A reader of this site, especially one raised on Drug War propaganda (which is to say literally everyone these days), may say to themselves: "Gee, this guy is awfully hung up about drugs. "
But that's got the whole situation backwards. The fact is that the whole world has been "hung up" about drugs, ever since the Harrison narcotics act of 1914 criminalized a mere plant (the poppy plant) in contravention of the natural law upon which America was founded. Since then, "drugs" have become the national (and, alas, international) boogeyman and scapegoat, responsible for all social ills and therefore something that the police and military have mobilized around the world to combat, letting civil liberties fend for themselves.
It is thus society that is hung up about "drugs," not me. My whole goal in writing these essays is to stop the world from superstitiously scapegoating drugs. Drugs are not the problem. To the extent that there's a problem that's ASSOCIATED with drug use, it stems from a lack of education, not the substances themselves. To think otherwise, is to reason like our prehistoric ancestors: if they got hit by lightning, then the evil lightning was to blame, not the fact that they had stupidly stood out in the open and attracted the lightning bolt.
There was no drug problem in Ancient Egypt. There was no drug problem in Ancient Greece. There was no drug problem in Ancient Mesopotamia. There was no drug problem in Ancient Rome. There was no drug problem in the Mongol Kingdom. There was no drug problem in the Viking Age.
Why then is there suddenly a huge "drug" problem today? Answer: Because racist politicians (especially Francis Burton Harrison and Nixon) wanted to punish the people with whom they associated certain substance use, and since they could not enact any laws that were OBVIOUSLY racist, they drafted drug laws that would throw their enemies in jail, often for life, for using their substance of choice, thus often taking away their right to vote in American elections and ensuring the future election of yet more drug-warrior racists.
The Drug War thus created has nothing to do with America's health. If it did, then its first targets would be Big Pharma antidepressants 1, to which 1 in 4 American women are addicted. Then it would move on to crack down on "liquor abuse," which one could plausibly argue is "rampant" in America. Yet the Drug Warrior is blind to such problems. When they say they want to crack down on "drug use," they are using the word "drugs" as they have defined the term for their own strategic political purposes: namely, a substance that fails to enrich Big Pharma 23 and Big Liquor, and a substance whose ingestion could help Americans bypass the expensive and highly addictive pill mill of psychiatry, thus leaving the medical establishment out of the loop when it comes to the profits to be reaped by addicting one's fellow human beings.
So the Drug Warrior willfully lies about these substances that they have hypocritically labelled "drugs" for political reasons, claiming that such substances have no therapeutic value, thus lying in the teeth of contrary anecdotal evidence that dates back millennia. They say coca is pure evil: yet it was an Incan God and helped Jules Verne and HG Wells create the best sci-fi stories in the world. They say opium 4 is even PURER evil: yet Benjamin Franklin and even Thomas Jefferson himself partook.
No, I'm not the one who's hung up about drugs: it's the racist politicians who are fixated on "drugs," but not any drugs, mind: just the drugs that they have decided to demonize in order to achieve their racist political goals (namely, getting elected by marginalizing their opponents through the enactment of harsh drug laws). Sadly, they have hoodwinked liberals to play along, by convincing them that it's all about health, encouraging leftists to embrace the superstitious reasoning that amoral substances can be blamed for problems, rather than the lack of free and objective education that could render drug misuse impossible.
Author's Follow-up: August 28, 2022
Speaking of America's obsession with "drugs": "Just say no" classes are like DIY instruction for rebellious kids. They say, in effect: "If you ever decide to rebel, kids, here are some nasty substances that you can take to really piss off your parents and other authority figures." Besides that, such classes are anti-scientific, because they promote the pernicious idea that some substances can be bad without regard for how, when, or why they are used. In reality, there are no such substances in the world. Even the highly toxic Botox can have positive uses in the correct context. Moreover, it is this lie about substances that, even as we write, is censoring scientists by outlawing their thorough research of psychoactive medicines, some of which have great promise for combating Alzheimer's 5 disease and autism. But American drug policy is all about scaring Americans, not educating them. That's why Joe Biden 67's Office of National Drug Control Policy was originally set up with a charter that prevented its board members from even considering positive uses for the substances that politicians had outlawed.
One wonders when scientists are going to recognize this fact, come out soundly against the status quo, and insist that we stop politicizing substances -- and thus science -- altogether.
Re-affirm natural law and forbid politicians from barring the world's use of medicines simply because they do not pass moral muster with racist WASP politicians.
Drug prohibition fails even on its own terms. Instead of protecting white American young people, it has exiled them to the city streets where they are sacrificed on the altar of the American religion of substance demonization.
This hysterical reaction to rare negative events actually creates more rare negative events. This is why the DEA publicizes "drug problems," because by making them well known, they make the problems more prevalent and can thereby justify their huge budget.
I just asked New York Attorney General Letitia James how much she was getting paid to play Whack-a-Mole. I pointed out that the drug war created the gangs just as liquor prohibition created the Mafia.
The first step in harm reduction is to re-legalize mother nature's medicines. Then hundreds of millions of people will no longer suffer in silence for want of godsend medicines... for depression, for pain, for anxiety, for religious doubts... you name it.
Drug Warriors should be legally banned from watching or reading Sherlock Holmes stories, since in their world, it is a crime for such people as Sherlock Holmes to exist, i.e., people who use medicines to improve their mind and mood.
If NIDA covered all drugs (not just politically ostracized drugs), they'd produce articles like this: "Aspirin continues to kill hundreds." "Penicillin misuse approaching crisis levels." "More bad news about Tylenol and liver damage." "Study revives cancer fears from caffeine."
Getting off some drugs could actually be fun and instructive, by using a variety of other drugs to keep one's mind off the withdrawal process. But America believes that getting off a drug should be a big moral battle.
What I want to know is, who sold Christopher Reeves that horse that he fell off of? Who was peddling that junk?!
And where did politicians get the idea that irresponsible white American young people are the only stakeholders when it comes to the question of re-legalizing drugs??? There are hundreds of millions of other stakeholders: philosophers, pain patients, the depressed.
Opium is a godsend, as folks like Galen, Avicenna and Paracelsus knew. The drug war has facilitated a nightmare by outlawing peaceable use at home and making safe use almost impossible.
(up)