computer screen with words DRUG WAR BLOG bird icon for twitter bird icon for twitter


What Obama got wrong about drugs



by Ballard Quass, the Drug War Philosopher






August 20, 2020



lthough President Obama's views on drug law were a great improvement over those of his Stalinist predecessors (Reagan and the two Bushes who shamefully called on kids to "turn in" their parents for using substances of which politicians disapprove) his desire to be "scientific" about drugs raises at least three major problems of its own.

April 2025 Update

1) Why need we turn to science to justify the legalization of plant medicines that were unconstitutionally criminalized in the first place? Surely, a country founded on natural law cannot justifiably deny its citizens the right to access the plants and fungi that grow at their very feet. To turn the discussion to science is to yield unnecessary ground to the Drug Warrior, saying in effect: "Yes, of course, citizens cannot be trusted with free access to all of Mother Nature's bounty, but let's decide which plants can be legal on a scientific basis." That's as much as to say, "Yes, Drug Warrior, we agree on one thing: that common law must now triumph over natural law, given the prevalence of all these nasty drugs out there in Mother Nature."

2) Natural law aside, the subject of drugs is not merely a scientific issue. It is also an aesthetic, spiritual and political one. This is because illegal substances can endow the user with a whole new view of life, especially viewpoints that are thought to be left-leaning, including a love for nature and a feeling of unity with all of humankind. It is therefore tyrannical and partisan to render such new outlooks criminal. It is an attempt on the part of government to discourage certain ways of thinking about the world. It is thus the ultimate form of governmental mind control. And that is not a tyranny that science is going to solve for us: it is a question of fundamental freedom in a modern democracy: either we have the freedom to entertain new outlooks that these substances can facilitate or we don't.

Consider how the eccentric character Augustus Bedloe saw the natural world around him with the help of morphine in the Edgar Allan Poe story entitled "Tale of the Ragged Mountains":

"In the meantime the morphine had its customary effect- that of enduing all the external world with an intensity of interest. In the quivering of a leaf- in the hue of a blade of grass- in the shape of a trefoil- in the humming of a bee- in the gleaming of a dew-drop- in the breathing of the wind- in the faint odors that came from the forest- there came a whole universe of suggestion- a gay and motley train of rhapsodical and immethodical thought."

I don't know about you, but I want that kind of wide-awake life, rather than to drowsily trudge through God's scenery with dull eyes and shuffling step, and science's view on my desires is irrelevant. Science may play an advisory role in telling me the downsides of morphine use as a means to living such a lifestyle (no doubt there are safer means through, say, the guided use of certain psychedelics), but their advice will be laughably hypocritical to me until the day when they are free to tell me both the subjective good sides and the objective bad sides of ALL psychoactive substances, including Big Pharma pills and alcohol. Instead, most "drug information" focuses on the negative properties of illegal substances alone, thereby reinforcing Drug War propaganda which says that substances can only bring about evil once they have been criminalized by American politicians.

Which brings up the final problem with the "scientific" approach to drugs:

3) Even science is political when it focuses only on specific aspects of a supposed problem. That's why science today has zero street cred in lecturing me on drug misuse. This is because it completely ignores the fact that 1 in 8 American men and 1 in 4 American women are addicted to Big Pharma meds. If 1 in 4 American women were addicted to morphine, conservative politicians would be screaming for martial law to be put in place, allowing the government to do constitutionally shady things to quash the scourge of drug abuse. The last thing they want is a drug being popularized which gives the user a "touchy-feely" outlook on life: it might cause them to vote for Democrats, after all.

But what is the difference between me being addicted to the daily use of morphine and me being addicted to the daily use of Big Pharma meds? There's no doubt which I would personally choose if I had to be addicted to SOMETHING. It's really a no-brainer: do I want morphine to facilitate deep insights into the world around me, or do I want my emotional life to be "tamped down" by Big Pharma meds? Um, I'll take the morphine, please, hold the moralizing. Why? Because addiction itself is not necessarily a problem if a safe supply of one's chosen poison is reliably available to the user: the problem is being addicted to a substance that keeps you from attaining self-actualization in life.

Relax, Drug Warriors: I'm not advocating morphine use: rather I'm advocating free but informed decision making regarding all substance use, which is nothing more radical than the status quo that existed in the American Republic until 1914, when racist politician Francis Burton Harrison first outlawed a plant in violation of the natural law upon which America was founded.

Inconvenient Truths



Dr. William Stewart Halsted, co-founder of Johns Hopkins medical school, was a lifelong morphine addict. Sound shocking? Well, check your hypocritical astonishment at the door, because thousands of famous and worthy men today are addicted to Big Pharma meds and use them every single day of their life. As Thomas Szasz reports in "Ceremonial Chemistry," Halsted was able to adjust his dosage so that he appeared eminently sober while yet having the increased energy and focus that the drug facilitated in him. Interviewed late in life, his colleagues professed astonishment that he could have done so much IN SPITE OF his morphine use, never stopping to think that he may have done so much BECAUSE OF his morphine use. If Americans thought rationally about drugs, they would reserve their astonishment for folks who achieve a great deal in life while yet taking modern-day anti-depressants, since those latter drugs have been shown to conduce to emotional flat-lining in long-term users.

Author's Follow-up: July 21, 2022






I feel compelled to add that the ideal pharmacological world for me would be a non-addictive one. Such a stand, however, does not rule out the use of morphine or opium, because Drug War propaganda aside, a potentially addictive substance can be used non-addictively. You'd know that if the government spent its time and money teaching folks how to be safe rather than demonizing substances like so many Christian Science cavepersons. Moreover, even if I did err on the addictive side, the world is still my pharmacological oyster when all psychoactive medicines are legal and I have a pharmacologically savvy empath for a friend. I look forward to the day when pharmacologically savvy empaths will have the green light to leverage psychoactive substances of all kinds in order to provide a seeker, as opposed to a "patient," with insight, guidance and focus for the human mind. Indeed, I see such interventions as getting rid of the whole concept of "patients" when it comes to mental conditions, since we only think of them as patients because the healthcare business wants to claim mood and mind as their bailiwick, for obvious financial reasons.

Of course, this will be hard to understand for many brainwashed readers -- those of you who received teddy bears as kids for just saying no to mother nature's godsend meds -- especially since you then went on to watch TV shows in which coca and opium users were only ever depicted as fiends -- and in which even scientists only ever focused on the downsides of substance use. And then you discover that drugs are so evil that you'll be removed from the American workforce if you use even a trace of the government's official list of despised substances (notwithstanding that some of them have inspired the creation of entire religions). Moreover, the US Office of National Drug Control Policy has actually been forbidding its employees for decades now to even consider possible safe uses of "drugs" -- in other words, they are all about spreading propaganda and fearmongering. So it's amazing that anyone sees through the mist of Drug War lies considering how politicians have run a full-court press against the truth for the past century, starting with their Sinophobic demonizing of the poppy plant.

That's why I maintain that the Drug War is a cult. Indeed, I believe it meets the 8 conditions for being a cult as defined by psychiatrist and author Robert Jay Lifton. But that's a subject for another essay.

Author's Follow-up: December 3, 2022






Obama launched his so-called BRAIN Initiative in 2013, at the same time that he was supporting a Drug War which outlawed all the substances that reveal the power of said brain. Psychedelics reveal whole new worlds in the mind. Opium allows one to metaphorically parse their negative experiences (including physical pain) so that one is not bothered by them. The problems do not go away: rather they are seen as separate from one's true self. Such drugs imply all sorts of wonderful things about the role of the brain and of consciousness itself, yet the BRAIN Initiative will not investigate these angles, since it will be censored from doing so by Drug War superstition, which says that such substances are without any value whatsoever. And so the "scientific" BRAIN Initiative is completely unscientific. The fix is in. By outlawing the study of such experiential wonders, Obama invites consciousness-scorning materialists to declare premature victory in the field of neuroscience.



Author's Follow-up:

April 07, 2025

picture of clock metaphorically suggesting a follow-up





The more one actually thinks about the issues involved, the more outrageous the Drug War appears: this, at any rate, is the takeaway message for myself as a philosopher after six years of methodically contemplating all things drug-related.

Indeed, I have found that the dogmatic roots behind substance prohibition have borne poisonous fruit in almost all areas of academic and political life. I have found, moreover, that almost all Americans are blind to the roots of this dystopia. To be sure, many can see the fruits of this poisoned harvest -- police brutality, the prevalence of suicide and depression, the unnecessary use of brain-damaging shock therapy, the unnecessary existence of mafias and drug cartels, the unnecessary disappearance of the rule of law in Latin America, the unnecessary shootings in inner cities, the unnecessary provincial hatred that leads to school shootings, the unnecessary global hatred that has us living under a nuclear sword of Damocles-- and yet almost no one sees how the Drug War has poisoned the soil to produce just such a crop of deformed outcomes. To extend the horticultural metaphor, the pundits of our times are blaming our sickly harvest on global warming, El Nino, pesticides, a lack of education, even on alien globules from outer space... on anything, in fact, except the War on Drugs, convinced as we are of the twofold lie of the Drug War: first, that drug use can have no upsides, and second, that prohibition can have no downsides.

Speaking of mutant crops, drug prohibition has led to the censoring of science itself. The authors of almost all magazine articles about subjects related to psychology and consciousness reckon without the Drug War: that is, they ignore what drug use might tell us about the topics under discussion.

This is why I cannot get excited about a materialist study of the human brain: we do not need to study the brain in the abstract, the brain, as it were, in a vat. We need to study the human mind in conjunction with that brain. Philosophers of all people should realize this. America's greatest philosopher, William James, called for just such a study in "The Varieties of Religious Experience.1" But today's philosophers have ignored that plea, so much so that it does not appear in James's online biography at Harvard University, his alma mater, where he founded the psychology department2. Why such censorship? Because the study in question would require the informed use of psychoactive substances. And in Drug War America, almost all academics have a prior commitment to the Drug War ideology of substance demonization, to the idea that drugs can have no positive uses for anybody: for any reason, at any dose, in any circumstances, ever.

And so the Drug War stops philosophers from studying the mind-body problem in a way that could actually produce answers. The Holy Grail of philosophy is right before our eyes but it is invisible to us thanks to our western world's previous commitment to the Drug War ideology of substance demonization.

The intentional and methodical use of psychoactive substances as championed by James could help us get real answers about the so-called mind-body problem. It could show us to what extent mind can influence matter and vice versa -- and the extent to which those very categories may be misleading. Prior to relativity theory, scientists thought of space and time as separate entities. After that theory, we thought instead of space-time. After the study of drug-expanded consciousness, we may very well begin thinking of mind and matter as mind-matter, that is, as two apparent entities which are actually ineluctably intertwined, such that one cannot be meaningfully comprehended without the other. This outlook would jibe with the findings of modern physics, for as physicist David Bohm points out in his 1980 book "Wholeness and the Implicate Order,3" Einstein's relativity theory and quantum science have at least one thing in common, even in the ongoing absence of a unifying theory: they both show that reality depends on context, that reality must be viewed holistically rather than with a myopic focus on parts.

By thinking in terms of mind-matter, we may also make progress in understanding the limits of human knowledge as understood by Kant and Schopenhauer, an understanding that has hitherto been limited by the duos' kneejerk assumption that valid perception comes only from the "sober" mind -- as that term "sober" is understood by intoxiphobic westerners like themselves.



Notes:

1 James, William, The Varieties of Religious Experience, Philosophical Library, New York, 1902 (up)
2 Quass, Brian, How Harvard University Censored the Biography of William James, 2025 (up)
3 Bohm, David, Wholeness and the Implicate Order, 1980 (up)



People

about whom and to whom I've written over the years...

Alexander, Lamar
Letter to Lamar Alexander
Barrett, Frederick S.
The common sense way to get off of antidepressants
Why the Drug War is Worse than you can Imagine
Benaroch MD, Roy
Open Letter to Roy Benaroch MD
Bloom, Josh
Science is not free in the age of the drug war
Buchanan, Julian
Finally, a drug war opponent who checks all my boxes
Chalmers, David
David Chalmers and the Drug War
Chelmow MD, David
How the US Preventive Services Task Force Drums Up Business for Big Pharma
Chomsky, Noam
Chomsky is Right
Chomsky's Revenge
Noam Chomsky on Drugs
Cline, Ben
Open Letter to Congressman Ben Cline, asking him to abolish the criminal DEA
Close, Glenn
Glenn Close but no cigar
Cossin, Daniel
How AI turned William James into a Drug Warrior
De Quincey, Thomas
The Therapeutic Value of Anticipation
Dick, Philip K.
Drug Laws as the Punishment of 'Pre-Crime'
Doblin, Rick
Constructive criticism of the MAPS strategy for re-legalizing MDMA
Is Rick Doblin Running with the Devil?
Why Rick Doblin is Ghosting Me
Ellsberg, Daniel
Drug Warriors Fiddle while Rome Gets Nuked
Falcon, Joshua
Drugs are not the enemy, hatred is the enemy
Floyd, George
The Racist Drug War killed George Floyd
Fort, Charles
The Book of the Damned
Fox, James Alan
The Invisible Mass Shootings
Friedman, Milton
How Milton Friedman Completely Misunderstood the War on Drugs
Fukuyama, Francis
Open Letter to Francis Fukuyama
Gibb, Andy
How The Drug War Killed Andy Gibb
Gimbel, Steven
Heroin versus Alcohol
Glaser, Gabrielle
Open Letter to Gabrielle Glaser
Glieberman, Owen
Open Letter to Variety Critic Owen Glieberman
Glover, Troy
Open letter to Professor Troy Glover at Waterloo University
Goswami, Amit
Alternative Medicine as a Drug War Creation
Gottlieb, Anthony
Open Letter to Anthony Gottlieb
Grandmaster Flash, musician
Grandmaster Flash: Drug War Collaborator
Griffiths, Roland
Depressed? Here's why you can't get the medicines that you need
Open Letter to Rick Doblin and Roland Griffiths
Gupta, Sujata
The Mother of all Western Biases
Hammersley, Richard
Open Letter to Richard Hammersley
Handwerk, Brian
How National Geographic slanders the Inca people and their use of coca
Harris, Kamala
Why I Support Kamala Harris
Harrison, Francis Burton
Screw You, Francis Burton Harrison
Hart, Carl
Open Letter to Dr. Carl L. Hart
What Carl Hart Missed
Harvey, Dennis
How Variety and its film critics support drug war fascism
Heidegger, Martin
Heidegger on Drugs
Hogshire, Jim
I've got a bone to pick with Jim Hogshire
Opium for the Masses by Jim Hogshire
What Jim Hogshire Got Wrong about Drugs
Hurley, Vincent
Open Letter to Vincent Hurley, Lecturer
Hutton, Ronald
Drug Dealers as Modern Witches
James, William
How the Drug War is Threatening Intellectual Freedom in England
Keep Laughing Gas Legal
The Criminalization of Nitrous Oxide is No Laughing Matter
William James rolls over in his grave as England bans Laughing Gas
Jefferson, Thomas
A Misguided Tour of Monticello
How the Jefferson Foundation Betrayed Thomas Jefferson
How the Monticello Foundation betrayed Jefferson's Legacy in 1987
Jefferson
The Dark Side of the Monticello Foundation
Jenkins, Philip
'Synthetic Panics' by Philip Jenkins
Jenkins DA, Brooke
Prohibitionists Never Learn
Kant, Immanuel
How the Drug War limits our understanding of Immanuel Kant
How the Drug War Outlaws Criticism of Immanuel Kant
Kastrup, Bernardo
How Bernardo Kastrup reckons without the drug war
Kenny, Gino
The Right to LIVE FULLY is more important than the Right to DIE
Kirsch, Irving
Brahms is NOT the best antidepressant
Klang, Jessica
All these Sons
Kotek, Tina
Regulate and Educate
Koterski, Jospeh
America's Blind Spot
Kurtz, Matthew M.
How Scientific American reckons without the drug war
Langlitz, Nicolas
Why the FDA is not qualified to judge psychoactive medicine
Lee, Spike
Spike Lee is Bamboozled by the Drug War
Leshner, Alan I.
How the Drug War Screws the Depressed
Lewis, Edward
Psilocybin Mushrooms by Edward Lewis
Ling, Lisa
Open Letter to Lisa Ling
Locke, John
John Locke on Drugs
Maples-Keller, Jessica
Hello? MDMA works, already!
Margaritoff, Marco
In Defense of Opium
Open Letter to Margo Margaritoff
Marinacci, Mike
Psychedelic Cults and Outlaw Churches: LSD, Cannabis, and Spiritual Sacraments in Underground America
Martinez, Liz
Replacing antidepressants with entheogens
Mate, Gabor
In the Realm of Hungry Drug Warriors
Open Letter to Addiction Specialist Gabor Mate
Sherlock Holmes versus Gabor Maté
McAllister, Sean
How to Unite Drug War Opponents of all Ethnicities
Mithoefer, MD, Michael
MDMA for Psychotherapy
Mohler, George
Predictive Policing in the Age of the Drug War
Morgan, Cory
Canadian Drug Warrior, I said Get Away
Naz, Arab
The Menace of the Drug War
Newcombe, Russell
Intoxiphobia
Nietzsche, Friedrich
Nietzsche and the Drug War
Nixon, Richard
Why Hollywood Owes Richard Nixon an Oscar
Noakes, Jesse
Americans have the right to pursue happiness but not to attain it
Nobis, Nathan
Top 10 Problems with the Drug War
Nutt, David
Majoring in Drug War Philosophy
O'Leary, Diane
Open Letter to Diane O'Leary
Obama, Barack
What Obama got wrong about drugs
Offenhartz, Jake
Libertarians as Closet Christian Scientists
Pearson, Snoop
Snoop Pearson's muddle-headed take on drugs
Perry, Matthew
Drug War Murderers
Matthew Perry and the Drug War Ghouls
Pinchbeck, Daniel
Review of When Plants Dream
Polk, Thad
How Addiction Scientists Reckon without the Drug War
Pollan, Michael
Michael Pollan on Drugs
My Conversation with Michael Pollan
The Michael Pollan Fallacy
Rado, Vincent
Open Letter to Vincent Rado
Reuter, Peter
The problem with Modern Drug Reform Efforts
Rovelli, Carlo
Why Science is the Handmaiden of the Drug War
Rudgeley, Richard
Richard Rudgley condemns 'drugs' with faint praise
Sabet, Kevin
Why Kevin Sabet's approach to drugs is racist, anti-scientific and counterproductive
Sanders, Laura
Science News Continues to Ignore the Drug War
Santayana, George
If this be reason, let us make the least of it!
Schopenhauer, Arthur
Ego Transcendence Made Easy
What if Arthur Schopenhauer Had Used DMT?
Schultes, Richard Evans
The Drug War Imperialism of Richard Evans Schultes
Segall PhD, Matthew D.
Why Philosophers Need to Stop Dogmatically Ignoring Drugs
Sewell, Kenneth
Open letter to Kenneth Sewell
Shapiro, Arthur
Illusions with Professor Arthur Shapiro
Smith, Wolfgang
Open letter to Wolfgang Smith
Unscientific American
Smyth, Bobby
Teenagers and Cannabis
Sotillos, Samuel Bendeck
In Defense of Religious Drug Use
Stea, Jonathan
The Pseudoscience of Mental Health Treatment
Strassman, Rick
Five problems with The Psychedelic Handbook by Rick Strassman
What Rick Strassman Got Wrong
Szasz, Thomas
In Praise of Thomas Szasz
Tulfo, Ramon T.
Why the Drug War is far worse than a failure
Urquhart, Steven
No drugs are bad in and of themselves
Vance, Laurence
In Response to Laurence Vance
Walker, Lynn
Ignorance is the enemy, not Fentanyl
Walsh, Bryan
The Drug War and Armageddon
The End Times by Bryan Walsh
Warner, Mark
Another Cry in the Wilderness
Watson, JB
Behaviorism and the War on Drugs
Weil, Andrew
What Andrew Weil Got Wrong
Wells, HG
HG Wells and Drugs
Whitaker, Robert
Mad at Mad in America
Whitehead, Alfred North
Whitehead and Psychedelics
Willyard, Cassandra
Science News magazine continues to pretend that there is no war on drugs
Winehouse, Amy
How the Drug War Killed Amy Winehouse
Wininger, Charley
Getting off antidepressants in the age of the drug war
Wuthnow, Robert
Clodhoppers on Drugs
Zelfand, Erica
Open Letter to Erica Zelfand
Zinn, Howard
Even Howard Zinn Reckons without the Drug War
Zuboff, Shoshana
Tune In, Turn On, Opt Out



computer screen with words DRUG WAR BLOG


Next essay: Heroin versus Alcohol
Previous essay: How the Drug War turned me into an eternal patient

More Essays Here




Some Tweets against the hateful war on drugs

I don't have a problem with CBD. But I find that many people like it for the wrong reasons: they assume there is something slightly "dirty" about getting high and that all "cures" should be effected via direct materialist causes, not holistically a la time-honored tribal use.
The book "Plants of the Gods" is full of plants and fungi that could help addicts and alcoholics, sometimes in the plant's existing form, sometimes in combinations, sometimes via extracting alkaloids, etc. But drug warriors need addiction to sell their prohibition ideology.
The drug war bans human progress by deciding that hundreds of drugs are trash without even trying to find positive uses for them. Yet scientists continue to research and write as if prohibition does not exist, that's how cowed they are by drug laws.
They drive to their drug tests in pickup trucks with license plates that read "Don't tread on me." Yeah, right. "Don't tread on me: Just tell me how and how much I'm allowed to think and feel in this life. And please let me know what plants I can access."
I'm interested in CBD myself, because I want to gain benefits at times without experiencing intoxication. So I think it's great. But I like it as part of an overall strategy toward mental health. I do not think of CBD, as some do, as a way to avoid using naughty drugs.
The most addictive drugs have a bunch of great uses, like treating pain and inspiring great literature. Prohibition causes addiction by making their use as problematic as possible and denying knowledge and choices. It's always wrong to blame drugs.
Amphetamines are "meds" when they help kids think more clearly but they are "drugs" when they help adults think more clearly. That shows you just how bewildered Americans are when it comes to drugs.
High suicide rates? What a poser! Gee, I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the US has outlawed all substances that elate and inspire???
Let's pass a constitutional amendment to remove Kansas from the Union, and any other state where the racist politicians leverage the drug war to crack down on minorities.
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.
More Tweets



The latest hits from Drug War Records, featuring Freddie and the Fearmongers!


1. Requiem for the Fourth Amendment



2. There's No Place Like Home (until the DEA gets through with it)



3. O Say Can You See (what the Drug War's done to you and me)






front cover of Drug War Comic Book

Buy the Drug War Comic Book by the Drug War Philosopher Brian Quass, featuring 150 hilarious op-ed pics about America's disgraceful war on Americans



You have been reading an article entitled, What Obama got wrong about drugs published on August 20, 2020 on AbolishTheDEA.com. For more information about America's disgraceful drug war, which is anti-patient, anti-minority, anti-scientific, anti-mother nature, imperialistic, the establishment of the Christian Science religion, a violation of the natural law upon which America was founded, and a childish and counterproductive way of looking at the world, one which causes all of the problems that it purports to solve, and then some, visit the drug war philosopher, at abolishTheDEA.com. (philosopher's bio; go to top of this page)