bird icon for twitter bird icon for twitter


Why the Drug War is the Great Philosophical Problem of Our Time

my application for joining the Philosophy Forum

by Brian Ballard Quass, the Drug War Philosopher

March 25, 2025



Membership in the Philosophy Forum1 is by invitation only and the moderator requests a letter of introduction from potential members. I will be very interested to see if I am "allowed in." I know nothing about the site moderator, but I do know that philosophers in general ignore the Drug War completely and seem to think that it is bad manners even to mention the topic. But fingers crossed. Check back to this page from time to time to see whether the Philosophy Forum will let your old pal Rudolph join in any reindeer games!

Hello, Jamal.

I was wondering if I might join your Philosophy Forum.


I am a 66-year-old philosopher in spirit if not in title. I have written hundreds of philosophically oriented essays against the War on Drugs and drug prohibition as The Drug War Philosopher at abolishthedea.com. I have also written essays for Sociedelic magazine. I received a BA in Philosophy from Virginia Commonwealth University in 1989. I was offered a job as a TA at the time, but unfortunately, I turned it down. I have come to regret that decision since I now see that my lack of credentials has rendered me more or less invisible online in the world of philosophical discussions.

I am, however, the only professed philosopher who protested on behalf of William James against the FDA's recently announced plan to regulate laughing gas as a "drug.2" As I am sure you know, it was the use of such anesthetics that gave James his view of reality and that he urged philosophers to study the effects of such substances as well.

'No account of the universe in its totality,' wrote James, 'can be final which leaves these other forms of consciousness quite disregarded.3'


But many (most?) philosophers are afraid to challenge the drug-war ideology of substance demonization. William James founded the psychology department at Harvard University, and yet Harvard's online bio of James does not even mention his use of such substances or how they shaped his views of reality4.

Don't worry: whenever I post on such subjects in forums, I always make supported inductive or deductive arguments and/or quote identifiable sources: I do not simply rant against the status quo, even though I am depressed that so few philosophers push back against the Drug War, given the fact that it is, in my view, the great philosophical problem of our time. I believe that it represents the triumph of illogical argumentation over common sense, arguments based on unfounded yet unspoken premises -- in other words, it represents a world view which philosophers as such might be thought to be uniquely qualified to anatomize and rebuke, were they not afraid to do so. This is one of the benefits of working outside academia: I can afford to be braver than tenured professors.

I have, in fact, written hundreds of letters to philosophers on this subject, almost all of which have been ignored, however5. The Drug War has frightened academics into silence, which alone is a good enough reason to end it, were there not many other reasons to do so as well, such as the fact that it has brought about the end of the rule of law in Latin America, while turning America's inner-cities into no-go zones and causing unnecessary drug overdoses by refusing to teach safe use and to regulate product. We are also under a sort of intense form of propaganda as westerners, thanks to which almost no reports of positive drug use can be published or depicted in movies or other media - this despite the fact that user reports in books by researchers such as Alexander Shulgin6 (and James Fadiman7, William Richards8, Stanislav Grof9, etc.) imply endless potential for common-sense therapeutic drug use. Consider the following user reports in Shulgin's book "Pihkal: A Chemical Love Story10":

"The breakthrough I had... the following day... was of the highest value and importance for me.11"

"The feeling was one of great camaraderie, and it was very easy to talk to people.12"

"I am experiencing more deeply than ever before the importance of acknowledging and deeply honoring each human being. And I was able to go through and resolve some judgments with particular persons.13"



Notes:

1: The Philosophy Forum (up)
2: Why the FDA should not schedule Laughing Gas DWP (up)
3: Scribd.com: The Varieties of Religious Experience James, William, Philosophical Library, New York, 1902 (up)
4: William James Harvard University (up)
5: I asked 100 American philosophers what they thought about the Drug War DWP (up)
6: I asked 100 American philosophers what they thought about the Drug War DWP (up)
7: Microdosing 101 Fadiman, James, Microdosing Institute (up)
8: Sacred Knowledge: Psychedelics and Religious Experiences Hardcover Richards, William, Columbia University Press, New York, 2015 (up)
9: The transpersonal vision: the healing potential of nonordinary states of consciousness Grof, Stanislav, Sounds True, Boulder, Co., 1998 (up)
10: The transpersonal vision: the healing potential of nonordinary states of consciousness Grof, Stanislav, Sounds True, Boulder, Co., 1998 (up)
11: The transpersonal vision: the healing potential of nonordinary states of consciousness Grof, Stanislav, Sounds True, Boulder, Co., 1998 (up)
12: The transpersonal vision: the healing potential of nonordinary states of consciousness Grof, Stanislav, Sounds True, Boulder, Co., 1998 (up)
13: The transpersonal vision: the healing potential of nonordinary states of consciousness Grof, Stanislav, Sounds True, Boulder, Co., 1998 (up)







Ten Tweets

against the hateful war on US




Doc to Franklin: "I'm sorry, Ben, but I see no benefits of opium use under my microscope. The idea that you are living a fulfilled life is clearly a mistake on your part. If you want to be scientific, stop using opium and be scientifically depressed like the rest of us."

"My faith votes and strives to outlaw religions that use substances of which politicians disapprove."

It's funny to hear fans of sacred plants indignantly insisting that their meds are not "drugs." They're right in a way, but actually NO substances are "drugs." Calling substances "drugs" is like referring to striking workers as "scabs." It's biased terminology.

We're living in a sci-fi dystopia called "Fahrenheit 452", in which the police burn thought-expanding plants instead of thought-expanding books.

The drug war is a big scare campaign to teach us to distrust mother nature and to rely on pharmaceuticals instead.

Scientists are responsible for endless incarcerations in America. Why? Because they fail to denounce the DEA lie that psychoactive substances have no positive medical uses. This is so obviously wrong that only an academic in an Ivory Tower could disbelieve it.

Both physical and psychological addiction can be successfully fought when we relegalize the pharmacopoeia and start to fight drugs with drugs. But prohibitionists do not want to end addiction, they want to scare us with it.

Prohibition turned habituation into addiction by creating a wide variety of problems for users, including potential arrest, tainted or absent drug supply, and extreme stigmatization.

Google founders used to enthuse about the power of free speech, but Google is actively shutting down videos that tell us how to grow mushrooms -- MUSHROOMS, for God's sake. End the drug war and this hateful censorship of a free people.

The drug war normalizes the disdainful and self-righteous attitude that Columbus and Pizarro had about drug use in the New World.


Click here to see All Tweets against the hateful War on Us






How the Drug War Outlaws Religion
Confessions of an Effexor Junkie


This site uses no cookies! This site features no ads!



Thanks for visiting The Drug War Philosopher at abolishthedea.com, featuring essays against America's disgraceful drug war. Updated daily.

Copyright 2025, Brian Ballard Quass Contact: quass@quass.com


(up)