Drug War prohibition is the perfect storm. It has something in it for everybody. That is why it has lasted for over 100 years now1. It is about power, it is about money, it is about materialism, it is about imperialism, it is about religion, it is about racism... and the list goes on. I mention this because every time I focus on one of these by itself, I get shot down by flamers who focus on another aspect, as if there was only one single factor involved in the success of the Drug War over the decades. "You say it's about A?" they scream. "Nonsense! It's about B!" But the fact is, it is about "all of the above."
Nor can we discuss this subject meaningfully without first identifying the demographic about which we are speaking.
Take drug producers like the MindMed company. It has produced a politically correct form of LSD for anxiety from which all visions and euphoria have been removed. Now the company has nothing against euphoria and visions per se2. Its motivation is clearly just financial. But how do we account for the fact that most Americans think that it makes sense in the first place to remove the visions and euphoria from LSD, the very ingredients for which the drug has been valued in the past? Money does not motivate that belief but rather some sort of metaphysical conviction that neither euphoria nor transcendent states are therapeutic. It's urgent that we recognize that unspoken assumption. Why? Because we are never going to get rid of greed, but we can expose and discredit the unacknowledged assumptions by which otherwise sane Americans continue to support the War on Drugs.
Another confusion arises whenever we talk about causes. The fact is there are more than one type of cause. The reason for which something is done is called its final cause. In the case of the Drug War, there are multiple final causes, the chief of which is racism. But there are also efficient causes. These are the beliefs that help justify and promote the Drug War but which are not the reason for the Drug War's existence. One such cause is scientific materialism, a way of conceiving the world which denies that psychoactive drugs have any benefits whatsoever3. The materialist is not a Drug Warrior per se, but the materialist's attitude toward drugs makes the Drug War plausible to society in general. Another efficient cause of the Drug War is puritanism, the west's preference for living by the Golden mean of Aristotle, to avoid excess in everything, including emotion. This helps explain our aversion to the ecstatic states produced by drugs. Nietzsche described this attitude as Apollonian, as distinguished from the tribal approach toward life, which he called Dionysian. But the point here is that literally all philosophers (save for diehard solipsists) agree that the general unspoken presuppositions of a society affect the way in which that society is governed.
This is why philosophy is important when it comes to the Drug War. If we merely blame the Drug War on greed and racism, we will get nowhere, since we will never get rid of such evils. But if we unmask and critique the unspoken assumptions behind the Drug War, we have a chance of deprogramming the millions of Americans who have never thought about such questions deeply and who are therefore being led by the nose by the racist pied pipers of prohibition.
Author's Follow-up: March 10, 2024
This is really the whole point of my website here at abolishthedea.com: I want to show that the Drug War "has to do" with almost every conceivable element of life. That's why I've published hundreds of essays in the last five years and am still nowhere near addressing all the problems that the Drug War causes in society. The Drug War is not a subject that we can or should ghettoize. It is not a niche subject. If you think that it lacks relevance to your life, I have two words for you: Donald Trump, the man who was elected only because the Drug War had thrown millions of minorities in jail and removed them from the voting rolls.
"My faith votes and strives to outlaw religions that use substances of which politicians disapprove."
Health is not a quality, it's a balance. To decide drug legality based on 'health' grounds thus opens a Pandora's box of different points of view.
Folks like Sabet accuse folks like myself of ignoring the "facts." No, it is Sabet who is ignoring the facts -- facts about dangerous horses and free climbing. He's also ignoring all the downsides of prohibition, whose laws lead to the election of tyrants.
There are endless creative ways to ward off addiction if all psychoactive medicines were at our disposal. The use of the drugs synthesized by Alexander Shulgin could combat the psychological downsides of withdrawal by providing strategic "as-needed" relief.
Drug warriors aren't just deciding for us about drugs. They're telling us that we no longer need Coleridge poems, Lovecraft stories, Robin Williams, Sherlock Holmes, or the soma-inspired Hindu religion.
They still don't seem to get it. The drug war is a whole wrong way of looking at the world. It tells us that substances can be judged "up" or "down," which is anti-scientific and blinds us to endless beneficial uses.
MDMA legalization has suffered a setback by the FDA. These are the people who think Electro Shock Therapy is not used often enough! What sick priorities.
Daily opium use is no more outrageous than daily antidepressant use. In fact, it's less outrageous. It's a time-honored practice and can be stopped with a little effort and ingenuity, whereas it is almost impossible to get off some antidepressants because they alter brain chemistry.
The addiction gene should be called the prohibition gene: it renders one vulnerable to prohibition lies and limitations: like the lack of safe supply, the lack of choices, and the lack of information. We should pathologize the prohibitionists, not their victims.
I have nothing against science, BTW (altho' I might feel differently after a nuclear war!) I just want scientists to "stay in their lane" and stop pretending to be experts on my own personal mood and consciousness.
"My faith votes and strives to outlaw religions that use substances of which politicians disapprove."