Having just begun my study of Michel Foucault, I must resist the temptation to make any criticisms of his philosophy that may conceivably be addressed to my satisfaction after future study on my part. I was startled, for instance, to learn that Foucault essentially champions the views of Thrasymachus over those of Socrates when it comes to the definition of justice. Justice, Foucault tells us, is a matter of power politics, not some transcendent ideal toward which we all must strive. What we call justice, he says, is just a system of social arrangements designed to produce outcomes that, collectively speaking, serve to benefit the powers-that-be. But this conclusion runs counter to everything that I've been taught in my academic career. My temptation is to "fire back" in defense of my university professors who always told me that Socrates was right on this subject, that Justice was a great objective ideal, and that our goal in politics is to create institutions that accord with that understanding. But I will hold my fire for now, in part because my gun is almost empty. It had never occurred to me that this topic was even up for debate and so Foucault has caught me unarmed as to a response. I suspect that an intelligent response could be formulated, but that will have to wait for a future essay after I have upgraded my arsenal by dint of more reading on this topic.
Prohibition is wrong root and branch. It seeks to justify the colonial disdain for indigenous healing practices through fearmongering.
No wonder the "Justice" Department relies on plea deals; otherwise juries could use nullification to free those charged with mere drug possession.
The FDA says that MindMed's LSD drug works. But this is the agency that has not been able to decide for decades now if coca "works," or if laughing gas "works." It's not just science going on at the FDA, it's materialist presuppositions about what constitutes evidence.
It's because of such reductive pseudoscience that America will allow us to shock the brains of the depressed but won't allow us to let them use the plant medicines that grow at their feet.
What I want to know is, who sold Christopher Reeves that horse that he fell off of? Who was peddling that junk?!
Even fans of sacred medicine have been brainwashed to believe that we do not know if such drugs "really" work: they want microscopic proof. But that's a western bias, used strategically by drug warriors to make the psychotropic drug approval process as glacial as possible.
Almost every article about suicide is shallow because it takes drug prohibition as a natural baseline, even though drug prohibition outlaws substances that could so clearly elevate mood.
Democratic societies need to outlaw prohibition for many reasons, the first being the fact that prohibition removes millions of minorities from the voting rolls, thereby handing elections to fascists and insurrectionists.
Freud had the right idea: He noticed that cocaine use actually ended depression in his patients. Unfortunately, he was ambitious and was more interested in making a name for himself than in pushing back against the statistically challenged fear mongering of prohibitionists.
Drug Prohibition is a crime against humanity. It outlaws our right to take care of our own health.
(up)