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.
Conservatives say they're against Big Government -- but they let bureaucrats decide what medicines they can use.
If we can go overseas to burn poppy plants, then Islamic countries should be free to come to the United States to burn our grape vines.
And so, by ignoring all "up" sides to drugs, the DEA points to potential addiction as a knock-down argument for their prohibition. This is the logic of children (and uneducated children at that). It is a cost-benefit analysis that ignores all benefits.
"The Harrison [Narcotics] Act made the drug peddler, and the drug peddler makes drug addicts.” --Robert A. Schless, 1925.
Endless drugs could help with depression. Any drug that inspires and elates is an antidepressant, partly by the effect itself and partly by the mood-elevation caused by anticipation of use (facts which are far too obvious for materialists and drug warriors to understand -- let alone materialist drug warriors!).
Trump supports the drug war and Big Pharma: the two forces that have turned me into a patient for life with dependence-causing antidepressants. Big Pharma makes the pills, and the drug war outlaws all viable alternatives.
When the FDA tells us in effect that MDMA is too dangerous to be used to prevent school shootings and to help bring about world peace, they are making political judgments, not scientific ones.
Americans are starting to think that psychedelics may be an exception to the rule that drugs are evil -- but drugs have never been evil. The evil resides in how we think, talk and legislate about drugs.
If politicians wanted to outlaw coffee, a bunch of Kevin Sabets would come forward and start writing books designed to scare us off the drink by cherry-picking negative facts from scientific studies.
If opium and cocaine were re-legalized, hospital buildings would no longer be the secular cathedrals of our time. Some of that wealth would actually go to healthy people.
(up)