Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: [an 152823] at [anon.penet.fi]
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 1994 11:02:18 UTC
Subject: re: everything prohibitable


Hune Margulies <[hm 64] at [columbia.edu]> writes:

> What about the case when the drugs you take affect your social
> behaviour, your ability to perform your job, or otherwise,
> renders normal interaction between you and society all but
> impossible?

What about it? That's the point! Here, listen to Terence tell it:

Psilocybin actually erodes the ego. This is what is put against a lot of
psychedelics. They say, "These stoners, they don't punch the time clock,
and when you threaten to fire them, it seems to have no effect on them.
I don't know how to reach these people." Well, the way you reach them is
you appeal to something other than the ego.

Modern industrial civilization has very skillfully promoted certain drugs and
supressed others.  A perfect example is caffeine. Caffeine -- I hate to tell
you this -- caffeine is a fairly dangerous drug.  It isn't dangerous in that
a cup of coffee will kill you, but a lifestyle built around caffeine is not
going to -- you're not going to live to be a hundred years old, or even
seventy, unless you are statistically in the improbably group.  Why is
caffeine not only tolerated but exalted?  Because, boy, you can spin those
widgets onto their winkles just endlessly without a thought on your mind.
It is *the* perfect drug for modern industrial manufacturing.  Why do you
think caffeine, a dangerous, health destroying, destructive drug, that has
to be brought from the ends of the earth, is enshrined in every labor
contract in the Western world as a right?  The coffee break -- if somebody
tried to take away the coffee break, you know, the masses would rise in
righteous fury and pull them down. We don't have a beer break. We don't have
a pot break.  I mean, if you suggested, "Well, we don't want a coffee break.
We want to be able to smoke a joint at eleven," they would say, "Well,
you're just some kind of -- you're a social degenerate, a troublemaker, a
mad dog, a criminal."  And yet, the cost health benefit of those two drugs,
there's no comparison.  Obviously, pot would be the better choice.  The
problem is, then you're going to be standing there dreaming, rather than
spinning the widgets onto the nuts. (laughter)

So I think that's another issue, that the psychedelics empower, with gnosis,
true information.  And every society is based on a lie of some sort.  So
having people going around the official lie and getting in touch with
reality turns them into social dissidents.  And you have to control that.
I mean, that was exactly what happened in the 1960's.  What happened was,
too many people were getting stoned, and then checking out of the official
canon of the culture. And people just said, you know, "You can take that
job and shove it."  And this was very alarming.  Now every society can
tolerate a certain amount of this.  You always have people who just aren't
playing the game.  But what happening in the 1960's was that LSD entered
the picture, and LSD is different from all other psychedelics in one
tremendously important quality, and that is: A single skilled chemist,
in a small apartment, with about $40,000 worth of equipment, in a single
long weekend, can produce forty to sixty million hits of a drug.  Forty
to sixty *million* hits!  This is a loaded gun at the head of society.

You see, the hidden issue, and it need not be hidden among us...the
government always tries to paint itself as the mother hen, concerned about
her errant chicks.  And so, to keep you from crashing into other people on
the freeway, to keep you from leaping out of buildings or committing
suicide, we have to control these drugs.  As a matter of fact, you know,
this is absurd.  More people die because of alcohol than all illegal drugs
combined in a given year. The government is not your friend on this issue.
The government is very concerned to control the mass mind.  And marijuana
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to [h--p] at [anon.penet.fi.]
Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to [a--m--n] at [anon.penet.fi.]