Showing posts with label Drugs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Drugs. Show all posts

Saturday, September 05, 2009

Drugs are Kewl!

Last month disappeared into the Hellishness of the Great White North that is Indiana- the high one day in AUGUST was only 60-something. But, more on that will have to wait. Especially since I'm not done up here, yet.

However, drugs have been much on my mind lately. And today, Warren Ellis has pointed me at an article about the way the Ancient Greeks and Romans looked at/used psychoactive drugs.

Sure, it makes sense that the Greeks and Romans used psychoactives. Fits right into the conceptions I was taught of self-indulgent orgies, vomitariums, et cetera. No problems with all that; but the person writing the article makes a lot of common, and stupid, assertions about drug use in general.

"[...]cannabis can alter your perception of reality, not just your mood.

Reports of psychoactive drug experiences tend to support the idea that the user can become aware of multiple levels of reality all present simultaneously that are far more complex and yet more harmonious and unified than normal experience permits her to perceive. All sorts of understandings are possible, based on the particular mind and the particular drug[...]"


Bullshit.

Those "higher levels" only existed from the time the drug's chemicals invade the brain meats to the time they are flushed out of those same brain meats. Subjective PSYCHOlogical ACTIVity in the head of a person on psychoactive drugs is not what I'd call supporting tendency in "reports". Without the drugs no one ever experiences those higher levels (excluding such abnormal phenomenon as Left Temporal Lobe Epilepsy, and similar events). If no one had ever taken the drugs we wouldn't talk about these "altered states". The drugs create the effects, they don't grant access to otherwise unattainable levels of existence. Anyone who would contend otherwise should feel free to take some objective, rigorous, experimental sensor readings to indicate the existence of these other "planes". fMRI wouldn't qualify- blood flow to certain areas of the brain would, indeed, (seem to) indicate higher levels of activity in those areas, which would be exactly what we expect due to the cognitive skewing of the psychoactive drug(s).

Guess what: Reality is Real. Bullshit some assholes believe because it seemed real when they were trippin' off acid (when they knew they shouldn't have kicked it with them spider monkeys) is bullshit. Drugs aren't bad, per se; and that's an argument for a different time. My point is that drugs aren't some aid to the mystical. The mystical is bullshit, emergent effects from the psychoactive response in the brain- not real. Anyone who goes all misty/starry eyed when talking about the vast levels of consciousness accessible through the gateway of little chemical packages is fooling themselves. Which is probably pretty easy since their little drug-friends have probably rotted holes in the bits they're trying to think with.

Read More...

Friday, March 06, 2009

The Economist says "Make it Legal"

(First found at Boing Boing)

The Economist is saying:

Next week ministers from around the world gather in Vienna to set international drug policy for the next decade. Like first-world-war generals, many will claim that all that is needed is more of the same. In fact the war on drugs has been a disaster, creating failed states in the developing world even as addiction has flourished in the rich world. By any sensible measure, this 100-year struggle has been illiberal, murderous and pointless. That is why The Economist continues to believe that the least bad policy is to legalise drugs.

“Least bad” does not mean good. Legalisation, though clearly better for producer countries, would bring (different) risks to consumer countries. As we outline below, many vulnerable drug-takers would suffer. But in our view, more would gain.


Here's why I doubt we'll be dropping this particular prohibition...

Look at the Kennedy legacy.

A single generation after prohibition and we had a political dynasty that was/is, arguably, the most powerful in America ever, but certainly within the 20th century.

And it was all built on the backbones of a fortune made in illegal alcohol sales.

The Kennedys made their money during prohibition; and when prohibition ended, they couldn't keep making money running booze. That's when they moved into politics.

BoingBoing seems to agree, to some respect:
But it won't happen, because the criminals don't want it, law enforcement doesn't want it, and the prison systems ... don't want it.

Read More...