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


The Handicapped NEED Crutches

on the anti-patient morality of the drug war

by Ballard Quass, the Drug War Philosopher





January 5, 2022



herapists tell us that shock therapy is only used as a last resort. But that is a lie. The fact is that there are hundreds of psychoactive substances that could help the depressed tolerate -- and even enjoy -- this life without frying their brain. This would be all too obvious in a world that wanted to profit from psychoactive medicine rather than demonize it, but in the age of the Drug War, I have to "spell it out" for folks:

The severely depressed could be given what today we disparage as "feel good" medicines on a weekly basis, in such a routine as to avoid addiction when desirable (remembering that even addiction is preferable to frying one's brain). The depressed could be taken on guided psychoactive trips to examine their lives and hopefully identify and surmount the conceptual hurdles that depress them. We could pharmacologically let them experience happiness (say, with one of the hundreds of drugs synthesized by Alexander Shulgin) so that they know that such a thing exists, that life does not have to be one uninterrupted span of gloom. The only thing holding us back is the puritan ethos of the Drug War, which tells us that it's better to fry this person's brain with ECT than to let them use a so-called "crutch." And that is fanatical Christian Science nonsense at its worst. For if people are severely handicapped, then they NEED crutches. But modern 'psychology' says we should kick such crutches out from under them -- and fry their brains into the bargain.

Let's hope that someday this ideology will be seen for the hateful and fanatical expression of drug-hating Christian Science that it is -- the same attitude that keeps kids in hospice and adults in chronic pain from getting the degree of pain relief that they require. For the DEA today is a moral censor: it evaluates (or rather second-guesses) the prescription of pain relief medicine on moral grounds, not on scientific ones, and, of course, the morality to which they subscribe is the drug-hating morality of the Christian Science religion, which tells us such lies as, "the less drugs, the better," and "drugs are not the answer," with the religious implication being that faith in a higher power should be the cure of choice.


Of course, psychiatry will tell us that they have the "REAL" cure for the depressed: you know, the one that has addicted 1 in 4 American women to Big Pharma meds for life. Now, THERE'S a crutch, and a faulty one at that, for I've used such 'godsends' for decades now and am more depressed than ever. And then there's the inconvenient fact that the number of depressed in America has been skyrocketing over the last 50-plus years, during the very time that these supposed miracle pills have become omnipresent.


Author's Follow-up: November 9, 2023


When psychiatry says that natural medicines like opium are "crutches" for depression and anxiety, they are suggesting the notion that science has found the cure to such things in brain chemistry. This claim is hogwash, and not just because these dependence-causing pills seem to cause the very chemical imbalances that they purport to be fixing. There is a basic philosophical problem with such alleged "mind fixes" as well.

First of all, if you're going to solve a problem for me as a depressive, you first have to tell me how you define the problem. When I say I'm depressed, I mean that I cannot live large -- or not as large as I would like. I want to grab the ball and run with life. I do not want a pill that merely keeps me from committing suicide, meanwhile fogging my brain and keeping me from crying at my parents' funeral.

I won't go into detail here, because I've expressed my philosophical qualms with the psychiatric pill mill in many other essays. suffice it to say here that it's a folly on par with frankenstein to even attempt to 'solve' the problem of human unhappiness, rather than treating it on a symptomatic basis. (There's another psychiatric lie: that it's wrong to treat the symptoms.) God keep us from ever "curing" depression, lest we live in a world of Stepford Wives. to the extent that we need anything at all, we should be able to use godsend meds to help us stand up to pain, sadness and anxiety. to say that this is somehow wrong is not science. It's not even logic. Such a view does not follow from any set of givens that one can adduce. Rather, it's the point of view of a Christian Scientist, aka a puritan who is convinced that it is morally wrong to use substances to improve or expand one's mental state.

So remember this the next time someone tells you that drug use is a crutch. That statement is always based on one of two unproven premises: 1) that psychiatry has already "sorted" depression, thank you very much, and 2) it's wrong to expand and improve one's mind with godsend medicines.

Finally, you'll note I refer to "drugs" as godsend medicines. This is because all substances have positive uses, Drug War ideology notwithstanding.

Besides, "drugs" is a pejorative label today. Like "scabs," it not only denotes a thing, but it passes judgment on that thing in so doing. So if prohibitionists are going to routinely slander psychoactive substances with their vocabulary, then they can scarcely blame me for routinely praising them in the same way. And praising what about them, you ask? Praising their great and almost entirely untapped potential for helping humanity, a blessing which the Drug Warrior is perversely determined to prevent through Pyrrhic victories which, if pursued to their illogical conclusions, will mean nothing short of the end of both democracy and human progress.




computer screen with words DRUG WAR BLOG


Next essay: Hey, You, Get Off Of My Creed!
Previous essay: What Terence McKenna Got Wrong About Drugs

More Essays Here




Some Tweets against the hateful war on drugs

The DEA is gaslighting Americans, telling them that drugs with obvious benefits have no benefits whatsoever. Scientists collude in this lie thanks to their adherence to the emotion-scorning principles of behaviorism.
Why don't those politicians understand what hateful colonialism they are practicing? Psychedelics have been used for millennia by the tribes that the west has conquered -- now we won't even let folks talk honestly about such indigenous medicines.
As great as it is, "Synthetic Panics" by Philip Jenkins was only tolerated by academia because it did not mention drugs in the title and it contains no explicit opinions about drugs. As a result, many drug law reformers still don't know the book exists.
There are no recreational drugs. Even laughing gas has rational uses because it gives us a break from morbid introspection. There are recreational USES of drugs, but the term "recreational" is often used to express our disdain for users who go outside the healthcare system.
The drug war outlaws everything that could help both prevent addiction and treat it. And then they justify the war on drugs by scaring people with the specter of addiction. They NEED addiction to keep the drug war going.
But that's the whole problem with Robert Whitaker's otherwise wonderful critique of Big Pharma. Like almost all non-fiction authors today, he reckons without the drug war, which gave Big Pharma a monopoly in the first place.
In the Atomic Age Declassified, they tell us that we needed hundreds of thermonuclear tests so that scientists could understand the effects. That's science gone mad. Just like today's scientists who need more tests before they can say that laughing gas will help the depressed. Science today is all about ignoring the obvious. And THAT's why scientists are drug war collaborators, because they're not about to sign off on the use of substances until they've studied them "up the wazoo." Using grants from an agency whose very name indicates their anti-drug bias: namely, the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
For those who want to understand what's going on with the drug war from a philosophical point of view, I recommend chapter six of "Eugenics and Other Evils" by GK Chesterton.
To put it another way: in a sane world, we would learn to strategically fight drugs with drugs.
To oppose the Drug War philosophically, one has to highlight its connections to both materialism and the psychiatric pill mill. And that's a problem, because almost everyone is either a Drug Warrior, a materialist, and/or has a vested interest in the psychiatric pill mill.
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, The Handicapped NEED Crutches: on the anti-patient morality of the drug war, published on January 5, 2022 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)