AND MURDERS AMERICANS IN COLD BLOOD FOR USING… (wait for it…) PLANT MEDICINE!!!!!!!!!



Up abolishthedea.com

July 16, 2021

I Challenge a Philosopher




Yesterday, I joined a YouTube chat with Philosopher Patrick Grim arranged by Wondrium, formerly known as Great Courses Plus. I wanted to finally ask one specific philosopher what he thought about the way that the Drug War bars him from studying the effects of plant medicine on human consciousness. After all, Patrick lectures on the Philosophy of Mind and Body and draws conclusions about the nature of consciousness and ultimate reality. Surely, it would be problematic for him (at very least) to have his study in such a field limited by a government which criminalizes consciousness-changing plant medicines that have inspired entire religions and given users perceived glimpses of an afterlife. For it was the soma plant medicine that inspired the Vedic religion and the psychedelic-fueled Eleusinian Mysteries that interested Plato in the afterlife.

So I posted my question -- or rather I tried to. However, the black-listing software that runs behind the scenes at YouTube removed my question shortly after I posted it, giving me the eerie feeling that American prejudices on the topic had been so inflamed by racist politicians that merely mentioning the "drug war" was now considered hate speech. Fortunately, my question was restored after I brought the ham-fisted digital deletion to the attention of the moderators, and to my surprise, my question was soon put to Professor Grim himself. In paraphrasing my post, the moderator basically asked Grim, "How can we study mind and body in a society where a drug war keeps us from studying psychoactive plant medicine, given that such substances have inspired entire religions and given saints and philosophers hints of new worlds, etc.?"

Unfortunately, Professor Grim dodged the subject almost entirely. He first cited William James' use of psychoactive substances (such as nitrous oxide), which sounded like a promising start, but then he switched to the topic of human souls (apparently grasping at that topic as to a life vest, since the word "souls" happened to have been used somewhere in the moderator's casual iteration of my drug-war-related question), beginning with the observation that James saw no proof of the soul, then branching out to the modern disbelief in souls, which he apparently shared, saying that there was no reason to believe that such a thing existed, and then tracing the origins of this seeming myth to the insights of Plato (failing to mention, however, that Plato's own ideas on this topic have been ascribed to his participation in the psychoactive mysteries mentioned above).

I asked my question, not hoping to ambush Grim, but rather to clarify my own views about philosophic silence about the drug war. Were things really as bad as they seemed? I've written to over 100 of America's top philosophers on the topic of the drug war and never received so much as a single response. I wanted to see if philosophers -- especially ones specializing in "mind and body" -- really felt indifferent to that the way the drug war circumscribed their studies. I was hoping to finally get an answer on the question, rather than to simply be ignored. For I just could not believe that philosophers of the mind could really ignore the drug war, since to me that would be like Galileo (in some hypothetical modern interview) ignoring the role that the Church played in limiting his astronomical researches.

I don't blame Grim for avoiding the topic entirely, any more than I blame the other 100 philosophers who ignored my letters on the subject -- theyv'e got their jobs to consider -- but I do blame US drug policy, which is so draconian that it not only limits scientific research, but it so frightens researchers (with implicit criminal threats and threats of ostracism) that they dare not even protest those limitations.

This is not a free academia, folks, it's an academia made complicit in its own muzzling.

There's an additional problem with a materialist like Grim remaining silent about the drug war. It is like a democrat remaining silent about the fact that the republican party has been outlawed (or vice versa). The democrat profits politically from the silencing of his opposition, and so does the materialist. The materialist's "opposition," after all, comes from those who gain practical and ontological insights from the use of psychoactive plant medicine -- and if such use is forbidden, then Grim wins the battle against the spiritualist school by default. No need to argue, his opposition has been silenced.



Up abolishthedea.com

July 7, 2021

El Chapo Crappo




Just found a review of the book "El Chapo: The Untold Story of the World's Most Notorious Drug Lord" on the Small Wars Journal Website, reviewer Malcolm Beith.

Of course, the title says it all: just as the Drug War demonizes plant medicines, it must also demonize those who dare to sell them. Now, I wouldn't be surprised if El Chapo himself was morally challenged (to put it mildly), but that is beside the point. The US CREATED the El Chapo's of the world by its colonialist war on plant medicines that are not popular in the west. Think of it: you criminalize plants worldwide that have been used responsibly by other cultures for millennia, and then you are shocked that there's violent pushback? The real villains are Richard Nixon and every racist US politician who insists that it makes sense to demonize plant medicine instead of studying it to learn how to ensure the safest possible use.

At any rate: here is the comment that I posted beneath Malcolm Beth's review of "El Chapo":

The Real Villain is the United States of America and its racist drug war, which dictates to the world what plant medicines it can use -- thus establishing Christian Science as a world religion and violating natural law. The US is the colonialist bad guy who tells other countries to outlaw plant medicines that have been used responsibly by other cultures for millennia, so that the world can be safe for the two most deadly drugs of all: alcohol and tobacco. And when drug warriors aren't busy invading other countries on the pretext of enforcing these colonialist drug laws, they're reading books like “El Chapo” to get a thrill out of all the guns and violence that the drug war itself brings into the world. Someday the world will wake up and realize that the drug war itself is causing all the problems it purports to solve. Then we will exchange the Drug Enforcement Agency for the Drug Education Agency and start learning how to use plant medicines safely rather than to demonize them like so many fanatical Christian Scientists.



Up abolishthedea.com

July 5, 2021

Legalize Opioids Now




Just read an article by Troy Ange and Zane Kaleem on Medpage Today entitled "We Must Legalize Opioids Now."

I kind of agree. But Troy and Zane fail to understand that the opioid crisis is just one of many inevitable results of substance prohibition itself. And since legalizing opioids is such a big ask already, they might as well go for the brass ring and pursue the legalization of all naturally occurring substances, including opium itself.

My views on this topic are perhaps made somewhat clearer in the following comment I posted beneath the article above cited, though my comment was really in response to another comment by a certain Dr. Michael Atkins, who betrayed his allegiance -- consciously or otherwise -- to a variety of drug warrior lies.



Does Michael not realize that no one in their right mind would use a super-addictive opioid if all psychoactive plant substances (like opium, pot and mushrooms) were legal -- like they have been thru 99.9% of recorded history, until America, the one nation founded on Natural Law, decided for racist reasons to start outlawing plants in 1914? It is the outlawing of all natural mood-affecting psychoactive substances that has incentivized bad guys to profit by selling highly addictive synthesized drugs. The result, Michael? We have an all-out war in Mexico, prisons full of minorities, a self-proclaimed "Drug War Hitler" in the Philippines, and movies in which Americans are encouraged to cheer on DEA agents who are gleefully violating the US Constitution -- a document which they obviously hold in disdain. Besides, doctors have no leg to stand on in denouncing addiction, since they tell addicted psychiatric patients like myself to "keep taking our meds." After 40 years of addiction to doctors' brain-numbing drugs, however (oh, pardon me, their "meds"), I am as depressed as ever and longing to be able to use opium weekly instead (to better enjoy a concert, a la De Quincey). If I'm going to be addicted for life, I would prefer a substance that can assist my creativity and insight. Besides, opium is NOT addictive if used properly, whereas Big Pharma antidepressants are addictive BY DESIGN. They're meant to be taken every day of one's life! Marco Polo enjoyed opium. As did Benjamin Franklin and Marcus Aurelius. If someone they knew had died of an overdose, they would have blamed a lack of education, both about substances and about life in general, rather than superstitiously blaming the death on an inanimate substance called a "drug."



Up abolishthedea.com

July 4, 2021

Libertarians as Closet Christian Scientists




You'd think libertarians would see through all the Drug Warrior censorship and demonization of amoral substances, but even they are unwittingly hobbled by Drug War lies. Take Christian libertarian Jake Offenhartz. He sees the drug war as a flagrant overreach of government, however, his own argument is weakened by his tacit acknowledgement of the drug war lie that there is no necessity for using the psychoactive substances of which politicians disapprove. Jake himself professes a kind of scorn for such substances, declaring that he would never personally use them.

But how -- and why -- would he say that? The kind of medicine that he's referring to has scarcely been examined for its therapeutic potential (how could it be with the outlawing of any plant that manifests potential useful psychopharmacological qualities?) and the hints of their efficacy are overwhelming. There are thousands of plants out there that we are forbidden to even begin investigating for therapeutic purposes. Given this Nazi state of affairs, what sense does it make to forswear those medicines a priori, unless the libertarian who does so is actually a closet Christian Scientist, convinced that drugs are to be avoided on principle -- a standard, however, that they surely do not hold for aspirin and Pepto Bismol, let alone tobacco and alcohol.

By outlawing psychoactive medicine, the Drug War is deciding how and how much people can think. This is the great crime of the drug war, and yet libertarians like Jake cannot confront it since they essentially agree with the drug warrior about the lack of necessity for what is hypocritically called "drug use." Such a limit upon thinking itself is also a violation of religion to those who believe with Plato that the unexamined life is not worth living, since freedom of thought itself is controlled by a government which (like the Christian Science libertarian) has a scorn for mental states of which they disapprove. The libertarian is thus powerless to confront the Drug War for its greatest sins against human freedom -- sins, however, which only follow after we have allowed the original sin of the drug warrior, which was outlawing plants in the first place, in clear violation of natural law.



Up abolishthedea.com

July 4, 2021

The Nazi Drug War

William L. Shirer writes in "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich":

No one who has not lived for years in a totalitarian land can possibly conceive how difficult it is to escape the dread consequences of a regime's calculated and incessant propaganda.


This explains why so few Americans even recognize the evils of the drug war today. We have had 100 years of anti-drug propaganda in the form of censorship (of the discussion of all positive "drug" use) and demonization of all substances of which our government disapproves. Shirer goes further to note that anyone who dares to point out that the emperor is wearing no clothes in such cases is greeted with blank stares of incredulity. This in turn explains, or at least gives precedence for, the silence that greets my attempts to point out these truths to modern Americans. They have long handed the subject matter of psychoactive substances over to the government -- they decide how we should feel about such things -- and so plain home truths and scientific observations are not welcome, and are often even considered to be in contravention of American law.

Apropos reflections for the Fourth of July, when we celebrate our freedom to do anything -- so far as we do not claim access to the plants and fungi that grow at our very feet.



Up abolishthedea.com

June 30, 2021

To Jake Offenhartz

In response to "3 moments that might convince you Edgar Allan Poe was a time traveler."

Poe was ahead of his time in daring to point out that substance use can have something other than hedonism for its goal. Thus he writes of a morphine habitue named Augustus Bedloe in “A Tale of the Ragged Mountains,” a knowledge-seeker who used what we would today denigrate as a “drug” to better profit from his daily walks through the forested mountains southwest of Charlottesville, Virginia. Poe writes:

“In the meantime the morphine had its customary effect- that of enduing all the external world with an intensity of interest. In the quivering of a leaf- in the hue of a blade of grass- in the shape of a trefoil- in the humming of a bee- in the gleaming of a dew-drop- in the breathing of the wind- in the faint odors that came from the forest- there came a whole universe of suggestion- a gay and motley train of rhapsodical and immethodical thought.”

While Poe may have traveled through time to become a prophet, I think that it is even more likely that Poe was rendered visionary with the help of psychoactive plant medicine. It certainly inspired the fabric of his prose, why not its essence as well?

This runs counter to drug war theology, of course, which considers it heresy to allude to any positive outcomes of unsanctioned substance use. Yet in this latter case, Poe’s very times were ahead of our times, given the way that America first adopted a Christian Science disdain for plant medicine beginning only in 1914, when racist politicians first criminalized a plant in violation of Natural Law. And so if Poe were inspired by godsend plant medicine, the whole drug war apparatus of censorship and demonization has been in force since at least 1914 to hide that fact, which explains why “A Tale of the Ragged Mountains” is rarely assigned reading in public schools. A story in which “drugs” are not completely evil can never pass muster in the times of a drug war.



Up abolishthedea.com

June 29, 2021

Toddler Abuse in Drug War America

To paraphrase JB Haldane, far-left fads are not only stranger than we think, but stranger than we CAN think. I certainly never would have thought that toddlers had the ability, let alone the need, to pick a gender. Merely for school systems to put that idea in kids' heads does seem like a form of child abuse, for it causes kids to doubt the one thing that should be a given for them in an otherwise topsy-turvy new world: that is to say their very feeling of biochemical integrity. By all means, let the child become he-she-or-it after high school, but to make gender such an issue at such an age is clearly part of a highly debatable agenda of sexual politics for which toddlers should not be used as pawns.

Why am I broaching this unpleasant topic in a site that aims to end the drug war (aka the war on plant medicine)? Because this issue shows how confused Americans are about their rights. The same people who are pushing for this uber-radical overthrow of the basic understanding of our very humanity are those who, for the most part, are absolutely silent about the war on plant medicine, if not egging it on, the same folks who cheer when corrupt DEA agents in the movies shoot suspects at point-blank range and in cold blood. These radicals see outrages all around them that need to be addressed, but only when they're parsed and disseminated by a grievance-filled academia. Tell them they can't use the plants that grow at their very feet -- and that they must urinate to prove their compliance -- and these same uber-radicals will say, "Yes, sir, may I have another!"

We're all in a Christian Science prison as far as our mental states are concerned, a clear violation of the obvious natural law, but at least we inmates have all sorts of increasingly recherche rights that our forebears never even dreamed of: the right to decide if we're feminine, masculine, or even neuter. And our Christian Science caretakers will gladly bring us all of these outre luxuries that we demand -- as long as we do not demand any self-evident right, like the freedom to reach down and grab the plant medicine that grows at our very feet.



Up abolishthedea.com

June 28, 2021

Bill Clinton: Drug Warrior Par Excellence

No one's support of the drug war bothers me as much as that of Bill Clinton, because he should know better. He claims that plant medicine cannot be legalized (as if government ever had the right to outlaw it in the first place under Natural Law) because his brother "would be dead" had that happened under his watch.

Let me get this straight, Bill: Because your brother is irresponsible, we must -- instead of educating him -- ban a plant -- A PLANT, BILL -- that has been used responsibly by other cultures for millennia. What's more, we must go around the world banning that plant in an act of colonial hubris, and use the mere existence of that plant as an excuse to topple foreign leaders. Onward Christian Scientists, Marching as to War -- the drug war, that is, of their own botanically clueless creation.

And what's the result, Bill? Hundreds are killed daily around the world, thanks to a Drug War that, even as we speak, is causing a Civil War in Mexico.

For shame, Bill! It's literally all your fault -- you and every other liberal who has been deceived by racist politicians who first sought to marginalize minorities by turning possession of plants into a violation of law -- a felony, in fact, that would keep them from voting. Meanwhile, the soaring death toll of alcohol and tobacco are invisible to Bill -- as are the 1 in 4 women who are addicted to brain-numbing Big Pharma meds. Bill's concerned about something, but it's not public health.

Bill Clinton may be a Rhodes Scholar, but he is about as philosophical on this topic as my left toe. In order to "save" his brother, my mother must go without godsend plant medicine, injured soldiers must do without pain relief, artists and writers must go without nature-provided inspiration, and everyone else in the world must refrain -- all of whom had a Godgiven freedom to access Mother Nature until the racist Narcotics act of 1914.

Wake up, Bill Clinton and all you equally Bamboozled Liberals! There is nothing moral, healthy or right about criminalizing mother nature -- and the results of that prohibition can be seen every day in death and suffering around the world.

And so Drug Warriors wring their hands in terror about a world full of Clinton's Brothers -- meanwhile outlawing drugs like ecstasy whose only side effect is to bring people together in peace and love and understanding.

Drug Warriors are so busy demonizing mother nature that they have lost track of the real goals in life: living happily and peaceably together.

Stop demonizing plant medicine: start learning how to use it as safely as possible -- without taking the unconstitutional shortcut of criminalizing plants altogether!

For that is the tyranny par excellence. Because in outlawing mood medicine, you outlaw how and how much a citizen is allowed to think.



Up abolishthedea.com

June 28, 2021

Listening to the Drug War

If the global capitalist system cannot allow plants to be legal, then there is something wrong with the global capitalist system, not with plants.

What’s wrong with the system?

Cynicism -- that refuses to see any good in spiritual states -- indeed that refuses to see any spiritual states at all, referring all good feelings to “getting high.”

Scientism -- that associates plant-induced mystical states with unscientific tribal life, insisting instead that folks take scientifically approved medications developed on reductive criteria, ignoring all such obvious benefits of substance use as ecstasy and the psychologically beneficial anticipation of the same.

Racism -- that, consciously and/or subconsciously, seeks to fashion laws that impact minorities, the racism being evident in the fact that white Anglo Saxon drugs of tobacco and alcohol receive zero state punishment, while far less dangerous substances which are associated with non-whites and foreigners are demonized and criminalized to the point that Anglos even travel overseas in an attempt to eradicate such plant medicine from the face of the earth.



Up abolishthedea.com

June 8, 2021

Legalize Cocaine Now

along with every other plant-based medicine

That sounds crazy, of course, because Drug Warrior propaganda has worked hard for 50+ years to make it seem so. But Sigmund Freud considered cocaine to be a godsend for his depression. Why should we succumb to a politically motivated campaign to demonize the substance, especially when demonizing plant medicine is in violation of the natural law upon which America was founded.

If America can't handle plant medicine, that is a problem with America, and the capitalist cynicism that pervades it. If capitalism encourages entrepreneurs to profit from encouraging drug misuse, that is a problem with capitalism, a problem for which plant medicine should not take the fall.

End the psychiatric pill mill. End the police state. End civil war in Mexico. Stop Duterte. End the lies. End Christian Science drug testing. Legalize cocaine now -- and every other plant medicine on the planet.

If you're worried about substance misuse, abolish the Drug Enforcement Agency and replace it with the Drug Education Agency. Then tell folks the real facts about substances: dangers and benefits. And stop screaming about "drugs, drugs, drugs," which only increases substance misuse by giving kids ideas that they would never have in a world that did not scapegoat substances.

Oh, while you're at it, put the DEA hierarchy on trial for having knowingly lied about godsend medicine since its inception in 1973, a crime that has resulted in the unnecessary suffering of millions -- if not billions -- of emotional sufferers worldwide, including the depressed elderly and soldiers suffering from PTSD.



Up abolishthedea.com

June 6, 2021

Logically Challenged Drug Warriors




I once had a drug warrior respond to my arguments in favor of decriminalizing plant medicine by saying that his family had once been harassed by a "drug user." That's it. Ta-da! He actually thought that this was some kind of knockdown argument against the rights of individuals to use the plant medicine that grows at their very feet.

How does one respond to such feeble reasoning without appearing sarcastic?

This man is saying that, because he can cite one single instance in which the use of psychoactive plant medicine affected him negatively, one single instance, that the medicine in question must be illegal, not just for Americans but for everybody in the entire world. And so it must be kept from the elderly in whom it might fight depression, it must be kept from the soldiers in whom it might fight PTSD, it must be kept from the artists in whom it might inspire creativity, it must be kept from the religious in whom it might inspire faith. Hold on, though, we're not done yet. Because this man has had one negative experience that had something or other to do with the plant medicine in question, Americans must travel overseas to burn this plant and must financially blackmail those countries that fail to view it in the same jaundiced and hysterical light.

Such thinking is beyond childish. Yet it is the way that drug warriors actually think about substances that botanically clueless politicians have outlawed for racist reasons.

Alcohol and cigarettes can rack up daily death tolls and prescription medicines can boldly proclaim on national television that they occasionally cause death -- yet the drug war has so enfeebled the American mind on the subject of substances that we see no hypocrisy in singling out psychoactive plant medicine as evil, provided only that it can be misused by one person. And whence came even this rare misuse? It is a product of the Drug War itself, which teaches us to fear medicines rather than to learn about them. No one in so-called scientific America knows the dangers and benefits of the coca plant -- instead we know that it is our moral and patriotic duty to abhor the substance, tho' it has been used responsibly for millennia by non-Western cultures and Sigmund Freud himself considered it a godsend for depression. (Hey, if we didn't abhor it, how could we justify invading other countries by charging their leaders with trading in "narcotics," aka substances of which corrupt Western Christian Scientist politicians disapprove.

My advice to the reader who, despite drug war propaganda, can actually grasp what I'm saying here is this: never believe anything that any American tells you about "drugs." It is a subject ruled by primitive emotions that have been stoked by primitive politicians, a campaign of anti-scientific substance demonization that has its origins in racially motivated drug laws disguised as public health measures. What's more, these racists have played on primitive fears in such a way (thru censorship and lies, like the slanderous Christian Science "frying pan" ad) that even the well-meaning have been bamboozled into scapegoating this politically created category called "drugs," despite the breathtaking hypocrisy of such "concern" in a nation where 1 in 4 American women are hooked on Big Pharma meds and no one cares. But then that's down to American scientism: "Ah, that addiction is scientific, don't you see, and so it may go forward full speed ahead!"

In a way, I'm happy for the drug war. I look around me and see my shortcomings in so many fields: I can't get my mind around nuclear physics, cosmology, or field theory, but I do have a philosophical skill that places me far above my fellows, in that I see the Drug War as the unprecedented establishment of the Christian Science religion and a violation of Natural Law (and I dare say the ghost of Thomas Jefferson would agree with me, after the DEA stomped onto Monticello and confiscated the garden-loving president's poppy plants in 1987). A country scared to death of plants! What anti-democratic, anti-scientific rot!

Of course, a lot of my seeming exceptionalism in this quarter is probably due to the fact that those who agree with me have no interest in speaking up for fear of endangering their careers, or at least being looked at askance by friends and family. Nor do I blame them.



Up abolishthedea.com

June 5, 2021

Open Letter to author William Richards

I hope you don't mind if I follow up on our discussion about drug-war related issues, particularly the work of Gabriel Mate regarding addiction. I hope that the following philosophical ideas make some sense to you, because frankly the vast majority of the responses I get to such ideas is silence. This always leads me to wonder: am I ahead of my time, am I just plain wrong for some reason that no one cares to share, or are these ideas somehow unintentionally hateful in a way that I have yet to understand (or am I just unqualified to hold forth, being a mere victim of the drug war and not an officially certified academic on the subject).

For I believe that almost everything that is written about addiction these days is wrong or misleading, simply because it does not properly account for the role of the Drug War in creating addiction, both literally by incentivizing bad actors and outlawing safer medicines than the ones they sell, and by linguistic fiat, as when drug warriors of the early 20th century turned "habituation" to opium almost overnight into a morally tinged "addiction" to that drug.

Gabriel Mate makes the same mistake, which is ironic to me given his discovery that psychedelic-aided therapy can be so powerful. He ignores the role of the drug war in defining what we consider to be addiction. We live in an age where 1 in 4 American women are addicted ("reliant" as the Drug Industry would say) to Big Pharma meds, and yet Gabriel does not even mention this fact in the opening of his book. This is because the Drug War has a Christian Science metaphysic, and so when we think of "addicts," we're to think of those practicing doubtful health habits and championing lifestyles that are at odds with Christianity, not those who have received their drugs from board-certified scientists who (however falsely) claim to have found some chemical imbalance that is somehow responsible for all human sadness.

So Gabriel takes the "Drug War" as a given and a natural baseline, thinking that he can then draw conclusions about human nature from today's state of affairs. And so he concludes that almost all addicts are dealing with inner pain. This, however, is either just plain wrong, or else so universally true about the human race that it's a meaningless observation. Marcus Aurelius was not dealing with inner pain when he engaged in the casual use of opium, neither were Benjamin Franklin nor Marco Polo. Plato was not fighting inner pain when he took part in the psychedelic-fueled Eleusinian Mysteries. Nor were the followers of the Vedic religion fighting inner pain when they drank soma and praised it to the skies, thereby founding a new religion. Freud was indeed fighting depression when he tried cocaine therapeutically, but the inconvenient truth in that case is that the cocaine actually worked for Freud. It overrode his depression and empowered him to achieve the prolific work output that would result in his worldwide fame.

I have no doubt that Gabriel has great empathic skills in working with his "patients," and I have nothing against the idea of "talk therapy," which indeed a lifetime of experience has shown me could work wonders in conjunction with the advised use of the proper godsend medicines. But before we pathologize "addiction" by ascribing it to inner pain, we must first acknowledge the political nature of the term "addiction" in a drug war society. JFK and his wife were regularly prescribed what the Drug Warrior would call "speed" by their personal physician, but if a poor person were to use the same substances with the same frequency, they would be considered mere drug addicts and required to go to reeducation classes in the form of a 12-step group.

And what are the problems with addiction? Uncertain drug supply, both as to quantity and quality, dealing with underworld elements, unpredictable and often high prices?

It seldom seems to occur to the modern addiction expert that all of these problems are the result of the drug war itself, not of the drugs themselves.

I therefore think that every speech (or book) by a supposed addiction expert should start with the speaker (or author) excoriating the drug war. The drug war, after all, created addiction in the morally charged and political way that we consider that term today. That's why I gave up on Mate's book (Hungry Ghosts) after 20 pages, both for his failure to mention the great addiction of our time (indeed the greatest national addiction ever: that of women to SSRIs) and the fact that the drug war causes the problems of which Gabriel is preparing to write.

Once we renounce both the Drug War and its Christian Science emphasis on sobriety as somehow good in itself, we come up with very new and promising solutions for what today we call (or rather judge by calling) "addiction."

What's the answer, then, to the addiction problem?

I would end the drug war, change the Drug Enforcement Agency into the Drug Education Agency, and replace psychiatrists with pharmacologically savvy empaths, who would be empowered to use any psychoactive plant medicine(s) in the world to obtain a desired psychological result with a given person -- person, not patient, since the change I'm proposing would obviate the need for using the term "patient" for all but the most dire cases -- since from a psychological standpoint, we're all in search of self-actualization, and so these proposed empaths would be available for anyone at any time to discuss ways to further their life goals -- whether with the help of medicinal plant medicine or not.

Right now, if someone decides to "get off" of heroin, we consider "cold turkey" to be a plausible means of that happening. But this is only because we have a Christian Science metaphysic which values sobriety in and of itself -- that plus the fact that we've outlawed all the substances that could help the patient get off heroin without going through hell. Moreover we have politically concluded that there is no such thing as a human need for self-transcendence that might manifest in substance use, and therefore we judge the use as unnecessary and hedonistic -- or, at best, based on some "inner pain." Once we take off our "drug war" glasses, however, we see that cold turkey addiction treatment makes no more sense than the knee-jerk application of leeches to the body as a cure-all. It is in fact the deliberate infliction of great psychological suffering for political and ideological reasons.

In a world that is free of the drug war and its Christian Science demonization of plant medicine, the goal of "addiction" treatment would be, first and foremost, to have the "patient" live a fulfilled life, NOT (as in the current treatment) to make sure that they are "sober" -- which is another political term in a drug war world, since it means, "using only psychoactive substances of which politicians approve." (This is another blind spot of the modern "addiction expert": ignorant of history, he or she ignores the motivating need for human self-transcendence by ascribing all "drug use" to hedonism and escapism. This is in line with Mary Baker's Christian Science ethics, according to which the need for self-transcendence is INDEED thought of as escapism, since according to that religion, all plans for human improvement are escapist if they're not directed to Jesus Christ.)

With nature's entire psychoactive pharmacy at hand, it is unthinkable that my psychologically savvy empath would recommend "cold turkey" for a heroin USER, let alone follow up with treatment by a drug like Naltrexone to ensure that the patient's very digestive system is inline with drug war prejudices. (It's interesting: it's not enough for America to go overseas and burn opium plants in defiance of local opinion, we then have to create drugs that make it impossible for Americans to use those foreign drugs for any reason whatsoever. This is drug war imperialism taken to a whole new level.)

Whether you agree with my analysis or not, I hope you can see why I was disappointed in Gabriel Mate's book. Regarding that analysis, I would add, however, that I take the drug war personally, because it has turned me into an eternal patient. And that's interesting. I used to think that the problem of addiction was the fact that it made you dependent on something and that, in and of itself, was disheartening. But when I found that psychiatry itself had placed me on meds that are harder to kick than heroin (source: NIH), I began to see that America's hatred of addiction was not based on rational principles, but rather on economic and Christian Science motives. Addiction to coffee is fine. Addiction to alcohol is fine. Addiction only gets problematic when my drug of choice happens to be a substance of which botanically clueless Western politicians disapprove.

In just a month, I will have to travel 45 miles once again to describe my personal feelings to a stranger who is half my age. Why? So that I can have the privilege of making another very expensive purchase of SSRis that are fogging my mind rather than leading me toward self-actualization. They aren't correcting a chemical imbalance, they're causing one. (See the books of Richard Whitaker.) Or, if these "wonder drugs" are working, then my emotions failed to get the memo.

Between you, me and the lamp post, I would much rather be addicted to a reliable supply of opium or cocaine -- since the person from whom I received such a supply wouldn't be so ill-mannered as to inquire about how much sleep I was getting and whether I ever considered suicide. Moreover, I value creativity and mental dexterity over "fitting in" and being a good economic citizen, let alone a Christian Scientist.

But the hypocritical Drug Warrior Christian Scientist "addiction expert" just shrugs and reminds me to "keep taking your meds!"

Thanks for reading my apparently oddball ideas!

Brian

PS The next time a 20-something "doctor" asks me if I've ever considered suicide, I'm going to say: "Only when I think how psychiatry has turned me into an eternal patient."



Up abolishthedea.com

June 4, 2021

Yellow Drug War Journalism

The Drug War can never be killed -- and remain dead -- until American journalists stop demonizing psychoactive medicine, with stories that imply that one single solitary misuse of a psychoactive substance is enough to disqualify that substance from being used by anyone, anywhere, at any time, for any purpose. Not only is this bad journalism and logic-challenged unscientific reasoning: it also represents Christian Science run amok: Christian Science: the religion that tells us that we must just say no to drugs.

For it's bad enough that America, a nation founded upon Natural Law, should prevent its citizens from accessing the plant medicine that grows at their very feet -- but it is outrageous imperialism that America should then insist that the entire world follow that unscientific lead -- demonizing and burning substances rather than learning how to use them wisely for the reasons that societies have always used such medicines: for personal relaxation, increased mental focus, creativity -- and the establishment of entire religions like the Vedic.



Up abolishthedea.com

May 28, 2021

Letter to Psychology Today

written in response to Twenty Billion Fails to "Move the Needle" on Mental Illness posted May 23, 2017, by Gregg Henriques Ph.D.

As Gregg Henriques reported in 2017, NIMH head Thomas Insel said, "We have not moved the needle in improving lives" of the mentally ill. As a 60-year victim of the psychiatric pill mill, I would go further: America (under the NIMH) has moved the needled BACKWARDS in the last 50 years, by creating a nation of Stepford Wives, wherein 1 in 4 American women are now dependent on Big Pharma "meds" for a lifetime. As a male Big Pharma addict, my psychiatrist told me not to bother trying to get off Effexor, because an NIH study proves it to be as addictive as heroin. I later complained about my addiction, and my clinic fired my therapist, apparently upset with him for telling me the truth about the medicines I was taking.

With respect, Insel and the ENTIRE FIELD OF PSYCHOLOGY is to blame for the problem of mental illness, because you guys have rolled over and played dead for drug warriors, pretending that you're working from a normal baseline in fighting mind trouble when in reality you have been forbidden from even researching hundreds of godsend psychoactive medicines (medicines that have long histories, not simply of helping troubled minds -- see the modern-day work of James Fadiman, Stanislav Grof, Richard Griffiths, Amanda Feilding, Rick Doblin, etc. -- but of inspiring entire religions, thinking here of the soma plant(s) in India and the use of entheogenic mushroom medicines in MesoAmerica, not to mention the psychedelic kykeon of the Eleusinian Mysteries, which inspired Plato, Plutarch and Cicero. And then there's Ecstasy, which can stop mass shootings by endowing haters with a feeling of compassion for their fellows. But professional psychologists cannot imagine using demonized DRUGS for such purposes as simply preventing mass killings.

I know that I don't count since I'm just a patient and I am supposed to shut up and take my meds. You only accept input from the PhD's whose policies have turned me into an eternal patient of the psychiatric pill mill. But at least Insel admits what folks like myself have known for decades: that psychology and psychiatry are an utter failure today. Why? Because thanks to your Christian Science drug war sensibilities, you have turned folks like myself into ETERNAL PATIENTS, who have to bare their souls to a doctor half their age every three months in order to have the privilege of buying yet another ridiculously expensive prescription of mind-numbing "meds," which were promoted on the lie that they fix a chemical imbalance. Why then am I more depressed than ever -- and still prevented by Christian Science drug warriors from helping myself out with the plant medicine that grows at my very feet?

In short, professional psychology's speculations about mental health are meaningless to me (and probably even dangerous for me based on the addictive SSRI dystopia resulting from their previous misguided musings about therapy protocols) because the field has failed to recognize how the drug war has circumscribed their research and turned folks like myself into eternal patients, deprived of the plant medicine that grows at their very feet. In this connection, I would remind you that lobotomy is not a last resort as professionals like to call it: it is the default treatment required for chronic depression thanks only to the DEA's mendacious scheduling of godsend entheogens as somehow being without therapeutic value.

This is all a long-winded way to beg psychological professionals to start fighting back against the Drug War, recognizing that it is the mere establishment of the Christian Science religion and a violation of the natural law upon which Jefferson founded America -- Thomas Jefferson, the president whose estate was invaded in 1987 by the DEA so they could confiscate his heretical poppy plants, thereby keeping the world safe for liquor and tobacco.



Up abolishthedea.com

May 28, 2021

Nietzsche and the Drug War

Nietzsche brought the western world's attention to its unrecognized and unacknowledged reliance on Christian moral precepts. It's time now for someone to bring the western world's attention to the fact that the Drug War is premised on the exact same religious attitudes. More specifically, the Drug War is premised on the Christian Science precept that it is immoral to use "drugs." Why? According to Christian Science, it is wrong because Jesus is the answer.

Of course, the Drug Warriors cannot rely on that argument in a country that at least gives lip service to the freedom of religion. That's why the Drug War is all about the demonization of plant medicine, a demonization that is practiced by outright lies (like the highly mendacious "frying pan" ad, which claims that a substance fries the brain the moment it is criminalized by a politician) and the censorship of all history and biography that tends to illustrate the responsible use of substances that the drug warrior desires us to hate. Thus we suppress Poe's short stories which dare tell us of the perceptual and creative powers of morphine and opium. We hide the fact that Marcus Aurelius and Ben Franklin enjoyed opium. We never -- but never -- mention Freud's conviction that cocaine was a godsend for depression. And we're completely hush-hush when it comes to politically incorrect histories such as the psychedelic-fueled Eleusinian Mysteries, the Vedic religion's link to the worship of psychoactive plant(s) known as soma, and the widespread Mesoamerican use of mushrooms for religious enlightenment and ritual.

American philosophers have long since "grokked" the general principle that the west is founded and continues to act (subconsciously, as it were) according to Christian precepts... but they have yet to recognize that the drug war is the prime example of that fact and that it therefore represents the establishment of a state religion, namely the state religion called Christian Science, albeit a hypocritical version that is applied exclusively to psychoactive medicines and makes exceptions for the drug warrior's own favorite drugs of alcohol and tobacco. That's why, when in a mischievous mood, I like to imagine a drug war that cracks down exclusively on those two biggest killers in the drug world, depriving jobs to any American who has so much as sipped alcohol in the last month or who is found to have a crushed cigarette butt in their car. I envision THOSE "drug fiends" tossed into overcrowded jails and removed from the voting rolls, denied public housing, and forced to attend government re-education camps known as "12 step groups." Now that's a drug war that I could support, if only to give America's Christian Science drug warriors a taste of their own violence-spawning and racist medicine.



Up abolishthedea.com

May 20, 2021

PC Patsies for the Drug War

The University of Pennsylvania just blacklisted the words "freshman" and "sophomore." Whatever we may think of this latest politically correct gambit, it strikes me as amusing that we have this faux freedom to tweak the dictionary while we have no freedom to use the plant medicine that grows at our very feet. If the university wants to be truly progressive and take a truly courageous action, they would ban the word "drugs," which is used in the US as a Christian Science pejorative for psychoactive medicine. But that would be a real stand that might cause real pushback, and that's not the kind of "bold action" that university deans are known to favor. "Look at us, we're attacking patriarchy -- but we still grant government the right to control how much we can feel, how we can think, and how much we can think."



Up abolishthedea.com

May 14, 2021

Christian Science Rehab, aka the Twelve Step Group

posted in response to article in New York magazine of May 11, 2021, entitled Who Should John Mulaney Be Now?.

The whole concept of rehab is nonsensical in a Drug War society, where the cure always means Christian Science sobriety, whether the "patient" likes it or not. In a Drug War society, we dutifully ignore all the psychoactive remedies of Mother Nature, even though some of those medicines have been responsible for inspiring entire religions, like the soma of the Vedic peoples and the mushrooms of a wide variety of Mesoamerican tribes, including the Taino people. They were enslaved by Columbus and "persuaded" to make alcohol their drug of choice. Sure, the "rehab" cure may involve "drugs," but only if they're from Big Pharma -- like the antidepressants on which 1 in 4 American women are dependent: a whole nation of Stepford Wives that gets a big fat MULLIGAN from the modern hypocritical and racist Drug Warrior. But dependency on SSRIs does not require rehab, of course, because the Christian Scientist is happy as long as Americans do not dare use the evil pharmacy of Mother Nature. Psychoactive medicine can be used responsibly to help patients achieve self-actualization, but the Christian Scientist fetishizes over the moral perfection of their hypocritically defined "sobriety" instead.



Up abolishthedea.com

May 13, 2021

Christian Science Thugs, aka Drug War SWAT Teams

posted in response to article in Reason magazine of May 11, 2021, entitled Cops Wrecked a Home, Terrorized a Family, Assaulted a Man. It Was the Wrong Place.


The Drug War is wrong root and branch. It was begun to disfranchise minorities while allowing the US to invade other countries at will, under the pretext of fighting the politically created boogieman called "drugs." We're legalizing pot today only because it's becoming overwhelmingly popular with Anglo-Americans. We keep cocaine criminalized because it is associated with Hispanics and Blacks (even tho' Freud himself considered cocaine to be a godsend for his depression and it has been used for millennia by MesoAmericans, all without a lot of belly-aching about the supposed immorality of it all). What's the result? We're causing a Civil War in Mexico, empowering a self-described "Drug War Hitler" in the Philippines, and sending militarized police forces into hitherto sancrosanct American homes, all in an effort to keep the world from accessing the plant medicine that grows at their very feet (which is a violation of Natural Law, by the way, should America's legal system ever choose to wake up from their self-satisfied slumber and face this outrage head-on).

If we have to have a Drug War, let's jail everyone who has so much as a trace of alcohol or tobacco in their system. Let's remove them from the work force and force them to urinate for us upon demand. Let's remove them from the voting rolls and throw them into overcrowded prisons. That's a Drug War that would give the Drug Warriors a taste of their own medicine. (Of course, let's break down the doors of all these tobacco and alcohol "fiends," kick their family members in the groin while shouting, "Get down! Get Down!"



Up abolishthedea.com

May 4, 2021

How the Drug War Banned my Religion

Not only is the Drug War the establishment of a religion (namely, that of Christian Science), but it bars me from practicing my own religion, for my religion holds that the mind can gain metaphysical insight through the use of psychoactive plant medicines and that it is my responsibility as a human being to pursue that insight. Why? Because I believe with Plato that the unexamined life is not worth living. The Drug War, however, prevents me from living this examined life by denying me access to precisely those plant medicines that I hold to be sacred and inspiring in this regard, plant medicines that have inspired entire religions in the past and been the source of metaphysical inspiration for such western icons as Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, and Plutarch.

The Drug War is therefore intolerable to those who believe in freedom of religion, not to mention the Natural Law upon which America was founded. For if anything is truly a natural law as defined by Jefferson and Locke it is an individual's right to access the plant medicines that grow at their very feet.



Up abolishthedea.com

May 4, 2021

Jefferson Bashing on Medium.com

There's something morally pretentious about finding so much fault for a person who, like everyone, was a product of his time, as if the fault finder assumes that he or she will appear faultless 250 years from now when hopefully more enlightened societies than ours will look back upon us and our doings. These critics of past heroes would do well to remember that their own replacement heroes will be subject to the same jaundiced critique that they are now reserving for their enemies. If they dubiously equate Jefferson with Hitler, then it won't be long before their philosophical enemies will be making an equally plausible case against Malcolm X and Al Sharpton, in part by speculating how the diatribes of the latter pundit may have led to the torching of a Jewish business in New York City. But mainly I'm talking about the protestor in the mirror. When we condemn past wrongs, we should have a little humility, since we're surely perpetrating our own terrible wrongs that will only be clear to society 250 years from today.

Take the Drug War, for instance: it is a violation of the Natural Law upon which Jefferson founded America, and it is the establishment of the Christian Science religion. Yet no one who's ranting today about Jefferson seems to have any problem with the Drug War, this Drug War that is causing a civil war in Mexico, empowering a self-proclaimed Drug War Hitler in the Philippines, and militarizing local police forces so that they can kick down your door and punch your grandmother in the face with impunity, should you yourself be suspected of dealing in plant medicines of which botanically clueless politicians disapprove. And so the Monticello Foundation was happy to sell out the ex-president's Natural Law legacy in 1987 by allowing the DEA to stomp onto the president's estate and confiscate his poppy plants. Natural Law? Who cares? No one would speak up for Jefferson because we wanted to paint him entirely evil and so we renounced the Natural Law legacy that he gave us, a legacy that took hundreds of years to arise from a tortured body politic in England.

And so we "good guys" of the 21st century still dutifully urinate for billionaire LSD-using employers and see no problem with a Drug War that makes Christian Science the law of the land -- this Drug War that first taught police to treat suspects like scumbags, this unprecedented superstitious demonization of amoral substances, this Drug War that is just the modern version of Columbus telling the Taino people to give up psychoactive mushrooms in favor of the shabby Western drug called alcohol. Of course, Columbus rendered the whole matter moot by simply killing the tribes in question. So if Jefferson-haters want to see the bad guys of 250 years from now, the majority of us need only look in the mirror: for there they will see a Drug War collaborator who was failing to this very day to speak up for Jefferson's natural law, duped as they were by Drug War lies and censorship and focused as they were on "calling out" the dead, and so religious liberty and natural law have disappeared from the American republic while we pat ourselves on the back for being so much more moral than past generations.

If you doubt that religious liberty has disappeared, just try to start a stateside church that uses a plant like Ayahuasca to achieve enlightenment in the same manner that the Vedic religion used soma, and you'll have the DEA breaking down your door before you can shout, "Natural Law!" But don't expect them to listen to you. After all, you've renounced the Natural Law legacy that alone could have forced the religious-banning Christian Science government to cease and desist.



Up abolishthedea.com

April 15, 2021

Capitalism and the Drug War

The interests of capitalism dictate what politician-led Americans can think about substances. Psychoactive plant medicine need merely cause a problem for one demented youth and our politicians easily convince us that the substance must be eradicated from the face of the earth. Meanwhile if a Big Pharma antidepressant causes weight gain and suicide, we dismiss these as "bad reactions," essentially blaming the victim for their oddball reaction to the drugs, while insisting that the substance in question is a godsend for the vast majority of the depressed.

This is not surprising since unfettered capitalism has a history of keeping problems from being solved if the solution would negatively affect stock values. That's why we have no quick answers to heart problems and cancer, since the obvious solution would be for Americans to cut back drastically on red meat, and yet the American Heart Association is supported by precisely those industries that would lose out given such a truly scientific approach. Therefore such agencies are like OJ Simpson vowing to spend his life searching for the guy who killed his wife. If they truly wanted to find the reason for heart disease (etc.) in America, they'd take one long look in the mirror.

We'd have been driving electrically powered cars a century ago, using free electricity and cell phones too, except that capitalism quashed these inventions because they merely empowered humanity rather than the all-important stockholder.



Up abolishthedea.com

April 7, 2021

America's Obsession with Fascist Drug War Movies

Interesting. Most movie producers seem to be stuck in the '80s, determined to toe the party line that psychoactive medicine from Mother Nature is devil spawn, which is a lie scientifically, historically and cross-culturally speaking. In "Running with the Devil" from 2019, CIA agent Natalie Reyes tortures one "drug suspect" and murders another in cold blood, shooting him at point blank range while she's puffing the hell out of her ever-present cigarettes. If a Drug War makes sense, then she should be the first one to be shot, since her drug of choice (nicotine) kills far more than the stuff she's cracking down on. The message of these movies is insidious: it says basically that America should declare martial law and simply kill everyone who dares to sell mother nature's psychoactive plants. Funny, I missed that part in the US Constitution, the part that calls on us to exact barbaric justice on folks who dare to use plant medicine of which politicians disapprove.



Up abolishthedea.com

March 26, 2021

There is No Drug Problem

There is no drug problem in America. There never has been. However there is a HUGE problem with how America deals with drugs. Instead of learning about them and teaching Americans how to use them wisely and for good purposes -- such as religious inspiration, creativity and increased mental focus, the way that "drugs" have been used since caveman days -- we demonize such substances and blame every possible social problem on them. Why? Because if we were to acknowledge that drugs aren't a real problem, we'd have to look at the real causes of our problems with drugs: namely, modern cynicism, unfettered capitalism, and America's scientistic expectation that all "drugs" should act like aspirin, that we should simply take them and wait placidly for some specific effect, with no effort on our part to make ourselves open to the drug-aided inspiration and epiphany that we're expecting. And of course when this naive attitude inevitably leads to "bad trips," we blame the substance rather than our inability to use it wisely.

And so American politicians blame "drugs" for all of America's problems, thereby shooting the messenger that's trying to tell us that Americans are immature and improperly educated. Other nations have been deeply awed by psychoactive substances to the point of creating entire religions around them and the hints of cosmic truth that their ingestion provides. But Americans titter like grade-schoolers at such substances and imagine ways of harnessing them to achieve carnal self-fulfillment. At least that's the image that the Drug Warriors seek to perpetuate, desperate as they are to hide the fact that so-called "drugs" have ever been used for anything but evil. And so we see nothing but horrifying depictions of hedonist "drug use" on television, drug "fiends" shooting up with dirty needles and scumbag thugs "snorting blow" as loudly as they possibly can.

Check out the unintentionally hilarious scene in the drug-war propaganda film called "Crisis" from 2021, wherein Jake, the self-righteous undercover DEA agent, is shuttling a nefarious "drug dealer" (is there any other kind?) across town in an unmarked police car as the latter horrible "druggie" snorts like a disgruntled water buffalo, frequently swiping his forefinger under his nose, just in case the audio clues are insufficient to convince the viewer that the bad guy in question has been "doing" that evil drug par excellence called cocaine. (Oh, the shameless hussy!) The producers do everything but insert a lower-third graphic reading "rotten evil druggie" with an arrow pointing upward at the offender's constantly wriggling proboscis. One thinks for a moment that the indignant Christian Science good guy in the driver's seat is going to lose his cool, come out from undercover and shout, "Oh, hell no," as he slams on the brakes and begins to pummel his passenger for daring to flaunt his terrible evil drug use in such a noisy and plebeian fashion, like an open invitation for SWAT teams to start raiding his home at once and start kicking his grandmother in the face. ("And here's another kick for raising that scumbag son of yours!")


Meanwhile we censor our history books to expunge the fact that folks like Marco Polo, Benjamin Franklin, and Marcus Aurelius used opium; that MesoAmericans employed coca and psychedelics in their religious rituals, and above all the fact that Sigmund Freud himself considered cocaine to be a godsend cure for his depression.

America is in such deep denial about its childish inability to handle "drugs" that it has forced the entire world to adopt its own jaundiced attitude about the plant medicine that grows unbidden around us. Desperate to ignore the fact that there's a problem with our own attitudes toward psychoactive substances, we not only demonize such substances but we insist that the entire world do the same, on penalty of our Army marching into their countries unbidden to burn the plants and fungi that we have turned into scapegoats for our own social problems. Nor do corrupt politicians have the least incentive to change this status quo, since they know that drug laws can be used like poll taxes to suppress voting by minorities simply by targeting them with "drug-related" felonies in order to remove them from the voting rolls -- plus, we can invade countries at will, merely by associating its leadership in any way with the sale of non-western medicine. Just the excuse that an imperialist government needs to carry on business as usual in these days of anti-colonial sentiment.



Up abolishthedea.com

March 26, 2021

How Ecstasy Could End Mass Shootings

It's hard to end mass shootings in America, because we're not allowed to come up with any solution that involves guns in any way. So we're hobbled from the start. It's like we're being asked to solve one of those crazy logic problems that says: "Using two match sticks, make 10 triangles... but you're not allowed to touch the match sticks at any time."

But I do have one idea of how to end -- or at least to seriously decrease -- mass shootings without (heaven forbid) inconveniencing gun owners in any way, shape or form. Here's the solution:

Force all haters to undergo talk therapy while under the influence of MDMA, aka Ecstasy. That's it. Problem solved (or at least seriously dented).

Why? Because the Drug Ecstasy has a long history of promoting pro-social feelings. The drug single-handedly brought about peace, love and understanding in Britain in the 1990s, when E-using folks of every ethnic group happily joined together on the dance floor to celebrate life without regard for racial, social or ethnic distinctions, a unity never witnessed before in the British Isles. That dance floor utopia would still be going on today except that Drug Warriors blamed one single solitary death on E, and used that as an excuse to crack down on the drug. The result: dancers switched from Ecstasy to anger-facilitating drugs such as alcohol and crack cocaine, and concert producers had to hire special forces troops to police their venues.

Yet another "victory" for the Drug War.

Of course, the Drug Warriors failed to notice that the E-related death which inspired their crackdown was caused by the Drug War itself. Why? Because the Drug War suppresses research on substances like Ecstasy, making it impossible to establish guidelines for safe use. Nor did they stop to think that Ecstasy was, in fact, FANTASTICALLY SAFE compared to alcohol, which racked up 5,460 deaths in Great Britain in 2020 alone* -- deaths over which the purblind British Drug Warrior never lost a moment of sleep, let alone launched a nationwide campaign to demonize alcohol.

So the good news is that Ecstasy could drastically decrease mass shootings if we were to use it therapeutically to treat angry people.

The bad news is that America is unlikely to hear this penny drop for many decades to come. Why not? Because guns are not the only thing that Americans are hung up about. They're hung up about the politically created scapegoat called "drugs" as well, unable to wrap their minds around the fact that the substances we dogmatically demonize today could actually be used for the good of a hate-filled humanity, if not to save us from nuclear annihilation, then at least to render mass shootings fewer and farther between.

Until America ends its illogical policy of substance demonization, Americans will remain as confused about mass shootings "as the Egyptians in their fog," vainly trying to think of solutions to this problem that do not involve either guns OR drugs... a self-created dilemma that makes the above-mentioned matchstick problem sound solvable by comparison.

*https://thehill.com/policy/international/europe/537505-alcohol-related-deaths-hit-record-high-in-uk-amid-coronavirus



Up abolishthedea.com

February 2, 2021

The Philosophical Idiocy of the Drug War

If an American has a negative response to an anti-depressant, we sigh and say, "Oh, dear, they had a bad reaction." We ascribe no blame to the Big Pharma anti-depressant. The bad reaction is the fault of the user: their system simply fails to respond appropriately to the drug in question.

If an American has a negative response to a psychoactive plant medicine, we snarl and say, "Oh, dear, that is an evil drug!"

It's this kind of muddled thinking about substances that makes the Drug War the great philosophical problem of our time, because the Drug War is propped up and supported on a framework of bogus hypocritical assumptions like this.

Take the old canard of the "crutch," the idea that we should not use mother nature's psychoactive plant medicines because they are crutches.

Was cocaine a crutch when it helped Sigmund Freud achieve self-actualization in his life? Was opium a crutch when it increased Benjamin Franklin's creativity and friendliness? Were psychedelics a crutch when they provided Plato with metaphysical insights at the Eleusinian mysteries? Was the natural substance called soma a crutch when it single-handedly (or single-plantedly) inspired the Vedic religion?

If any substances are "crutches," they are the tranquilizing meds of Big Pharma, which, since the introduction of lithium, have been designed, not to help folks achieve self-actualization in life, but to render them more docile and accepting of the status quo. In this way, Big Pharma meds are crutches designed to make the patient forget about the need to walk on their own two feet.

The idea that psychoactive medicines are crutches is not science, of course: it's Christian Science. It is a mere metaphysical postulate that it is somehow morally wrong to tweak mental functions with the use of psychoactive substances. Why should that be wrong, one asks? The Drug Warrior can only stammer in response, especially after you point out that 1 in 4 American women are addicted to the legal "crutches" of SSRI antidepressants, of which few Drug Warriors disapprove -- in fact, are likely to be among those who constantly needle the latter drug users to "keep taking their meds." At least Mary Baker was honest and told us WHY (in her opinion) we should refrain from all drugs: because Jesus was the answer to all suffering. We may disagree with her, of course, but she would have been the first to tell us that her proscriptions were faith-based, an example of frankness that the Christian Scientist drug warriors of today would do well to emulate in the name of full disclosure.



Up abolishthedea.com

January 30, 2021

TV's Cops: The Drug War in Action

Review of the TV show "Cops," submitted to the IMDB.

Americans outlaw psychoactive substances around the world, in violation of Natural Law, then they sit home and eat popcorn while watching minorities and morons get arrested on "Cops" for possessing substances that politicians have demonized. Marcus Aurelius used opium. So did Benjamin Franklin. Sigmund Freud thought cocaine was a godsend for his depression. Plato and Plutarch took part in the psychedelic-fueled Eleusinian Mysteries. The whole Vedic religion was founded to worship the metaphysical insights provided by a plant called Soma. Yet idiot America outlaws psychoactive substances and makes entire entertainment genres based on suppressing them. This not only violates the Natural Law upon which Jefferson founded this country, but it is the establishment of Christian Science as America's state religion: Christian Science: the religion that tells us that we have some moral duty to just say no to so-called "drugs." Thomas Jefferson didn't think so and he was rolling in his grave when the DEA confiscated his poppy plants in 1987. Cops is just the modern version of gladiator fights in ancient Rome and the Drug War is just a make-work program for American law enforcement.

NOTES: You can learn a lot about the evils of the Drug War by watching Cops, how the Drug War is a make-work program for law enforcement and causes police officers to have a weird obsession, not with how people actually behave but with what substances they may possess.

In one episode, a woman was pulled over on a domestic terrorism charge, but was never once questioned about domestic terrorism. Instead, the officer kept needling the suspect, asking her if she had any drugs in the car? No? Is she sure? What about the glove compartment? No? Well, had she ever used drugs?

The cop was absolutely obsessed with drugs.

Finally, he uses the terrorism charge to justify a search of the car (even though that charge had nothing to do with "drugs') and to his great delight, the cop found an awful horrible bad terrible evil half-bag of marijuana.

Then the cat-and-mouse game started up again: Was that the woman's marijuana? Had she used it? If not, whose was it? Where did they get it?

Most of the violent situations are clearly caused by alcohol. But that's the Christian go-to drug so no problem. Because the natural "drugs" don't cause such problems, the cops have to pry and badger suspects to find out if they have any on hand. What a titanic joke perpetrated on Natural Law by bigoted brain-dead politicians, completely unschooled in botanical science yet who set themselves up as Inquisitors to bar human beings from natural medicines, first and foremost by stigmatizing them with the pejorative epithet of DRUGS!



Up abolishthedea.com

January 30, 2021

The Great Non-Sequitur

The Drug War only makes sense to Americans because of a lie: the lie that psychoactive substances can only be used by irresponsible people for the tawdry purposes of 'getting high.' A dispassionate look at world history reveals a different story: Psychoactive substances have been the basis for entire religions over the last 5,000 years and have been used by individuals to eliminate pain and to help them gain peace of mind and insight into the world around them. Marcus Aurelius used opium for that latter purpose. So did Marco Polo and Benjamin Franklin. Sigmund Freud thought cocaine was a godsend for his depression. Western luminaries such as Plato and Plutarch took part in the psychedelic-fueled Eleusinian Mysteries. The entire Vedic religion was founded to worship the psychoactive properties of a plant. And psychedelic cults were common in Meso-America and the Caribbean -- before Columbus showed up and enslaved and killed the people who practiced such supposedly "satanic" religions.

For modern society to criminalize the mere possession of psychoactive plants is therefore a cruel non-sequitur that carries on the colonialist outrages of the Spanish in the 16th-century, as we assume, along with our Conquistador forebears, that the use of psychoactive substances is an affront to religion and science.

How does America get away with this blatant spiritual colonialism?

First by the propaganda of omission, by means of which the stories of positive substance use are entirely censored from movies, news, television and books. Second by the fact that criminalizing substances naturally places drugs in the hands of criminals, which in turn allows the Drug Warrior to say, "See? Drugs are associated with criminals! I told you!" Of course, that's a circular argument based on a self-fulfilling prophecy, but the average "patriotic" American never notices such details. After all, they've been told the bold-faced lie that "drugs" fry the brain, and they believe it -- even though that's the biggest lie in the history of public service announcements. Plato's brains were not fried. Neither were the brains of Marco Polo, Ben Franklin, and Sigmund Freud. If drugs fry the brain, it is only because the DEA has poisoned them with weed killer, as DEA Chief John Lawn poisoned marijuana crops in the 1980s. Indeed, the only drugs that really seem to fry the brain are modern Big Pharma anti-depressants, which tamp down inconvenient emotions, thus helping depressed Americans remain productive members of our capitalist Drug War society -- or if not productive members, then at least members who are no longer impassioned enough to make any trouble for the materialist status quo.



Up abolishthedea.com

January 24, 2021

The Problem with 12-Step Groups

I recently watched an episode of the Canadian series "Remedy" in which the perennially troubled character Griffin finally goes to a 12-step meeting, where he's surprised and reassured to see the hospital's new chief of staff at the podium testifying about her own over-reliance on painkillers. Griffin grins wistfully from the back row, realizing now that everybody has problems and he's not alone, etc. etc. It's meant to be a heart-warming scene, of course, this narrative of the secular sinner coming home and getting real before his similarly drug-duped colleagues. And yet I always feel philosophically obliged to steel my heart against such scenes because this is an American trope, this secular homecoming: a trope that is based on America's (and hence the world's) muddled views about inanimate objects that we have demonized with the politically created epithet of "drugs."

Of course, those who have been born and bred on Christian Science drug warrior propaganda, censorship and substance demonization will ask me "What's not to like?" when they see such scenes.

The problem is that 12-step groups act according to assumptions that are highly debatable or just plain false, simply because such assumptions completely ignore the role that the Drug War plays in skewing our attitude toward substances. By ignoring the Drug War, which is the real villain of the piece, the 12-step group turns the substance misuser into the bad guy, the protagonist/antagonist, the one who must come home to the Mother Church, and how? By becoming "clean." And what does "clean" mean? It means that you have forsworn psychoactive medicine entirely (with the exception of the highly addictive meds that are prescribed by pill-mill psychiatry and upon which 1 in 4 American women are currently dependent). It means, in fact, that you must practice the precepts of Christian Science when it comes to mood and cognition (albeit while making a hypocritical allowance for the emotion-tamping pills of Big Pharma).

But I'd better back up. Most Americans don't even understand why the Drug War is responsible for addiction in the first place. Answer: It is responsible because it outlaws hundreds of godsend psychoactive plants while creating a black market that incentivizes the sale of the most addictive meds possible. What's more, it justifies this crackdown on the implicit assumption that there is no good use for psychoactive medicine but to produce "highs" and for folks to "get wasted." The facts are quite different, however. Human beings have used psychoactive substances since prehistoric times to obtain spiritual transcendence and a new way of seeing the world and to improve their mental powers. Contrary to Drug War dogma, the use of psychoactive substances is not usually pathological, but rather the expression of the most basic of human impulses, to find greater meaning in life and to find self-fulfilment by removing the shackles of one's ordinary misperceptions, which for most of us stand in the way of our self-improvement and self-knowledge on a daily basis.

We see then that 12-step programs constitute a kind of secular religion. We can prove this by stating the highly debatable dogma which 12-step programs accept:

1) It is morally good to be free of all psychoactive substances.

2) The search for pharmacologically aided transcendence is pathological.

3) Mother Nature's psychoactive plant medicines are not good (as God himself said in the Christian bible) but rather they are so many snares to trap unsuspecting human beings.

4) Human beings are powerless in the face of evil substances and must confess that powerlessness as the first step in healing.

I do not believe in the dogma outlined above. That is not my religion. That is not my faith.

1) I do not find it morally good to avoid Mother Nature's psychoactive plant medicines -- in fact, I find it superstitious, dogmatic and unscientific.

2) I therefore do not find a search for pharmacological transcendence to be anything but natural.

3) Nor do I believe that psychoactive plants and fungi are a snare, but rather that they are on the Earth for a reason, and not just to be the inspiration for the creation of pseudo-Christian morality plays in the time of a Drug War.

4) And if human beings are powerless when it comes to psychoactive substances, that's only because the drug war has outlawed the hundreds of psychoactive godsends of mother nature that could help wean them from their poison. The Drug War has rendered addicts powerless. They are not powerless in some intrinsic way.

Besides, in a world where we had full and well-publicized disclosure about all "drugs" (including objective and subjective usage reports and notes on avoiding addiction -- on everything from Big Pharma anti-depressants to magic mushrooms) intelligent users would be empowered to avoid the highly addictive pills that the dealers are incentivized to sell thanks to prohibition. You can bet that these intelligent users would also avoid using the habit-forming Big Pharma meds when they find out that they'll end up having to take them for a lifetime, thus turning themselves into eternal patients and wards of the healthcare state. (If the users are not intelligent, that's a problem with our education system, not with an amoral boogieman that we think of superstitiously as an evil "drug.")

Getting back to supposedly troubled Griffin for a moment: he is apparently not even an addict at the time he attends the session in question -- but his girlfriend, under the influence of drug war assumptions, has "pegged" him as the addictive type (merely because he's "had truck" with evil substances in the past) and therefore insists that he attend the 12-step program.

This is how far we will go to avoid naming the real problem when it comes to addiction: namely the "Drug War." We'll imagine a whole category of pathological human beings instead, the "addictive type," and pretend that the Drug War's crack down on spiritual ascendancy and substance research has nothing to do with the situation at all. Instead, we turn the supposed addiction problem into a moral drama that feels "right" to us erstwhile Christians because it re-creates the parable of the prodigal son, without any divisive references to deity, and gives us a new revival tent that we can come to, complete with confession booth transformed into a public podium.


Don't get me wrong: I have no problem with folks attending a 12-step program, for the same reason that I have no problem with folks attending an Episcopal Church, or the Church of the Brethren, or St. Paul's even. It's none of my business what religion you follow.


But until we legalize psychoactive substances -- and the research of the same in order to promulgate safe use information -- we have no business talking about "addictive types," let alone trying to reform them by turning them into stealth Christian Scientists.

What's my alternative to 12-step groups?

I propose ending the war on psychoactive plant medicine and then turning psychiatrists into pharmacologically savvy shaman, psychologically savvy empaths who are enabled to use any and all psychoactive plants or fungi that they think will conduce, as part of a strategic protocol, to achieving the goals of their patients, whether that goal be "getting off" of a particular substance, ending alcoholism, or simply gaining self-knowledge and a new direction in life.

Meanwhile, let's refrain from moralizing the supposed "Drug Problem," for that means blaming the victim, the victim of the unscientific and choice-limiting Drug War.

As for the supposed intractability of alcoholism and other addictions, how dare we pronounce ex cathedra on that subject until we have freed psychiatry to advisedly use the plants and fungi that grow at our very feet? Such addictions are intractable? How would we know that in an age of the strict prohibition of Mother Nature's pharmacy? That's like claiming that the flu can't be treated while ignoring the fact that we have outlawed antiviral medicine.



Up abolishthedea.com

January 4, 2021

The DEA and Crack Cocaine

A couple of decades ago, I used to scoff at the idea that the US government would purposefully introduce a highly addictive form of cocaine into LA. But the more one studies Drug War history, the less improbable that claim appears. Such a governmental action would not be unprecedented after all. The British government introduced a particularly addictive form of opium into China in the 1900s. Moreover the DEA has been lying about psychoactive medicine since its inception in 1973, and continues to lie to this very day, claiming in the teeth of millennia of evidence that such substances have no therapeutic value (even potentially), notwithstanding the fact that the use of such medicine has inspired the founding of entire religions. So it's clear that the DEA will go to great lengths to save its jobs, to the point of abjectly lying about matters of fact.

For those who still think that the DEA has America's best interests at heart, we have only to remember that the Drug War was founded by Chinese racists in 1914 and that when Nixon took up the cause in the '70s, he had no interest whatsoever in America's health but rather in attacking his political enemies. That's why his drug war punished mere possession with felonies, because he was not out to help anyone, but rather to remove them from the voting rolls. Still not convinced? Well, DEA Chief John C. Lawn was certainly not thinking about public health when he ordered his agents to spray marijuana plants with paraquat, a weed killer that has subsequently been shown to cause Parkinson's Disease.

So, did the US government purposefully introduce crack cocaine into LA? I have no smoking gun to show you, but I can say this: such an outrage would not be out of character with the way that governments have been shown to behave under the pernicious influence (and political cover) of the minority-targeting Drug War.



Up abolishthedea.com

January 2, 2021

Bamboozled

Reagan and Bush created the Drug War prohibition which brought guns and plenty of violence and drugs into the inner city. They knew that prohibition created violence and black markets. Alcohol prohibition created the Mafia after all. Then they bought off the Black community by inviting folks to the White House, those folks who excel in helping the community survive the violence and drug-pushing that Drug prohibition itself had unleashed on the city. It's as if a sniper were attacking a small town while simultaneously giving out awards for those who were helping the victims of the carnage that he himself was creating.

NWA confused matters by writing a song against the police. That was a useless protest because no one really wants to abolish the police. Had NWA connected the dots and seen the Drug War as the cause of the violence, then they might have written a song that slammed prohibition and the DEA and Drug Law and truly defined a problem against which protests could make real progress. But the drug war is all about taking America's eye off the ball and blaming everything on drugs themselves, rather than on the laws that surround them -- utterly forgetting that substances are inanimate and amoral and that evil is a result of social problems, such as anti-minority drug laws and the failure to provide top-notch education to kids in the inner cities.

*Abolishing the police may not be as crazy as it first sounds, however. Why do we even have police forces in America? Check out How You Start is How You Finish? The Slave Patrol and Jim Crow Origins of Policing on the website of the American Bar Association.



Up abolishthedea.com

January 2, 2021

American Immaturity

When a child snickers before Michelangelo's statue of David and says that the statue is "nekkid," we know that the child is immature. But American politicians behave the exact same way when it comes to so-called "drugs." They snicker cynically before higher states of consciousness (states of consciousness that have fostered entire religions) and dismiss it as getting "high" or getting "wasted." What's worse, in the latter case, Americans think they have discovered some new truth about substances, that there's this thing out there called "drugs" that are evil... when what they've really discovered is that America is immature, to the point of not being able to live sanely with the very flora that grows unbidden around us. Americans cannot imagine any way to use spiritual substances except in a cynical and hedonist fashion, as part of some scheming capitalistic transaction, and rather than blaming themselves or unfettered capitalism for this immaturity, they proclaim a new law of the land: that drugs are evil and that they must be eradicated around the globe. It's as if that immature child never grew up and declared that nudity in art is evil and must be eradicated everywhere around the globe.

There is no drug problem. There is a problem with America's attitude toward drugs. That problem is immaturity, cynicism and hedonism, and the insistence that every transaction be considered through the calculating lens of capitalism. Why do we blame these American problems on the scapegoat "drugs"? Because otherwise America would have to transform for the better in order to live wisely with the flora that surrounds us. We'd have to prioritize education and permit true religious freedom. Instead, we blame all our problems on inanimate substances, drugs -- and worse yet, we insist that the entire world follow our superstitious example under pain of economic and sociopolitical blackmail. Sadly, all nations are happy to follow suit. It was America, after all, that claimed we had a basic right to nature under Natural Law. If a nation so founded should dare to come in between its citizens and the flora that grows at their very feet, what need have less enlightened countries to stand up for common sense, let alone dictatorships, which will gladly take America's lead and crack down on the modern boogieman of "drugs" in order to enhance their despotic control over their citizens.

And what better way to enhance tyranny than to control how (and how much) citizens are allowed to think and feel by denying them the God-given bounty of Mother Nature's psychoactive plant medicine? It is, in fact, the ultimate tyranny. Why merely control what your citizens can think when you can control how and how much they can both think and feel? It's the ultimate power grab of government, rendered acceptable by the one country that should have known better given its birth under natural law: the USA.



Up abolishthedea.com

December 29, 2020

Why the Drug War is Worse than a Religion

As a white kid who grew up listening to so-called black music in the '70s (not just the crossover hits of Labelle but the deep album cuts such as "Isn't it a Shame" and "Somewhere Over the Rainbow") I would occasionally experience the awkward phenomenon of having my white friends snicker or break into what for me was unwelcome parody when I made the mistake of playing one of my favorite soul hits during a get-together at my place. It actually made them uncomfortable to hear singers expressing so much emotion. Sure, they had grown to like "Lady Marmalade," but when Labelle really let herself go, emotionally speaking, on such lengthy ballads as "Isn't it a Shame," complete with melodious moaning and impassioned scatting, my white friends began to squirm in their seats like so many grade-schoolers, despite the fact that their college days were already long behind them.

In that reaction, I think we can see the real motivation behind America's drug war: the white man's insistence that we all be as emotionally restrained as he is, that we "let ourselves go" a little, perhaps, in the same way that my friends could find it in their hearts to enjoy "Lady Marmalade," but that we never really truly "shake it like we mean it" in this life, as Labelle most obviously did in "Isn't it a Shame?" It strikes me, moreover, that this "white reaction" to soul music is "all of a piece" with the Caucasian preference in Shakespearean times for behavior to be "meet" and "seemly" and to not offend the sensibilities of the community with any emotional excesses. In short, the white race, if we must call it so, has placed such a premium upon thought (which is, indeed, the very touchstone of its own existence, according to Descartes) that it has come to fear any forays into the long-since unfamiliar lands of unbridled emotion.

With this backstory in mind, the Drug War may be seen as the enforcement, not simply of a religion, but of a whole way of "being in the world," a whole way of approaching life. We must be aggressive and ambitious, yes, and so the use of caffeine is not only legal but encouraged. However, we must not be TOO aggressive or ambitious (after all, that would not be "meet" and "seemly" and it might even empower the user to promote the overthrow of the uptight status quo) and so the use of cocaine must be punished. In this way, the Drug War turns Aristotle's Golden Mean into the law of the land. "Dance if you must," it cries, "but never, never, shake it like you really mean it." Of course, even the Drug Warrior agrees that occasional self-forgetfulness is necessary in this life, and so we are free -- and even encouraged -- to use alcohol and beer. However, we must never achieve this self-forgetfulness with the help of a substance that inspires us to question the very thought-centric nature of the society in which we live (and so psychedelic use will be punished). Americans have to be uptight by law, and the last thing that the drug warrior wants is for us to realize through substance use that there are other perhaps more satisfying ways of seeing the world.

We can say then that modern drug law is designed to legally oblige Americans to be "uptight" (or "meet" and "seemly" as Shakespeare would have called it) and to have only those thoughts and feelings that are not quite passionate or novel enough to rock the boats of the thought-obsessed powers that be. And so the drug war is far worse than the mere establishment of a religion, for in such an injustice, the tyrant may be appeased with a mere outward show of obedience. No, the drug war tyrant is far more ambitious: he insists that we FEEL the way that he wants us to feel (namely uptight) on penalty of law.



Up abolishthedea.com

December 28, 2020

Why Daffy Leftists are Powerless to Combat the Drug War

I say daffy leftists are powerless to combat the drug war, but then they never even try. Perhaps they sense that their commitment to postmodernism and so-called critical theory (which denies the existence of any universal principles) has cut the ground out from under them should they attempt to denounce that war in the most logical way possible, namely by calling it a violation of Natural Law. For what is Natural Law to the postmodernist but a creation of Dead White Males who lived by a meta narrative that cannot be meaningfully discussed outside the Caucasian community that created it? In this way, the left is just as bad as the Drug Warrior, albeit for different reasons: they both willfully ignore the Natural Law upon which Jefferson founded America.

Instead, the modern leftist (better known as "progressive" in the States) fights for ever more obscure "rights" -- like the right for transgender people to be protected from hearing or reading their birth name anywhere in the public discourse! And so they speak truth to power by implicitly making eccentric demands such as: "Sure, tell me which plants I can access, but don't you dare let others speak or write my birth name! Scrape a chalkboard with fingernails if you must, but don't speak the name-that-must-not-be-spoken. Don't get me wrong, I'm a strong, fierce leftist... but there are some things that are just too much even for MY solid nerves!"

Of course, it's impossible to argue with a leftist because their whole postmodern system obliges them to demonize their enemies -- or at very least to deny that their enemies have the ability to say anything meaningful on the topics that the leftist raises. This makes debates easy for them, of course, because you can never knock them off-guard with sound and devastating arguments. The minute that you think you've made an irrefutable logical point, they'll claim that your thoughts are invalid from the git-go on account of your color, faith, religion or sexual preference. As the Church Lady used to say, "How conveeeenient."

Why am I writing this on a website about America's drug war? To provide the reader with just one more of the seemingly endless reasons why America has been saddled with ideologically motivated substance prohibition for 106 consecutive years now. For just when America is starting to awaken from its propaganda-induced trance viz the Drug War, just when we're realizing that the drug war is a violation of Natural Law and the establishment of Christian Science as America's state religion, the far left has discovered (working overtime, of course, in their government-funded ivory towers) that, surprise, surprise: Natural Law doesn't even exist as far as they're concerned! It means nothing except to the elite White Males for whom it was written. (I don't have the heart to tell the leftists that their own cynical self-aggrandizing philosophy is itself the creation of a community of elite White Male philosophers in France!)

PS I should say for the record that I consider myself a liberal under the original meaning of that word... but then that's no doubt exactly what I'd have to say now, wretch that I am, given the meta narrative with which I was raised, one which held that there were some things that government could not justifiably take from human beings. But Earth to leftists: Is that really a narrative that we wish to call contingent and non-universal? Um, hello... I don't think so.



Up abolishthedea.com

November 25, 2020

America's Racist Path to Drug Law Liberalization

marijuana is decriminalized while cocaine is treated like devil spawn

The legalization of marijuana in Virginia is being held back over equity concerns about the treatment of cocaine possession. This illustrates perfectly why the Drug War must be eradicated root and branch and not dealt with one corrupt law at a time. We must all come together, white, black, Hispanic and Asian, and reclaim our right under natural law to the plants and fungi that grow at our very feet. We must deny government the power to override the natural law upon which Thomas Jefferson founded America. For it is no coincidence that the DEA stomped onto Monticello in 1987 and confiscated that Founding Father's poppy plants. It was a coup against the natural law upon which Jefferson founded America.

We should come together to fight against another mega injustice as well: namely, the fact that the Drug War represents the enforcement of the religion of Christian Science, which holds as a matter of faith that we have no need for so-called drugs. I say "so-called" because the great crime of the Drug Warriors is that they have created a new category of evil substances that they call "drugs," out of political expediency, not out of any social, historical or scientific analysis of the substances in question. If we're free to look at uncensored history, we know that there is no such thing as "drugs" in the superstitious and demonizing way that the Drug Warrior uses that term. There are only amoral and inanimate substances that can be used rightly or wrongly, for good or bad reasons, in good or bad doses, in good or bad settings, by good or bad people. To think otherwise is to use drug law as a convenient sledgehammer with which politicians can silence and disenfranchise their enemies. So you have political opponents that use substance X? No problem. Make the possession of X a felony and wipe those opponents off of the voting rolls.



Up abolishthedea.com

November 25, 2020

See No Drug War, Hear No Drug War

How America is in denial about its addiction to fascism

While searching under "Drug War," I found a page for Landmark Recovery Center. It's the kind of site that I cannot even stand to read because it is written from the assumption that the Drug War is OK if only it would work. WRONG. The Drug War is the violation of Natural Law and the enforcement of Christian Science as America's state religion. It must not be allowed to work. We must fight addiction with education and the use of less addictive substances -- not hypocritically demonizing mother nature's plant medicines while we absolve cigarettes, alcohol and Big Pharma from all need of criminalization.

The site's authors apparently did not expect anyone to disagree with them, because their contact page wanted me to tell them where I wanted them to appear and when -- and whether I had a "facility." I answered No to the latter query and posted the following comment in a couple of blanks where they wanted me to describe some event that I was presumed to be holding.

The Drug War is the enforcement of Christian Science and a violation of Natural Law -- which is why Jefferson rolled over in his grave when the DEA confiscated his poppy plants. (I had to post the following bit in a form blank entitled 'Desired Outcome.' I should have written: 'The end of the disgraceful Drug War.')
It's sad that America demonizes psychoactive substances rather than learning how to use them for psychotherapy and to fight Alzheimer's. abolishthedea.com. (PS Your captcha is HIGHLY irritating. Almost impossible to answer correctly because of ambiguous photographs.)



Up abolishthedea.com

November 25, 2020

How the Drug Warriors Divide and Conquer

The legalization of marijuana in Virginia is being held back over equity concerns about the treatment of cocaine possession. This illustrates perfectly why the Drug War must be eradicated root and branch and not dealt with one corrupt law at a time. We must all come together, white, black, Hispanic and Asian, and reclaim our right under natural law to the plants and fungi that grow at our very feet. We must deny government the power to override the natural law upon which Thomas Jefferson founded America. For it is no coincidence that the DEA stomped onto Monticello in 1987 and confiscated that Founding Father's poppy plants. It was a coup against the natural law upon which Jefferson founded America.

We should come together to fight against another mega injustice as well: namely, the fact that the Drug War represents the enforcement of the religion of Christian Science, which holds as a matter of faith that we have no need for so-called drugs. I say "so-called" because the great crime of the Drug Warriors is that they have created a new category of evil substances that they call "drugs," out of political expediency, not out of any social, historical or scientific analysis of the substances in question. If we're free to look at uncensored history, we know that there is no such thing as "drugs" in the superstitious and demonizing way that the Drug Warrior uses that term. There are only amoral and inanimate substances that can be used rightly or wrongly, for good or bad reasons, in good or bad doses, in good or bad settings, by good or bad people. To think otherwise is to use drug law as a convenient sledgehammer with which politicians can silence and disenfranchise their enemies. So you have political opponents that use substance X? No problem. Make the possession of X a felony and wipe those opponents off of the voting rolls.



Up abolishthedea.com

November 20, 2020

Another Drug War Propaganda Flick

Just watched another drug-war movie in which the DEA is the hero in the opioid crisis, running out to gun down the bad guys. That's like an arsonist returning to the scene of the crime to put out the fire. 40 people die in Detroit every day because of opioid addiction. Does anyone truly believe that the gun violence and substance-related death would be going on had America not taken the historically unprecedented step of criminalizing psychoactive substances and stifling research? To put it another way, who, in a well educated world where plants were free, would ever want to addict themselves to an expensive taskmaster like synthetic opioids? Yet the idiot Drug Warriors never get it. The message of these movies is that we need to crack down still further, never mind that the DEA agents are already gleefully violating the US Constitution at every chance they get. What is the end game here? To set the DEA free to do absolutely anything they want to do in the clear light of day in order to combat the republican-made problem known as "the opioid crisis"? Drugs are not the problem. They never have been the problem. The problem is the profit motive combined with substance prohibition and the outlawing of thousands of substances that are far less dangerous than the synthetic garbage that is custom-made these days to create addicts.



Up abolishthedea.com

November 11, 2020

Letter to a Friend

There's a new movie out about the opioid crisis in which the DEA plays the hero. That's like having an arsonist return to a fire he set in order to help extinguish it. The DEA criminalized all far safer substances that offer self-transcendence, created a black market (meanwhile criminalizing mere understanding of psychoactive plant medicine), thereby incentivizing "bad actors" to profit by addicting folks to synthetic crap.


As usual, the DEA is above the law in this film, in this case covering up for the fact that an outraged law-abiding American shot the bad guy in cold blood.


The murderess had been a junkie earlier, so it's hypocritical of her to shoot the dealer. If she's going to shoot anyone, she should shoot the folks who created the black market and outlawed all safe means to self-transcendence.


That's one of the many logic flaws of the Drug Warrior: they refuse to acknowledge humankind's desire for self-transcendence and so childishly ascribe all substance use to irresponsibility and character flaws born of childhood trauma. The whole Vedic religion was established to worship a psychedelic plant. The psychedelic-fueled Eleusinian mysteries lasted 2000 consecutive years and were attended by such western luminaries as Plato, Cicero and Plutarch. Marcus Aurelius and Benjamin Franklin used opium. Freud used cocaine and thought it was a great cure for his depression.


The movie ends by displaying dire statistics about how many are dying from opioids and how much worse it's getting every year. The implication is that we have to crack down still FURTHER ON DRUGS. What then is the end game here? Do we give the DEA carte blanche to do absolutely anything they want to do in the name of combatting this American creation known as "drugs"? a hypocritically selective category of substances that never existed before 1914?


I want to start publishing essays on this subject with B&N as actual analog books. Even if I don't sell any, I would really enjoy sending copies to select logic-challenged individuals, such as the logic-challenged folks who filmed this hatchet job on behalf of the DEA.


As far as I can see, no one's publishing on these topics. Most everyone's bought the absurd premise that there is a real thing called DRUGS that we must fight at every turn -- a viewpoint that no civilization except America has ever embraced. It's a superstition. Everyone else knew that substances are amoral and that things like overdoses are caused by social issues (like a lack of education or the lack of available safe substances). If someone OD'd in Marco Polo's time (himself an opium user) they would not have blamed the substance, just the lack of knowledge that the substance user possessed.



Up abolishthedea.com

November 9, 2020

The Drug War: America's Greek Tragedy

The Drug War is bullet-riddled Greek Tragedy American-Style. It's a way of looking at the world that allows us to enforce puritan piety that passe religion can no longer command. It's a way to keep the Wild West going so that gun addicts can satisfy their need to play the good guy. Custom-made violence. It is the new Tenth Commandment. Thou shalt not use dope. It is Mary Baker Eddy on steroids. It is responsible for the OXY epidemic because it not only outlaws far safer substances but it criminalizes their mere research. It makes a boogieman and a scapegoat out of psychoactive substances (dumping them all into the discreditable category of "drugs") in a way that no other civilization has ever done.

But substances are not the problem. Ignorance is a problem. A violence-creating black market is a problem. The outlawing of safe psychoactive plant medicine is a problem. The ideological war on human consciousness, THAT is a problem. Politicians telling us how and how much we can think, that is a problem. Politicians violating natural law by presuming to tell us what plants and fungi we can access, that is a problem. DEA thugs who poison Americans with paraquat and stomp onto Monticello to steal Thomas Jefferson's poppy plants, that is a problem. A tyrannical government that denies gainful employment to Americans who dare to access time-honored plant medicine, THAT is a problem.

Then, because America has such a jaundiced attitude toward psychoactive substances, we arrogantly go around the world burning plants, as if we've discovered some great truth about evil substances, never realizing that our willfully purblind attitude toward "drugs" is the problem, not amoral substances themselves. Our hatred of education. Our hatred of plant medicine. Our need for a scapegoat for social ills. Our idiotic view of psychology that takes exactly zero account of the human being's unquenchable desire for self-transcendence and "seeing beyond the veil." These are all problems, not "drugs".

If we must have a Drug War, let's crack down on alcohol use and remove anyone from the work force should their urine reveal any traces of booze whatsoever. Let's then remove them from the voting rolls. Then let's make America great again by executing alcohol distributors, thereby hoisting the beer-swilling Drug Warriors by their own petard.

Of course I'm speaking rhetorically here. I do not personally want to punish ANYONE based on the substances that they choose to consume -- I only wish I could say the same of the vast majority of Americans, bamboozled as they are by daily doses of ideological Drug War propaganda on TV and in movies (as in cop shows, for instance, in which cocaine is only ever used by the scummiest of board-certified scumbags, lest the viewer get any crazy ideas about personally profiting from the psychoactive powers of Mother Nature's plant medicines).



Up abolishthedea.com

October 20, 2020

Trogodolyte Drug Warriors

There are no such things as "drugs." There are only substances that can be used for good or bad reasons, at good or bad dosages, by the right or wrong people, in the right or wrong circumstances. Neither are there such things as "drug problems." If a substance is misused, it is because of a social problem such as a lack of education, not a problem caused by some all-powerful scapegoat substance called a "drug." All intelligent people and societies understood this fact, until 1914, when racist politicians realized that they could marginalize their political opponents by criminalizing their drug of choice and then removing them from the voting rolls when they chose to partake. In short, the Drug War is a politically motivated superstition designed to take America's eye off the ball and have us scapegoat inanimate substances rather than deal with real social problems, such as the bigoted legislation that arises from the Drug War itself.

Ignorant America has made such a fetish out of this political category of "drugs" that we criminalize the mere research of such politically demonized substances, which represents, of course, a superstitious way of looking at the world worthy of cave people, not of a society that preens itself on its supposed scientific prowess.



Up abolishthedea.com

October 7, 2020

Drug War Censorship is All Around You




For examples of Drug War censorship, you have only to look at the reading suggestions provided by the Firefox browser every time you open a new page:




Up abolishthedea.com

October 2, 2020

Stealth Racism of the Drug War

The Drug War is a kind of stealth racism. Cocaine was outlawed because Blacks were using it, psychedelics because hippies were using it, marijuana because Hispanics were using it, and opium because the Chinese were using it.

The Drug War is a godsend for racists: they can arrest the groups that they hate (which would never vote for them in a million years) and remove them from the voting rolls, all while claiming to be looking out for public health! If they were interested in public health, they'd ban alcohol and cigarettes, the most deadly drugs of all, and force users of the same to submit to weekly urine samples -- and remove them from the voting rolls should they fail such a test. If they were interested in public health, they'd legalize cocaine, a substance that Freud considered a godsend for depression, and end the civil wars overseas that substance prohibition has created out of whole cloth. If they were interested in public health, they end a drug war that has empowered a self-proclaimed Drug War Hitler in the Philippines, namely Duterte, who is fighting very ironically to make sure that only the western drugs of choice are ever used in his country. If they were interested in public health, they'd end the drug war which is responsible for the psychiatric pill mill, which has addicted 1 in 4 American women, creating a whole nation full of Stepford Wives. If they were really interested in public health, they'd allow scientists to do their job and learn about substances, rather than demonizing substance a priori in a way that even our caveman forebears didn't have the arrogant idiocy to do.



Up abolishthedea.com

September 29, 2020

Why It's Sometimes Good to Say Yes to Drug (i.e. psychoactive medicine of which pharmacologically clueless politicians disapprove)

A Russian Buk missile is a piñata from hell. It contains 8,000 individual pieces of bow-tie shaped metal, each the size of a Twix candy bar. When the missile explodes, these become projectiles that can easily take down any passenger plane -- as was demonstrated in July 2014 when Ukraine separatists shot down Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 near the Russian border, killing 283 passengers and 15 crew members.

What does this have to do with "drugs"? Just this: In a world where occasional E use was required for anyone exhibiting antisocial feelings, such a missile would be unimaginable. Humans would literally weep and vomit while attempting to put such an abomination together. Conclusion: We have drug testing backwards: we need to test people to make sure that people DO have love-stoking drugs in their system, at least when the sober state of such individuals permits of them creating diabolical weaponry that shoots innocent adult, children and babies from the sky.

Why It's Sometimes Good to Say Yes to Drug (i.e. psychoactive medicine of which pharmacologically clueless politicians disapprove)



Up abolishthedea.com

September 27, 2020

America's Juvenile Attitude toward Substances

Juvenile delinquents decide drug policy in America. If so much as one juvenile delinquent can figure out a way to die from using a substance, then that substance must not be available for artists to increase creativity, nor for the elderly to fight depression, nor for musicians to improve performance, nor for the religious to use in mystical rites. That's the testing standard that Americans accept in this (ahem) "scientific" country of ours. No need for lab rats or careful statistical analysis: just dig up one scrawny poorly educated waster and see how he or she handles the drug under study. If they can't handle the drug, we must ban it, because "one swallow makes a summer" in the minds of the statistically challenged Drug Warrior. Compared to that standard, the Monty Python "duck test" for identifying witches smacks of scientific rigor.
America's Juvenile Attitude toward Substances AbolishTheDEA.com







Next essay: The word 'drugs' is a political term
Previous essay: Psst! You have been bamboozled by America's Drug War
Twitter Icon -- click for Twitter Feed of AbolishTheDEA.com


All Essays

Piss Off the Drug Warriors in Your life! Give the Drug War Comic Book a prominent place on your coffee table! (Or better yet, buy THEM a copy!)







Sample pics from book





Bone up on slam-dunk arguments against the drug war, starting with the fact that it was a violation of natural law to outlaw plant medicine in the first place. Check out the site menu for fun ways to learn more about the manifold injustice of the status quo, including many knock-down arguments never made before. Why? Because even the majority of drug-war opponents have been bamboozled by one or more of the absurd assumptions upon which that war is premised. See through the haze. Read on. Listen on. And Learn how tryants and worrywarts have despoiled American freedom, thereby killing millions around the world, totally unnecessarily, ever since the fateful day in 1914 when ignorant America first criminalized a mere plant -- and insisted that the rest of the world follow suit or else -- an act of colonialist folly unrivaled since the days of the genocidal Conquistadors.

Abolish The Dea