Dr. Chomsky On Marijuana

[Rakhmetov]

This information psyched me up. It seems Chomsky is aging like wine. Any thoughts?


"It [the criminilization of marijuna] cannot be because of the health impact, because that is exactly the other way around. There has never been a fatality from marijuana use among the 60 million reported users in the United States, whereas tobacco kills hundreds of thousands of people every year. My strong suspicion, though I do not know how to prove it, is that the reason [marijuna is illegal] is that marijuana is a weed, you can grow it in your backyard, so there is nobody who would make any money off it if it were legal. Tobacco requires extensive capital inputs and technology, and it can be monopolized, so there are people [corporate investors] who can make a ton of money off it. I do not really see any other difference between the two of them, frankly except that tobacco is far more lethal and addictive."
Noam Chomsky from his book Understanding Power

[Sarah Palin]

Yeah, he's alright.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

This thread would be better if it was actually about Chomsky getting stoned.

[punisa]

This thread would be better if it was actually about Chomsky getting stoned.
:laugh:
I bet ol' man Chomsky's gettin' high now and then. Probably counts the clouds listening to Jim Morrison :lol:

[Sarah Palin]

I always wondered how he kept so calm.

[Axle]

This sounds exactly like the "the government makes it illegal 'cuz its not big business" arguments I used to have with people way back when I smoked grass.

Only a lot more eloquent.

[x359594]

I understand from sources in Lexington that his late wife Carol made use of a marijuana perscription to off-set the effects of chemo-therapy treatment. If so, I hope it eased her suffering.

I suspect that Chomsky won't be with us much longer; when one spouse in a long term relationship dies the other often follows soon after. I hope I'm wrong.

[fabilius]

Yes, and if you want to go really conspirationalist, by making it illegal you allow some businessmen to profit from it.

[SubcomandanteJames]

When it was first illegalized in the United States, one of the grounds for it's criminalization was its tendency to "Cause white females to become promiscuous with colored men." :laugh:

[Janine Melnitz]

Yes, and if you want to go really conspirationalist, by making it illegal you allow some businessmen to profit from it.
This is really important: along with the hugely profitable prison industry etc., you have the more direct, and extensive, involvement of "legitimate business" with the "illegitimate" drug trade; all this means that decriminalization would be a terrible blow for a big sector of capitalists.

[Andy Bowden]

Part of the reason it was banned was also cos of the competition hemp posed to the paper industry in the states. Alongside racism - the reason it's known as "marijuana" and not cannabis in the states is cos marijuana is what Mexicans called it.

[fabilius]

Hopefully capitalist interests are now siding against it. The drug war costs to much tax money, so just like FDR was forced to legalize alcohol, so might Obama be forced to legalize marijuana. Or possibly the next one after Obama.

Anyway, I predict that cannabis will be legalized soon in many european countries.

[x359594]

...I predict that cannabis will be legalized soon in many european countries.

There will be a measure to legalize cannabis in the state of California on the November 2009 ballot.

Medical use of cannabis is already legal in California, and there are several dispensaries licensed to sell it to anyone who has obtained a prescription from a medical doctor.

[ckaihatsu]

This sounds exactly like the "the government makes it illegal 'cuz its not big business" arguments I used to have with people way back when I smoked grass.


I think your *exact* words at the time were:

"Naw, naw, look -- it's like there are these *really* *really* big dealers, right? -- but they don't deal *pot*, right -- okay? -- you follow me here?

So, like, *they* deal in the gas for your car, or the cigarettes and the booze, y'know? But wait, wait, get this -- *some* of them also wear the suits and the ties and *they* sell the big-ticket weapons to *this* country and all other countries -- got it...? So *that* means that they-- oh, shit, where was I going with this...?

Okay, so where was I? Right, right, so *then*, those *booze* and *cigarette* makers go, 'Noooooooooo waaaaayyyyyyyy' when it comes to pot, right? 'Cause then *they'd* be on the outs, y'know, 'cause like *every* *fucking* *body* can just like grow the shit in their backyard, right? And then where would the cigarettes and the booze be?! Yeeeeaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh...! *Now* you see it...!


= )

[mosfeld]

My next bowl is dedicated to Chomsky for being such a chill dude and right on the spot.

[Mather]

There will be a measure to legalize cannabis in the state of California on the November 2009 ballot.



Will this measure fully legalise pot or just decriminalise it, in the same way they have done in the Netherlands?

Either way, it would be progress compared to the current harsh system that pot smokers face in California, lets hope this passes come November.

[Rawthentic]

I'm glad Chomsky wrote this. And, even if Chomsky does or has toked (and he has, although thats not the point) his support for its legalization shows that pot smokers are not lazy muthafuckas with dreads chillin on their couches. They (uhmm..we) are normal working people, for the most part.

But reality, prohibition is a testament to the madness we live in.

[Enragé]

in the netherlands there might actually be a push towards illegalization of marijuana coming soon, because "it causes crime". This ofcourse is bullshit, because the only reason organised crime is still in weed is cuz although its not illegal to smoke or sell it (in coffeeshops), it is illegal to grow it (and bring it to the coffeeshop).

[x359594]

Will this measure fully legalise pot or just decriminalise it, in the same way they have done in the Netherlands?...

The measure will legalise it for "personal use," and that includes growing it at home, whether in pots, in the ground or hydroponically.

[Mather]

The measure will legalise it for "personal use," and that includes growing it at home, whether in pots, in the ground or hydroponically.


Then the measure is decriminalisation, not legalisation.

Legalisation would also allow for all forms of open growing, trading and consumption of pot, which this measure falls short of. This measure seems to be similar to the one that the Netherlands has in place, you can grow your own pot, smoke it and have it in select places, but otherwise growing it industrially and selling it remian illegal.

Like I said, this is an improvement on what California has now, but people should still struggle for full legalisation, not just for pot but all recreational drugs.

[Mather]

in the netherlands there might actually be a push towards illegalization of marijuana coming soon, because "it causes crime". This ofcourse is bullshit, because the only reason organised crime is still in weed is cuz although its not illegal to smoke or sell it (in coffeeshops), it is illegal to grow it (and bring it to the coffeeshop).


Agreed, decriminalisation, especially for some drugs and not others, leaves everyone in limbo, with a situation of having some benefits of a legalised drugs system but with a lot of the bad symptoms of prohibition in place.

To fully counter all the bad symptoms that come with drugs, prohibition needs to be done away with and all drugs legalised.

[x359594]

...Legalisation would also allow for all forms of open growing, trading and consumption of pot, which this measure falls short of...

The measure would complement the law that allows the cultivation and consumption of cannabis for medical purposes supplied by commercial dispensaries. Still, this is not full legalisation, but maybe a little more comprehensive than the Dutch system.

[Mather]

The measure would complement the law that allows the cultivation and consumption of cannabis for medical purposes supplied by commercial dispensaries. Still, this is not full legalisation, but maybe a little more comprehensive than the Dutch system.


I see, thanks.

BTW, a few questions:

What are the chances of the measure passing?

Is it going to be put to a popular vote/referendum or is it a measure thats going to be passed by the state congress or courts?

Is support for the measure done along party lines or is it a bi-partisan effort ie; Do the Democrats and Republicans support/oppose this?

[A New Era]

There are a lot of myths surrounding marijuana.

Look at Eddie Bravo and Joe Rogan. Very active people, and athletes. They actually use marijuana and smoke it all the time to enhance their martial art skills, and in order to go through a very stressful day. I do the same. I find it helps on getting ideas, being creative, getting through doing boring shit and just keep being active in life. It also makes you relax and brings you back to what life is really about, being conscious in the moment.

[revolution inaction]

is it possible for the government to block this even if it passes by claiming its a federal matter of something? the legal system in the US confuses me :confused:

[FreeFocus]

There are a lot of myths surrounding marijuana.

Look at Eddie Bravo and Joe Rogan. Very active people, and athletes. They actually use marijuana and smoke it all the time to enhance their martial art skills, and in order to go through a very stressful day. I do the same. I find it helps on getting ideas, being creative, getting through doing boring shit and just keep being active in life. It also makes you relax and brings you back to what life is really about, being conscious in the moment.

Well, I wouldn't call Rogan an athlete. Yeah, he's got some decent jiu-jitsu from what I know, but he doesn't have any wins to his name and hasn't competed anywhere meaningful. Eddie Bravo on the other hand, ok, fine. You could also bolster your argument by including Nick Diaz. Although I could say that his poor UFC run was because of him smoking pot before each fight. :lol: But seriously, Diaz is a good fighter (at least now) and Bravo is obviously one of the best jitz guys out there.

I don't support the use of marijuana unless for medicinal purposes, but I also don't want state intervention and the active prohibiting of access to marijuana.

[x359594]

...What are the chances of the measure passing?

Is it going to be put to a popular vote/referendum or is it a measure thats going to be passed by the state congress or courts?

Is support for the measure done along party lines or is it a bi-partisan effort ie; Do the Democrats and Republicans support/oppose this?

The measure will appear on the November ballot to be put to a popular vote. At this point it has bi-partisan support from politicians at the city level (mayors, city attorneys, council people, even a couple of police chiefs.)

Polls show voters favoring the measure by a slight majority, but the campaign for its passage hasn't gotten started yet, nor has the campaign against it gotten underway either. At this point it's too soon to say how things will turn out, but to get a measure on the ballot in California takes a lot of signatures that have to be verified, and the measure has already passed this hurdle.

[x359594]

is it possible for the government to block this even if it passes by claiming its a federal matter of something? the legal system in the US confuses me :confused:

The voters of California approved the Medical Marijuana Bill two years ago even though marijuana remains illegal on the Federal level. In the few cases where the FBI raided marijuana dispensaries shortly after the bill's passage, the courts refused to hear the charges; the US has a very strong states' rights bias.

The Federal government can always step in and make an issue of medical marijuana, but California's representatives in Washington have so far argued that the Feds should keep out because the voters have spoken. Obviously, they don't want to alienate their constituencies.

[Durruti's Ghost]

is it possible for the government to block this even if it passes by claiming its a federal matter of something? the legal system in the US confuses me :confused:

Not exactly. The US legal system is multi-tiered, and repealing a state law against something does not repeal federal laws against it. If the bill were to pass, state police would no longer arrest and prosecute people for marijuana use. However, this wouldn't stop the federal government--specifically the Drug Enforcement Agency--from arresting and prosecuting people. The DEA has limited resources, though, and usually only goes after large distributors.

[Rakhmetov]

Not exactly. The US legal system is multi-tiered, and repealing a state law against something does not repeal federal laws against it. If the bill were to pass, state police would no longer arrest and prosecute people for marijuana use. However, this wouldn't stop the federal government--specifically the Drug Enforcement Agency--from arresting and prosecuting people. The DEA has limited resources, though, and usually only goes after large distributors.

Did you see this???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsWH40ML-3U

[Axle]

I think your *exact* words at the time were:

"Naw, naw, look -- it's like there are these *really* *really* big dealers, right? -- but they don't deal *pot*, right -- okay? -- you follow me here?

So, like, *they* deal in the gas for your car, or the cigarettes and the booze, y'know? But wait, wait, get this -- *some* of them also wear the suits and the ties and *they* sell the big-ticket weapons to *this* country and all other countries -- got it...? So *that* means that they-- oh, shit, where was I going with this...?

Okay, so where was I? Right, right, so *then*, those *booze* and *cigarette* makers go, 'Noooooooooo waaaaayyyyyyyy' when it comes to pot, right? 'Cause then *they'd* be on the outs, y'know, 'cause like *every* *fucking* *body* can just like grow the shit in their backyard, right? And then where would the cigarettes and the booze be?! Yeeeeaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh...! *Now* you see it...!


= )


Hahah! Now that's definitely more like it!