find out if your favorite movies contain drug-war propaganda
by Brian Ballard Quass, the Drug War Philosopher
August 16, 2023
Here are some warning flags for moviegoers that Common Sense will never show you. They're perfectly happy for viewers to be indoctrinated by Drug War lies and propaganda -- their only concern is that the propagandists do not use a dirty word that might corrupt junior! Now, if the movie convinces them to condone torture and murder in the name of the Drug War, that's just fine. Those are all-American values these days, after all, in the age of Christian Science Sharia, aka the War on Drugs.
"RUNNING WITH THE DEVIL" -- WARNING: CONTAINS DRUG WAR AGITPROP:
Suspects are hung from meathooks and tortured, all in the name of prosecuting a war on time-honored plant medicine.
"TRADER" -- WARNING: CONTAINS DRUG WAR AGITPROP: Script toes the Drug War party line that outlawed substances are immoral, even though the substances thus demonized have endless positive uses and are infinitely less dangerous than alcohol and tobacco. (They actually badmouth LSD and even Ecstasy! Sounds like the writers received one too many teddy bears as kids for saying no to godsend medicines. It's interesting, though, the trader unabashedly swallows speed -- diverted from fake prescriptions for ADHD kids -- to improve her mind for trading. AND THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE! But when I saw that, I said to myself: the other shoe is about to fall: they'll have to let us know that this is evil of her: and sure enough, her mysterious male friend on the other side of the phone says (only half jokingly) that he's surprised this trader woman is so immoral as to use such substances. "There," I said to myself. "I knew it. They could not just let her use drugs to improve her game: they had to point out to the kiddies that such use is WRONG!" Propaganda and BS. The only question is, was the plot written by the White House as in Clinton's time.
"THE RUNNER" -- WARNING: CONTAINS RACIST DRUG WAR FANATICISM: Detective Wall calls a black teenager a 'waste of space' and blackmails a white teenager to narc on his schoolmate. Spoiler alert: The unarmed black teenager gets killed in a ridiculously irresponsible raid on a high-school dance, for which the detective nevertheless earns a medal!
"FOUR GOOD DAYS" -- WARNING: PROMOTES SUBSTANCE DEMONIZATION: Glenn Close is a wine-guzzling mother who lectures her daughter against her heroin 1 use, hypocritically sending her to an extremely expensive "treatment" facility whose bare-bones protocol consists of dumping the 'patient' on a cot and giving them a shot of Naltrexone, without so much as one godsend medicine to help them in their suffering. The movie reinforces the bogus notion that drugs are evil and that the answer to their use is a hypocritically defined sobriety. Of course, if Glenn Close wanted to experience MORE than four good days with her daughter, she would let the kid continue using heroin until such time as she's able to use any drug in the world to veer herself off that drug if and when she so desires (preferably with the help of a pharmacologically savvy empath). But the film promotes the superstitious idea that outlawed drugs are bad in and of themselves so drugs cannot be used to fix the young lady's problems. The result? Family spats drag on in the face of endless relapses and dubious promises to reform. The good news is, the prohibition that causes these problems generates no-doubt much-needed employment for addiction mongers, those whose workload depends on the outlawing of godsend medicines.
"COPS" -- WARNING: PROMOTES DRUG WAR RACISM: Glorifies2 the mistreatment of minorities in the name of the hateful Drug War. Parents, be sure to block junior's eyes and ears whenever the cops are hassling kids for using substances of which politicians disapprove, many of which grow at our feet and have inspired entire religions in the past.
Psychedelics and entheogens should be freely available to all dementia patients. These medicines can increase neuronal plasticity and even grow new neurons. Besides, they can inspire and elate -- or do we puritans feel that our loved ones have no right to peace of mind?
How else will they scare us enough to convince us to give up all our freedoms for the purpose of fighting horrible awful evil DRUGS? DRUGS is the sledgehammer with which they are destroying American democracy.
The best long-term treatment for OUD would be to normalize the nightly smoking of opium at home, not to addict the user to government-supplied drugs that render them impervious to the benefits of the poppy plant.
When folks die in horse-related accidents, we need to be asking: who sold the victim the horse? We've got to crack down on folks who peddle this junk -- and ban books like Black Beauty that glamorize horse use.
The benefits of outlawed drugs read like the ultimate wish-list for psychiatrists. It's a shame that so many of them are still mounting a rear guard action to defend their psychiatric pill mill -- which demoralizes clients by turning them into lifetime patients.
All drugs have positive uses. It's absurd to prohibit them because one demographic might misuse them.
Drug warriors blame all of the problems that they cause on "drugs" and then insist that the entire WORLD accept their jaundiced view of the natural bounty that God himself told us was good.
"They have called thee Soma-lover: here is the pressed juice. Drink thereof for rapture." -Rig Veda
(There would be no Hindu religion today had the drug war been in effect in the Punjab 3,500 years ago.)
Addiction thrives BECAUSE of prohibition, which limits drug choice and discourages education about psychoactive substances and how to use them wisely.
After watching my mother suffer because of the drug war, I hate to hear people tell me that the problem is drugs. WRONG! That's a western colonialist viewpoint. God loved his creation (see Genesis). He did not make trash. We need to use entheogenic medicines wisely.
Unless otherwise indicated, no AI is used in the creation of site content. These essays represent the original ideas of their author and not the ideas that the author SHOULD have based on an algorithmic parsing of existing data. For more on this subject, consider the AI-related viewpoints to which the author subscribes as delineated in the New York Times opinion piece entitled "What 370,000 College Essays Tell Us About A.I.’s Effects on Creativity" by Rebecca Winthrop of the Brookings Institution.
(up)