another American author reckons without the drug war
by Brian Ballard Quass, the Drug War Philosopher
January 15, 2023
How do you write a book about the end times and fail to even mention the power of love-inspiring substances to help humanity ward off Armageddon? This is what Bryan Walsh manages to do, but then he is just like almost every other non-fiction writer today in that he reckons without the Drug War. Americans like to think that the only downside to the Drug War is that it keeps hippies from getting "high," but it does so much more than that: it censors authors, for starters, and "End Times" is an example1. Of course, the censorship here is self-censorship. Bryan, after all, has grown up in a society whose media and academics is purposefully designed to ignore all positive reports on drug use. So all Bryan knows is that drugs are unnecessary problems, and as such should not figure in his books.
He has swallowed the Drug War lie, which tells us that the vast majority of psychoactive substances (aside from Big Pharma meds and a few drugs, like nicotine and alcohol) have no positive uses, for anyone, anywhere, ever, under any circumstances.
This is the Big Lie of the Drug War, which Bryan uncritically accepts: otherwise a book about end times would be unimaginable without mentioning the power of empathogens like MDMA and psilocybin to bring people together in defense of humanity.
Another issue with the book: Walsh keeps referencing the notion that information wants to be free, information wants to be free. But he tellingly cites the case of Napster, which is actually an example of how information can be jailed if moneyed interests put some effort into that task.
I was just looking for a free public domain download of the song Gaudeamus Igitur (for reasons that are beyond the scope of this essay). And I could find absolutely none. There were sites that seemed to promise a download, but most of them now stream such music, and those that promise downloads often deliver malware instead. Even the Library of Congress encourages you to stream old music -- a process that they have bizarrely farmed out to Sony Entertainment Corp., which is graciously allowing LOC to use ancient Sony tunes that actually should be in the public domain in any case.
The point here is that information can be jailed almost completely when there's a financial incentive for that to happen.
I think it would be easier for me to download the genome of the Black Plague than it would be for me to download a recorded book from Audible that was not in a proprietary format.
So the idea that we cannot put a lid on information is clearly false. We can actually do it, if we have the financial incentive to get it done.
To fight existential threats from science, we need to recognize that such action can be taken and be largely effective.
Such policies, combined with a policy of encouraging the use of drugs like MDMA 2 , may not save the earth, but they would surely cut down on school shootings as hotheads are given heart-felt evidence about the value of friendship and caring.
Author's Follow-up: January 17, 2024
Here is my new review of Walsh's book "End Times" posted on the Goodreads website:
Like almost all non-fiction authors these days, Bryan Walsh reckons without the Drug War. If humankind is going to be annihilated by nuclear war 345 , it is going to be because we have demonized the drugs that inspire peace. Ecstasy brought unprecedented peace, love and understanding to the British dance floor in the late '80s and early '90s, but British politicians did not want peace, they wanted a Drug War. When they cracked down on ecstasy, the ravers switched to hate-facilitating drugs like alcohol, creating so much violence that concert organizers had to hire special forces troops to keep the peace. Special forces!
Ecstasy is one of the safest drugs on the planet. It is only dangerous to those with whom we have refused on principle to discuss "safe use." Meanwhile Big Pharma 67 drugs like Rinvoq have side effects that include cancer and death, and yet they are advertised openly on prime-time television.
The Drug War has already given a victory to Trump by arresting millions of his opponents and removing them from the voting rolls, Trump, the guy who now wants to kill the minorities that we were formerly happy with merely arresting.
The anti-democratic trend continues. The Fourth Amendment was long ago suspended on behalf of the Drug War. Until authors like Walsh stop pretending that there is no Drug War, nothing is going to change -- except for the worse. To the extent that we are approaching "end times," it is because of the Drug War and the militaristic anti-democratic mindset that it represents.
Most authors today reckon without the drug war -- unless they are writing specifically about "drugs" -- and even then they tend to approach the subject in a way that clearly demonstrates that they have been brainwashed by drug war orthodoxy, even if they do not realize it themselves. That's why I write my philosophical book reviews, to point out this hypocrisy which no other philosopher in the world is pointing out.
We need a few brave folk to "act up" by shouting "It's the drug war!" whenever folks are discussing Mexican violence or inner city shootings. The media treat both topics as if the violence is inexplicable! We can't learn from mistakes if we're in denial.
NIDA is just a propaganda arm of the U.S. government -- and will remain so until it recognizes the glaringly obvious benefits of drugs -- as well as the glaringly obvious downsides of prohibition. We need a National Institute on Drug Use, not a National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Materialist puritans do not want to create any drug that elates. So they go on a fool's errand to find reductionist cures for "depression itself," as if the vast array of human sadness could (or should) be treated with a one-size-fits-all readjustment of brain chemicals.
It is a violation of religious liberty to outlaw substances that inspire and elate. The Hindu religion was inspired by just such a drug.
Researchers insult our intelligence when they tell us that drugs like MDMA and opium and laughing gas have not been proven to work. Everyone knows they work. That's precisely why drug warriors hate them.
Chesterton might as well have been speaking about the word 'addiction' when he wrote the following: "It is useless to have exact figures if they are exact figures about an inexact phrase."
Drug Warriors rail against drugs as if they were one specific thing. They may as well rail against penicillin because cyanide can kill.
Richard Evans Schultes seems to have originated the harebrained idea (since used by the US Supreme Court to suppress new religions) that you have no right to use drugs in a religious ritual if you did not grow up in a society that had such practices. What tyrannical idiocy!
America created a whole negative morality around "drugs" starting in 1914. "Users" became fiends and were as helpless as a Christian sinner -- in need of grace from a higher power. Before prohibition, these "fiends" were habitues, no worse than Ben Franklin or Thomas Jefferson.
In 1886, coca enthusiast JJ Tschudi referred to prohibitionists as 'kickers.' He wrote: "If we were to listen to these kickers, most of us would die of hunger, for the reason that nearly everything we eat or drink has fallen under their ban."
We need a few brave folk to "act up" by shouting "It's the drug war!" whenever folks are discussing Mexican violence or inner city shootings. The media treat both topics as if the violence is inexplicable! We can't learn from mistakes if we're in denial.