In the second volume of his collected letters1, we learn that William James was a foe of the medical licensing legislation that was being considered by the state of Massachusetts in the late 19th century. In particular, he was against an 1898 bill for medical licensing. This is a crucial fact for anyone interested in the development of drug law and drug attitudes in the United States. James’ reason for protesting, as I hope to show in an upcoming essay, was this: that medical licensing would involve a war on “quacks” and that such a war would ultimately serve to medicalize spiritual states. I was hoping to write an essay on this subject today; however, I have found this to be a difficult subject to research. There is not much information available on this topic online. Most of what exists has been placed behind expensive academic firewalls — which brings up another problem with America today besides drug prohibition, namely, the fact that the knowledge acquired at our tax-supported universities is now being sold back to the taxpayers at extortionate prices. But it’s just as well in a way: the relevant titles that exist on Google Scholar regarding William James and medical licensing suggest that the denizens of today's Ivory Tower think that James was "beyond the pale" on this topic. One of the typical materialist papers that is being held for ransom is titled “William James, Warts and All,” the implication of that being that James’ foray into medical politics was an embarrassment to his otherwise devoted fan base. This academic pushback suggests to me, however, that these latter-day scholars do not understand what James was protesting or why.
Peyote advocates should be drug legalization advocates. Otherwise, they're involved in special pleading which is bound to result in absurd laws, such as "Plant A can be used in a religion but not plant B," or "Person A can belong to such a religion but person B cannot."
Drug Warriors never take responsibility for incentivizing poor kids throughout the west to sell drugs. It's not just in NYC and LA, it's in modest-sized towns in France. Find public housing, you find drug dealing. It's the prohibition, damn it!
Drug testing labs should give high marks for those who manage to use drugs responsibly, notwithstanding the efforts of law enforcement to ruin their lives. The lab guy would be like: "Wow, you are using opium wisely, my friend! Congratulations! Your boss is lucky to have you!"
Uruguay wants to re-legalize psilocybin mushrooms -- but only for use in a psychiatrist's office. So let me get this straight: psychiatrists are the new privileged shaman? It's a mushroom, for God's sake. Just re-legalize the damn thing and stop treating us like children.
Even the worst forms of "abuse" can be combatted with a wise use of a wide range of psychoactive drugs, to combat both physical and psychological cravings. But drug warriors NEED addiction to be a HUGE problem. That's their golden goose.
Pundits have been sniffing about the "smell" of Detroit lately. Sounds racist -- especially since such comments tend to come from drug warriors, the guys who ruined Detroit in the first place (you know, with drug laws that incentivized profit-seeking violence as a means of escaping poverty).
There are neither "drugs" nor "meds" as those terms are used today. All substances have potential good uses and bad uses. The terms as used today carry value judgements, as in meds good, drugs bad.
There are no recreational drugs. Even laughing gas has rational uses because it gives us a break from morbid introspection. There are recreational USES of drugs, but the term "recreational" is often used to express our disdain for users who go outside the healthcare system.
When the FDA tells us in effect that MDMA is too dangerous to be used to prevent school shootings and to help bring about world peace, they are making political judgments, not scientific ones.
The Thomas Jefferson Foundation is a drug war collaborator. They helped the DEA confiscate Thomas Jefferson's poppy plants in 1987.
(up)