Editor's note, November 16, 2021: While Brian calms down a skosh, let me apologize on his behalf for the fact that this rant of his (as justified as it may be) has nothing whatsoever to do with Lamar Alexander, who it will be remembered was the Secretary of Education under one of the Drug Warrior Bushes. I think there's been some mix-up here, perhaps due to the overwriting of a file or two.
Brian: Thanks, Editor. My bad. There has indeed been some mix-up.
Editor: So what was the deal about Lamar Alexander?
Brian: Well, about a year ago, this Lamar chap started beefing about the fact that states were changing drug law policy when he thought it should be decided by the national government in conjunction with scientists. Am I like, "Lamar, baby, you had no right to outlaw plant medicine in the first place, homie! Second, you know as well as I do that plant medicine is only criminal these days because of the interests of racists, Big Pharma 1 2 , intolerant Christians, and the Corrections industry -- whose interests are all championed by the wealthiest 3% who control the Senate via bribery (see "Billionaire Democracy" by George R. Tyler). Under such a corrupt system, it makes perfect sense for Americans to change the system from the ground up when it comes to so-called drug policy, especially since you politicians feel the need to bow and scrape before the evil DEA, which has knowingly lied for half a decade now about godsend plant medicine -- and which poisoned American pot smokers with paraquat in the 1980s, a weed killer that causes Parkinson's disease.
There you go, Ed, baby. That paragraph contains both the warp and weft of the factual yarn that I'm spinning -- the original of which, as you rightly suppose, was probably overwritten due to some boneheaded error on the part of some lowly clerk or other, who shall be sacked quite momently, I assure you, with malice-a-freakin' forethought, even. (I'll be like: YOU are zee veekest link!) No, seriously, Eddy: How do you like that Lamar person? Typical politician -- wants to tell me what plant medicine I can use. He's the kind of politician who would have been cheering the DEA on as they stormed onto the once-"hallowed" ground of Monticello 3 in 1987 and confiscated Thomas Jefferson's poppy plants -- a coup against the whole concept of natural law upon which this nation was built.
Editor: Thanks, Brian, that was a delightful one and a half paragraphs. It did my heart good just to read them!
Brian: Aw, shucks!
Editor: Plus, it doesn't hurt that you're right as rain.
Brian: I think somebody should force Lamar to undergo a drug test -- 'cause I'm sure he's "used" alcohol in the last month or two. God help me, if we find so much as a trace of liquor in his blood, we're going to confiscate his house and remove him from the workforce! There's a Drug War for you, Lamar: one that isn't targeted against minorities either!
Editor: Okay, Brian, easy, boy! Easy!
As such, "we" are important. The sun is just a chaos of particles that "we" have selected out of the rest of the raw data and declared "This we shall call the sun!" "We" make this universe. Consciousness is fundamental.
A pharmacologically savvy drug dealer would have no problem getting someone off one drug because they would use the common sense practice of fighting drugs with drugs. But materialist doctors would rather that the patient suffer than to use such psychologically obvious methods.
Scientists are not the experts on psychoactive medicines. The experts are painters and artists and spiritualists -- and anyone else who simply wants to be all they can be in life. Scientists understand nothing of such goals and aspirations.
Being a lifetime patient is not the issue: that could make perfect sense in certain cases. But if I am to be "using" for life, I demand the drug of MY CHOICE, not that of Big Pharma and mainstream psychiatry, who are dogmatically deaf to the benefits of hated substances.
Americans love to blame drugs for all their problems. Young people were not dying in the streets when opiates were legal. The prohibition mindset is the problem, not drugs.
Videos about science and psilocybin are funny. They show nerds trying to catch up with common sense.
This is why we would rather have a depressed person commit suicide than to use "drugs" -- because drugs, after all, are not dealing with the "real" problem. The patient may SAY that drugs make them feel good, but we need microscopes to find out if they REALLY feel good.
It is folly to put bureaucrats in charge of second-guessing drug prescriptions: what such bureaucrats are really doing is second-guessing the various philosophies of life which are presupposed by the way we use psychoactive drugs.
The term "hard" is just our modern term for the kinds of drugs that doctors of yore used to call panaceas
Besides, why should I listen to the views of a microbe?
(up)