What if all drugs were totally legal?

I must be missing all of the interesting prescription hallucinogens in my area…

There probably are some people who think like that, but I suppose there aren’t many. That’s a reactionary outlook. I think of drugs as being tools, mostly pro-active things.

Mostly, I am not interested in a unified “system” which dictates which molecules I ingest because those choices are not relevant to others. The propaganda campaign of the industrial age has been to frame drugs as being a social problem because it’s a pretext for political control. Look at how much anti-drug legislation in the US has had its roots in blatant racial and religious prejudice. Meanwhile, it’s not as if these moralists are very concerned about increasing the safety of life in other areas. Why countless billions to fight “terrorism”, but not eliminate pollution? Why spend countless billions fighting a few drugs instead of using it to provide healthcare? It originates from an authoritarian ideology based upon controlling people to protect them from their own poorly-educated decisions. I have never bought the poor rhetoric of the social problems supposedly caused by drugs. They have their risks, like anything else, but the real social problems have social causes which are deliberately left unexamined.

Consider how now, a person can kill themselves by eating food which is harmful or simply of poor quality. And yet there is minimal outrage or stigma attached to this. Why is this? Simply because food and nutrition are not a fashionable arena for policing people’s lives. Yet, which causes more suffering and expense?

So, not unlike how I do not feel compelled to obtain clearance from some committee before I grow and eat some bok choy, I also do not feel compelled to seek or obtain approval if I grow and consume cannabis, or opium, or mushrooms. Because I see no compelling argument why it should be anyone else’s concern. I am not reacting against a system, so much as I never encountered any substantial argument there in the first place.

6 Likes

2 Likes

There is a grain of truth to that argument, but it only applies to a tiny minority of users.

The teenage heroin addicts that I used to live with were pretty much all abuse survivors. Their drug use wasn’t so much recreational as it was a slow-burn suicide attempt. As they said in Trainspotting, “we’d shoot up aspirin if only they’d make it illegal”.

But that is a very, very small proportion of the using population. And prohibition doesn’t solve their problems; it makes them worse. To help those folks, you need to tackle the bigger issue: people suck.

6 Likes

Yeah, prohibition means restricting ways of seeking help if you become inclined to do so. But my real problem was the claim that ending prohibition wouldn’t solve problems like the black market. I just can’t see how a black market could be sustained on the number of people who would still be interested in the black market. And the kind of black market that would exist would be people avoiding overzealous regulation when they sell the pot they grew in their back yard to their neighbors rather than big organized crime syndicates.

5 Likes

I am saying there are two groups of people to look at: those who are in the habit of using substances to alter their mental state and those who make a living providing it for them. There is nothing difficult about that.

The question is whether giving in to people who want to perpetually live in an altered state would make the world safe for democracy and free from hardened criminals.

As a wise bug-themed superhero said, Bwah ha ha!

Drugs are neither the problem or a solution: it is how people see them that is the problem. People are very narrow-minded either way when it comes how they understand drugs. Neither the pro nor anti sides can be smug about their views or hold any virtuous airs because they are chained to confining habits that compel them to look for The One Rule That Explains Everything so they never have to think again, but then want everyone to walk lockstep with their ignorance so they never have to revise their thinking.

People who want them legalized or see them as good things are just as ignorant as those who see it as a monster. The pro side deifies drugs, seeing them as a God who will magically solve their problems. How many people I know thought they were getting high, never realizing they were given benign tea leaves. People believe in drugs the way they believe in God, but they don’t just want any God, but a forbidden one. The minute that Forbidden God becomes Mainstream God, they begin to lose the faith, so they up the ante to ensure there is always a forbidden element to their chosen God because they want to be more special and enlightened than everyone else and that is their venue to pretend to prove it. They can’t live without drugs…until they find a replacement that promises to offer more and bigger forbidden thrills than the last Forbidden God, but while they replace one God for another, they still think they need a power greater than they are to get by. There will always be enterprising people who profit from those who function by creating manufactured gods and the profiteers will always cheerlead the delusion because it’s easier than having to think and get a job that actually entails work. People have no interest in anything unless there is an element of exclusivity attached to it.

Those who see drugs as a devil think it’s the drugs that are bad, but it’s the expectations people have that give it power. They don’t realize it’s their emotional reaction that make it more attractive than it actually is. It’s like parents who go off their nut objecting to the neighbourhood bad boy and their daughter suddenly wants to date the guy even if he is a fugly, freeloading and disloyal abuser who she actually has no feelings for, but is exploiting to manipulate her parents’ emotions. She is not attracted to the troll, she is attracted to the idea of defying her parents and placing herself on top of the pecking order. She obsesses with her narrative that she will do anything to prove is right, and her boyfriend is just the beneficiary of her boring and unoriginal soap opera. If her parents shrugged their shoulders and said her self-absorbed narrative had no place in their active lives and she can date whoever to prove whatever point she wished because life happily goes on without her, the boyfriend will lose his attractiveness to her because he will no longer be of any use to her. Drugs may be different fodder, but the structure of thought is identical.

I have no use for bad boys or drugs. They do not intimidate me or evoke any emotional reactions in me because when it comes to them, consider me a drug atheist (and a bad boy atheist, too). Life is just too short, random, and chaotic for me to care about or have respect for the superficial, but to many people, it is their single obsession. They want to prove a point and think proving it will matter or mean something or give them some positive feeling, and when it doesn’t, they’re bitter and lost.

I neither demonize it nor glorify it, but I am not naive to think the actual drugs have anything to do with this manufactured debate: people just want to be special. They want no effort to the way to paradise. They want that forbidden God to give them both the special status and the paradise. Some people will thump a bible to get it. Some people will roll of joint or light a crack pipe for the same ends, although theses days, new God is the smart phone so people can stare at it and not have to deal with reality and maybe find the app or game that will decree them The Chosen One as it gets sent to all their enemies’ social media feeds complete with a smug emoji. It is common behaviour that keeps society in limbo. People will waste their lives debating this Silliosity, making up twisty arguments based on sophistry to keep their game alive. It is just a game that is a bigger pointless life-sink than Pokemon Go.

Let them play on that rigged board in their rabbit holes if they feel that is their safe space. Life can seem scary and not everyone has the ability to end sickness, violence, prejudice, sadness, or poverty, so we can throw them a bone to make them feel important, smart, and worldy. I do not care, but I am not blind to it, either. Drugs cannot make a person better or worse. It is not a mask, magic wand, or even an alibi or excuse you can hide behind for making bad judgements based on a flawed personality. You are who you are and you can never get away from who you really are. Your true essence overrides anything drugs can do. Drugs are the illusion, but your belief in them is what’s real.

And speaking of illusions, for anyone who still subscribes to the Fairy Princess Theory that legalizing drugs will magically make gangs and cartels vanish…

Prescription drugs are legal and there is a huge black market for them.
Over the Counter drugs are legal and there is a huge black market for them.
Alcohol and cigarettes are legal and there is a huge black market for them.
Toys are legal and there is a huge counterfeit black market for them.
Hello Kitty is legal and there is a huge counterfeit black market for them.
Cheese is legal and there is even a profitable black market for it, too.

The chances legalized drugs will make those scary people go away, dismantle their systems, or dampen their power?

Nil.

There is a black market for every benign, legal, and mundane item out there. People do not engage in criminal behaviour on that scale because they have to do it to survive: they do it because they WANT to do it. That is the structure of their thinking and they have decades of experience in honing that thinking. They get off on tricking, conning, bullying, manipulating, controlling, brainwashing, fleecing, dominating, confining, breaking, cornering, harming, destroying, and terrorizing people. It gives them superpowers. The end. They are who they are, and if suddenly no one ever wanted or needed drugs and they ceased to exist, there would be a replacement for them to keep those organized cabals alive in a heartbeat. Do not kid yourself: there is such a thing as being an unrepentant psychopath and such people will gleefully exercise their psychopathic impulses to the fullest no matter what – and see nothing wrong with doing it.

Memo to the sketchy naive who overestimate their street cred: life really is not an ABC After School Special that seemed super-profound and brilliant as you viewed it while smoking daddy’s weed. That is your inconvenient daily dose of reality – now snort that up your nose and feel it. Next!

What makes those groups significant, as compared to any others? Drugs are simply tools like any other, and it seems dishonest to suggest that anything which affects one’s body must be used as a habit.

If so, then why do there need to be pro and/or anti sides? It sounds as if you might misinterpret the position of decriminalizing drugs as being a form of advocacy.

People debate what they choose to debate. I agree with you that much of the controversy for and against is based more in society than pharmacology, but I think that those controversies are entirely unproductive and uninteresting. That’s why I prefer to focus the debate upon the drugs themselves. They are simply molecules, which may or not be useful for a given person in certain situations. I am not sure what “specialness” or “paradise” have to do with anything, but I think neither have anything to do properly with law or pharmacology. It seems to me more responsible and educational to de-mystify drugs and deal with them in a clear, objective, matter-of-fact way.

Other than that, I think that most of your argument here seems to depend too much upon knowing what other people think, and speaking for them. Claiming to speak for lots of others does not make your opinions “reality”. It sounds like people in your world have no agency, and never use anything for their own reasons. But they are rather all being exploited by someone else. I don’t deny that exploitation can be and is a problem. But I think that the best way to counter exploitation is to encourage people to make informed choices.

1 Like

You keep saying that cigarettes and alcohol have black markets. I have twice now that the violence associated with those black markets is much smaller. That’s what we hope to accomplish via the end of prohibition. To use your terminology, I am a black market atheist. I neither demonize nor glorify black markets. I don’t like violence and filling up prisons. There are Hello Kitty counterfeits but there aren’t a lot of Hello Kitty related shootings on major streets in broad daylight.

But really, the degree you rail against people wanting to be special snowflakes while proclaiming yourself to be a special snowflake who doesn’t want to be special snowflake is exhausting. In 11 to 12 years we will factually know what the marijuana market looks like 10 years after legalization. If it still involves the same level of violence send me a PM and I’ll comment on how prescient you were.

Either way, it will involve putting a lot fewer people in prison.

12 Likes

Did you not watch deadpool then?

3 Likes

Obligatory:

Mad credit to you; I didn’t bother to reply because I simply have neither the patience nor the inclination to engage such folks anymore.

2 Likes

You apostrophe re means you are wasting ink.

A computer doesn’t use ink, grammatical errors still matter in effective written communication, and your Wonder Woman impersonation needs some work.

6 Likes

How do you refill your monitor? I think mine’s about to ru

10 Likes

If your (yes I no) using ascii then you waste 8 bits everytime. More for unicode.

It’’’’’’’’’’’’’"s the button next to refresh. That one gets yo’ur monitor a drink.

3 Likes

4 Likes

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.