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."
As such, "we" are important. The sun is just a chaos of particles that "we" have selected out of the rest of the raw data and declared "This we shall call the sun!" "We" make this universe. Consciousness is fundamental.
The whole drug war is based on the anti-American idea that the way to avoid problems is to lie and prevaricate and persuade people not to ask questions.
Rather than protesting prohibition as a crackdown on academic freedom, today's scientists are collaborating with the drug war by promoting shock therapy and SSRIs, thereby profiting from the monopoly that the drug war gives them in selling mind and mood medicine.
This is the problem with trusting science to tell us about drugs. Science means reductive materialism, whereas psychoactive drug use is all about mind and the human being as a whole. We need pharmacologically savvy shaman to guide us, not scientists.
Being a lifetime patient is not the issue: that could make perfect sense in certain cases. But if I am to be "using" for life, I demand the drug of MY CHOICE, not that of Big Pharma and mainstream psychiatry, who are dogmatically deaf to the benefits of hated substances.
The fact that drugs have positive uses for human beings is a psychological corollary of Husserl's phenomenology and Whitehead's philosophy of organism.
Scientists are censored as to what they can study thanks to drug law. Instead of protesting that outrage, they lend a false scientific veneer to those laws via their materialist obsession with reductionism, which blinds them to the obvious godsend effects of outlawed substances.
Orchestras will eventually use psychedelics to train conductors. When the successful candidate directs mood-fests like Mahler's 2nd, THEY will be the stars, channeling every known -- and some unknown -- human emotions. Think Simon Rattle on... well, on psychedelics.
Freud thought cocaine was a great antidepressant. His contemporaries demonized the drug by focusing only on the rare misusers. That's like judging alcohol by focusing on alcoholics.
In "The Book of the Damned," Charles Fort shows how science damns (i.e. excludes) facts that it cannot assimilate into a system of knowledge. Fort could never have guessed, however, how thoroughly science would eventually "damn" all positive facts about "drugs."
(up)