The Drug War is a godsend for conservatives. Whenever social policy results in disenfranchisement and anger in leftist and liberal quarters, conservatives can completely ignore a frank discussion of the policies that caused it by focusing instead on the illicit substance use to which the despair in question naturally gave rise. Does a failure to focus on childhood education result in semi-literate adult populations with no respect for human life? No problem. Conservatives merely focus their attention on the problematic substance use that resulted from that same abnegation of government responsibility. By thus framing the public debate in terms of substance abuse, conservatives not only avoid having to discuss the topic of equitable social arrangements, but they can blame the downsides of their selfish social policies on the victims of that policy themselves.
June 4, 2022
Fast-forward two years and conservatives now have a lock on the Supreme Court, Lord help us. The good news is, these conservatives have a penchant for so-called "state's rights," which, when it comes to drugs, may facilitate continued drug decriminalization on the state level, especially after the fashion of Oregon. Also, the court is clearly open to the idea that the ritual use of psychoactive medicine in a religion cannot be infringed, as shown in its 9-0 ruling in favor of the UDV Church re: its use of ayahuasca. What we need now are some would-be religion founders to come forward, to announce the sincere creation of various new churches in which various currently illegal drugs are used ceremonially. Let's see how this court then reacts to the DEA's attempt to shut down, say, Our Lady of Psilocybin or The First Baptist Church of Ecstasy. For the criminalization of all psychoactive medicines (but entheogens in particular) is necessarily an attack on the freedom of religion 1, insofar as these kinds of substances (from coca to mushrooms) have inspired entire religions in the past. Given that back story, in fact, the criminalization of these drugs is more than just an attack on specific religions: it is an attack on the religious impulse itself and an attempt to quash the propensity for psychospiritual growth and improvement in humankind, as who should say, "We've got Christianity now, folks -- we're all good now, religiously speaking. The world does not need any more religions, thank you very much."
"My faith votes and strives to outlaw religions that use substances of which politicians disapprove."
For most drugs, dependency is a bug. For Big Pharma antidepressants, it is a feature.
The FDA says that MindMed's LSD drug works. But this is the agency that has not been able to decide for decades now if coca "works," or if laughing gas "works." It's not just science going on at the FDA, it's materialist presuppositions about what constitutes evidence.
If America cannot exist without outlawing drugs, then there is something wrong with America, not with drugs.
Oregon's drug policy is incoherent and cruel. The rich and healthy spend $4,000 a week on psilocybin. The poor and chemically dependent are thrown in jail, unless they're on SSRIs, in which case they're congratulated for "taking their meds."
Drugs like opium and cocaine should come with the following warning: "Outlawing of this product may result in inner-city gunfire, civil wars overseas, and rigged elections in which drug warriors win office by throwing minorities in jail."
It is consciousness which, via perception, shapes the universe into palpable forms. Otherwise it's just a chaos of particles. The very fact that you can refer to "the sun" shows that your senses have parsed the raw data into a specific meaning. "We" make this universe.
It's disgusting that folks like Paul Stamets need a DEA license to work with mushrooms.
The American Philosophy Association should make itself useful and release a statement saying that the drug war is based on fallacious reasoning, namely, the idea that substances can be bad in themselves, without regard for why, when, where and/or how they are used.
This just in on the drug scene: A new New York Times report shows that America has been flooding the world with antidepressants, alcohol and cigarettes!
Unless otherwise indicated, no AI is used in the creation of site content. These essays represent the original ideas of their author and not the ideas that the author SHOULD have based on an algorithmic parsing of existing data. For more on this subject, consider the AI-related viewpoints to which the author subscribes as delineated in the New York Times opinion piece entitled "What 370,000 College Essays Tell Us About A.I.’s Effects on Creativity" by Rebecca Winthrop of the Brookings Institution.
(up)