Recreational use of Psycoactives

[John "Eh" MacDonald]

I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this but whatever. What are your insights on the recreational use of drugs in a communist society? I myself am against the use of any FDA approved pharmaceutical drugs what so ever. But on the other hand am all for the occasional shroom trip. I believe you should be able to produce all the drugs you want but not be able to sell them for profit.

[Proletarian Ultra]

Be careful. The forum rules are brutally puritanical about talking about this subject.

[bcbm]

all drugs users should be executed by firing squad.

[Raúl Duke]

What are your insights on the recreational use of drugs in a communist society?It should be allowed...

but we just had a thread a few days back which showed a few "comrades" willing to instigate a more brutal war on drugs than what is currently waged by the U.S.


all drugs users should be executed by firing squad.

:lol:

[Veg_Athei_Socialist]

They should be allowed. I don't see why not.

[John "Eh" MacDonald]

Sorry I'm new. Thank you for the warning.

[Raúl Duke]

Sorry I'm new. Thank you for the warning.

You are allowed to talk about it, even saying that you've taken them...but it's not suggested to talk about selling/buying such things online in this forum.

[Coggeh]

Psychoactive drugs as with most drugs would be available in a socialist society depending on what type of drug it may be . Illegality of drugs doesn't have any real affecy on addiction rates, however pumping money into education, health, housing, youth centres etc all have been proven to have an effect on drug addiction rates. For example in amsterdam where many drugs are legal they have a lesser user rate per person than the US .

Those who on the site advocate a drug war or vigilantism on drug dealers fail to examine facts and understand where the drug problem stems from and instead ramble on about " in my community drugs have ravaged the populance etc etc" like everyone else was born in some big city of golden mansions and don't have a drug problem in their own communities.

[danyboy27]

well, my answer is, its up to the people to decide what should be allowed or not in our society.

I am personally against hard drugs in general, but if on a general vote Heroin would become legal, i would somehow have to accept the general verdict.

if the legality of the substance would mess up the whole society i live in, well i would try to ask for a vote to ban it, and if it would fail, i would leave.

It should be always up to the people, always.

[Veg_Athei_Socialist]

well, my answer is, its up to the people to decide what should be allowed or not in our society.

I am personally against hard drugs in general, but if on a general vote Heroin would become legal, i would somehow have to accept the general verdict.

if the legality of the substance would mess up the whole society i live in, well i would try to ask for a vote to ban it, and if it would fail, i would leave.

It should be always up to the people, always.
Why not leave it up to the individual instead of the masses deciding for the minority? By banning do you really think people should be punished with fines and imprisonment for their own personal activities? Shouldn't it be left to the individual to decide weather or not they want to participate in the use of psycho-actives?

[9]

I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this but whatever. What are your insights on the recreational use of drugs in a communist society?

If by 'recreational use of drugs', you mean things like pot and tryptamines and MDMA etc. I don't imagine this form of drug use would disappear at all. I do think it would decrease. Personally, if I was able to go on vacation and travel and do things that I am presently unable to do for economic reasons, any recreational use of drugs that I may or may not presently engage in would become a much less frequent affair.
With regard to hard drugs, I imagine heroin and meth addiction would largely become things of the past but to the extent that they might persist, they should be regarded as serious medical conditions and should be dealt with in a completely humane way. I said this on another thread on here recently, but I think there should be treatment centers where addicts are able to access heavily regulated and carefully measured doses of their drug, and they should be monitored and have access to a variety of treatment programs. I see absolutely nothing beneficial in proscribing any drugs. If drug addiction is a problem, it needs to be attacked at the root. Criminalizing or banning drug use is a completely cosmetic measure that attempts to conceal a deeper problem by punishing those afflicted.


I myself am against the use of any FDA approved pharmaceutical drugs what so ever.
With all due respect, this is hippie logic and is completely absurd. Many 'pharmaceutical drugs' are lifesaving medicines. Simply because they are pharmaceutical drugs does not mean they are all bad and/or worthless. Some of them certainly are. Many of them aren't. Obviously in a communist world, there would be no pharmaceutical companies/industries. And obviously without the financial motives, medicines could be studied objectively and rigorously according to their effects on human health and disease etc.


But on the other hand am all for the occasional shroom trip.As long as you don't go into it thinking its gonna be fun. :bored:

[The Vegan Marxist]

all drugs users should be executed by firing squad.

Can I roll one up while you're aiming me down at least then? Get high then die! :thumbup1:

[Jimmie Higgins]

I think it would be a mistake for workers after the revolution to attempt to regulate people's personal behavior as long as it isn't directly a threat to other people. So in my opinion, it fine if workers at a workplace ban the use of substances or certain behaviors on the job which could endanger others or just cause the individual to cause more work for the rest of the workers (so no napping while at work, don't be drunk on the job, no LSD trips unless you work at Post-Revolutionary Disneyland:lol:), but beyond that there should be no regulations based on specific moral outlooks.

Capitalists have traditionally tried to whip up moralist hysteria about certain behaviors because the capitalist system is a minority-run system where it is important for the ruling class to regulate the ideas and behavior of the majority. So they promote things like the nuclear family to some kind of pseudo-magical moral necessity; the push punctuality, frugality, and hard work; and they promote all sorts of other morals all for the purpose of keeping their society running how they want it. The second thing that moral regulation does is that is scapegoats the problems of society to individual "bad choices". People are poor, according to this logic, not because of failings in the system, but because people are drunks or listen to hip-hop or talk with a lower-class accent, or do drugs, or have babies out of marriage, or are LGBT, or atheist, or whatnot.

Worker's won't have this need to regulate other people's behavior since a worker run system would be about cooperation and collective decisions and work, rather than trying to control other people so they work for you as it is in capitalism.

In short, after the revolution, you are all invaded to blow your minds at a drug party at my liberated warehouse club:thumbup1:.

[The Vegan Marxist]

I think it would be a mistake for workers after the revolution to attempt to regulate people's personal behavior as long as it isn't directly a threat to other people. So in my opinion, it fine if workers at a workplace ban the use of substances or certain behaviors on the job which could endanger others or just cause the individual to cause more work for the rest of the workers (so no napping while at work, don't be drunk on the job, no LSD trips unless you work at Post-Revolutionary Disneyland:lol:), but beyond that there should be no regulations based on specific moral outlooks.

Capitalists have traditionally tried to whip up moralist hysteria about certain behaviors because the capitalist system is a minority-run system where it is important for the ruling class to regulate the ideas and behavior of the majority. So they promote things like the nuclear family to some kind of pseudo-magical moral necessity; the push punctuality, frugality, and hard work; and they promote all sorts of other morals all for the purpose of keeping their society running how they want it. The second thing that moral regulation does is that is scapegoats the problems of society to individual "bad choices". People are poor, according to this logic, not because of failings in the system, but because people are drunks or listen to hip-hop or talk with a lower-class accent, or do drugs, or have babies out of marriage, or are LGBT, or atheist, or whatnot.

Worker's won't have this need to regulate other people's behavior since a worker run system would be about cooperation and collective decisions and work, rather than trying to control other people so they work for you as it is in capitalism.

In short, after the revolution, you are all invaded to blow your minds at a drug party at my liberated warehouse club:thumbup1:.

Don't you mean invited? lol

Either way, I'm there! :D

[Mindtoaster]

Can I roll one up while you're aiming me down at least then? Get high then die! :thumbup1:

Um... Can you even imagine how paranoid you would be?

[The Vegan Marxist]

Um... Can you even imagine how paranoid you would be?

Smoking pot? You don't get paranoid from smoking up some mary jane. Makes you more relaxed. Which is why I said can I roll one up if I was put on a line waiting to be shot at. At least I die relaxed & not worrying about the inevitable to come.

[Tablo]

Let people have their drugs. They can enjoy them all they want. As long as they continue to be a contributing member of society I don't care what they do. It would be good to have rehab facilities to deal with people who actually want help quitting though.

[Raúl Duke]

In short, after the revolution, you are all invaded to blow your minds at a drug party at my liberated warehouse clubhttp://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/smilies2/thumbup1.gif.

Hell yea

[mosfeld]

I've had two really enjoyable psilocybin mushroom experiences and one which I always remember describing during the trip as neither good or bad. The only description I had was "fucked up", where I had eaten so many I thought both of my friends who I was tripping with were Judas and Jesus. I thought that my last cigarette was my only real friend in the world and I was freaking out when another friend of mine, who was not tripping, was making some face and running after me and he looked like a vulture trying to eat me or something except I knew he was human and he looked human. We were at some rental store and I suddenly just walked out, without saying a word to my friends and went home, took a bath laughing my ass off because the water was so funny and then I ate cornflakes and the milk looked like semen which made me laugh like crazy. Surprisingly, it was still really fun, despite being so fucked up. I recommend it if you're unemployed and bored like a motherfucker and got friends in similar positions. Im probably not going to do it again anyways, though. Are shrooms even legal? Why am I posting this?

[Veg_Athei_Socialist]

I've had two really enjoyable psilocybin mushroom experiences and one which I always remember describing during the trip as neither good or bad. The only description I had was "fucked up", where I had eaten so many I thought both of my friends who I was tripping with were Judas and Jesus. I thought that my last cigarette was my only real friend in the world and I was freaking out when another friend of mine, who was not tripping, was making some face and running after me and he looked like a vulture trying to eat me or something except I knew he was human and he looked human. We were at some rental store and I suddenly just walked out, without saying a word to my friends and went home, took a bath laughing my ass off because the water was so funny and then I ate cornflakes and the milk looked like semen which made me laugh like crazy. Surprisingly, it was still really fun, despite being so fucked up. I recommend it if you're unemployed and bored like a motherfucker and got friends in similar positions. Im probably not going to do it again anyways, though. Are shrooms even legal? Why am I posting this?
Psilies in america? No. Fly Agarics? As far as I know, yes.

[John "Eh" MacDonald]

With all due respect, this is hippie logic and is completely absurd. Many 'pharmaceutical drugs' are lifesaving medicines. Simply because they are pharmaceutical drugs does not mean they are all bad and/or worthless.It's proven by statistics that prescription drugs kill 300 percent more americans than illegal drugs. Life saving medicine my ass. Its all about big brother.

[The Vegan Marxist]

You can get drugs with anything now practically, anyways. You can get tripped out by merely smoking banana peal carvings lol.

[Veg_Athei_Socialist]

Nutmeg, Morning Glory Seeds, San Pedro Cactus, Salvia Divinorum, Fly Agaric Mushrooms and skullcap I think are all legal psycho-actives. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Nutmeg, Morning Glory Seeds, San Pedro Cactus, Salvia Divinorum, Fly Agaric Mushrooms and skullcap I think are all legal psycho-actives. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Only in certain areas. Besides, it's practically only 5 minute trips. Not worth doing. Unless you get 20x, but that's maybe an extra 20 minutes to it. Again, not worth at all.

[Veg_Athei_Socialist]

Only in certain areas. Besides, it's practically only 5 minute trips. Not worth doing. Unless you get 20x, but that's maybe an extra 20 minutes to it. Again, not worth at all.

Maybe for beginners it could be worth it. Y'know, to see what it's all about?

[cb9's_unity]

I've only had one trip. I smoked a bunch of salvia extract, forgot where I was, and found myself running down some sort of tubular watermelon existence, not knowing where I ended and everything else started (I was an ill-defined slice of that watermelon existence) while wondering what the fuck reality was (i was in complete terror). Its a good thing my roommate came running after me.

Definitely worth doing. I'm not sure if I want to trip for more than 5 minutes.

[Yazman]

Either you own your own body or you don't. I say that we do own our own bodies, and that it is our responsibility to control what goes in and out of them. It is not the job of government or society to tell me what I can and can't put into my body. I am not a user psychoactives but I do feel that if people want to use them they should be able to, so long as they aren't endangering anybody else.

[Die Rote Fahne]

I'm fine with the recreational use of psychoactives. DMT, LSD, Mesc, weed, shrooms? Doesn''t matter. It's your body.

[Tablo]

Only in certain areas. Besides, it's practically only 5 minute trips. Not worth doing. Unless you get 20x, but that's maybe an extra 20 minutes to it. Again, not worth at all.
That's one of the cool things about it. You can smoke it before work or on break(not recommended) and not have to worry about being fucked the rest of the day.

[The Vegan Marxist]

That's one of the cool things about it. You can smoke it before work or on break(not recommended) and not have to worry about being fucked the rest of the day.

That may be, in which I'm sure there are those people who do like the idea of it only being around 5 minutes, but when I smoke up, I do it to relax, & not for just 5 minutes. Though, everyone's different, & entitled to whatever they want to do with their own body.

[Tablo]

Very true. When I want to be fucked up for extended periods I will get high, drunk, or down some painkillers. If I don't have time for it I do something brief, like salvia.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Very true. When I want to be fucked up for extended periods I will get high, drunk, or down some painkillers. If I don't have time for it I do something brief, like salvia.

I can't stand pills.

1) too expensive & I'm poor.

2) I'd rather continue to get fucked up & not worry about dying from it.

[Tablo]

I can't stand pills.

1) too expensive & I'm poor.

2) I'd rather continue to get fucked up & not worry about dying from it.
That's why I mix them with alcohol to get the best high out of the smallest amount(yeah, it's dumb and borderline suicidal, but when you know the proper balance it works out nicely). Never almost died from painkillers other than codeine. I mixed it with vodka one time... big mistake. NEVER mix alcohol with codeine. I hate codeine. x(

[The Vegan Marxist]

That's why I mix them with alcohol to get the best high out of the smallest amount(yeah, it's dumb and borderline suicidal, but when you know the proper balance it works out nicely). Never almost died from painkillers other than codeine. I mixed it with vodka one time... big mistake. NEVER mix alcohol with codeine. I hate codeine. x(

As long as it has nothing to do with tequila, then I'm down to drinking whatever. lol

[Foldered]

This should be in DIY and the title should read "How to Get Fucked Up On a Budget" at this point. ;)

[The Vegan Marxist]

This should be in DIY and the title should read "How to Get Fucked Up On a Budget" at this point. ;)

^ :lol:

They've already got something like that. It's called the "Anarchist Cook Book".

[Tablo]

As long as it has nothing to do with tequila, then I'm down to drinking whatever. lol
Ugh, I can't stand tequila. Tequila has almost killed me more times than I can count. x(


This should be in DIY and the title should read "How to Get Fucked Up On a Budget" at this point. ;)
Lol, my bad. I will stay out so this gets back on topic.

[9]

It's proven by statistics that prescription drugs kill 300 percent more americans than illegal drugs. Life saving medicine my ass. Its all about big brother.

Then you are simply the mirror image of the StalinoVatican conservative moralists on here who think smoking pot leads to murder and insanity, and legal drugs (e.g. alcohol) are all totally kosher because the bourgeois state says.
In a hypothetical communist world, people undergoing surgery are still going to need anesthetics and people recovering from surgery are still going to need painkillers. People with psychosis are still going to need antipsychotics. Epileptics are still going to need anticonvulsants. Hemophiliacs are still going to need recombinant factor. People with iron-deficiency anemia are still going to need ferrous sulfate. Those suffering from Malaria are still going to need Antimalarials. Vulnerable flu victims are still going to need vaccinations. Women are going to want to take MOAR oral contraceptives. People with autoimmune diseases are still going to need immunosuppresants. People with HIV/AIDS are still going to need anti-retrovirals. Where no safer and more effective option is available, cancer patients are still going to need antineoplastics. People with Leukemia are still going to need e.g. anthracycline, vincristine, prednisone etc. Working in hematology/pathology, I could surely go on.
If it is your contention that any of these drugs should be denied to those whose health is dependent upon them, I'd feel quite confident in saying that you are not a communist at all.
It isn't to say that pharmaceuticals don't kill a shitload of people. The problem, though, is with the way medicine is handled under capitalism, not with medicine in itself.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Don't you mean invited? lol

Either way, I'm there! :DHa, that's my best typo yet!

On second thought, is it a typo? Or did I mean...


You are all invaded, by my private gang of thugs, in order to compel you to attend my non-optional post-revolution warehouse drug party. :lol:

[John "Eh" MacDonald]

In a hypothetical communist world, people undergoing surgery are still going to need anesthetics and people recovering from surgery are still going to need painkillers. People with psychosis are still going to need antipsychotics. Epileptics are still going to need anticonvulsants. Hemophiliacs are still going to need recombinant factor. People with iron-deficiency anemia are still going to need ferrous sulfate. Those suffering from Malaria are still going to need Antimalarials. Vulnerable flu victims are still going to need vaccinations. Women are going to want to take MOAR oral contraceptives. People with autoimmune diseases are still going to need immunosuppresants. People with HIV/AIDS are still going to need anti-retrovirals. Where no safer and more effective option is available, cancer patients are still going to need antineoplastics. People with Leukemia are still going to need e.g. anthracycline, vincristine, prednisone etc. Working in hematology/pathology

I have a question for you comrade. What did people do before chemistry and pills were invented. They died. It's called natural selection. Pills weaken the immune system, my friend, so people then become dependent on them. They cause a list full of side effects that are worse than the disease itself. As for surgery, opium has been used since Mesopotamian times. In my opinion smoking a puff of opium would be a hell of a lot better than any other opioid.

[Raúl Duke]

I have a question for you comrade. What did people do before chemistry and pills were invented. They died. It's called natural selection. Pills weaken the immune system, my friend, so people then become dependent on them. They cause a list full of side effects that are worse than the disease itself. As for surgery, opium has been used since Mesopotamian times. In my opinion smoking a puff of opium would be a hell of a lot better than any other opioid.

Umm...no.

Opiods, while more potentially addictive, are also more affective pain-killers than just smoking some opium. Also, before chemistry and pills, people had short lives and died painful and, now with the fact that said medicine exists, unnecessary deaths.

Although if you want, under socialism/communism, you could ask your hospital/doctor to give you opium for your pain.

[Die Rote Fahne]

That's why I mix them with alcohol to get the best high out of the smallest amount(yeah, it's dumb and borderline suicidal, but when you know the proper balance it works out nicely). Never almost died from painkillers other than codeine. I mixed it with vodka one time... big mistake. NEVER mix alcohol with codeine. I hate codeine. x(

codeine goes with robitussin.

[danyboy27]

Why not leave it up to the individual instead of the masses deciding for the minority? By banning do you really think people should be punished with fines and imprisonment for their own personal activities? Shouldn't it be left to the individual to decide weather or not they want to participate in the use of psycho-actives?
I dont believe in fine and emprisonnement should be used to protect other citizen from dangerous individual, not to punish someone.

you dont seem to realize what kind of impact the complete legalization of stuff like heroin could do to society has a whole.

Many childhood are already fucked up by individual distributing stuff like christal meth in elementary school, imagine what it would be like to openly distributing such garbadge to young peoples.

whole neighborhood completly ruined in both canada and the us by the introduction of cheap hard drug like heorin and crack.

sure legalizing stuff like weed isnt such a big deal, i am not much critical of it, but even that should be decided by the people living in a society, beccause the impact will go further than just the individual choice.

[The Vegan Marxist]

I dont believe in fine and emprisonnement should be used to protect other citizen from dangerous individual, not to punish someone.

you dont seem to realize what kind of impact the complete legalization of stuff like heroin could do to society has a whole.

Many childhood are already fucked up by individual distributing stuff like christal meth in elementary school, imagine what it would be like to openly distributing such garbadge to young peoples.

whole neighborhood completly ruined in both canada and the us by the introduction of cheap hard drug like heorin and crack.

sure legalizing stuff like weed isnt such a big deal, i am not much critical of it, but even that should be decided by the people living in a society, beccause the impact will go further than just the individual choice.

Wouldn't the legalization of these drugs help decrease the consumption rate of said drugs? When criminalized, it becomes scarce. When scarce, the consumption rate will go up. We've seen this under the comparison of the Netherlands with the US on the consumption rate of marijuana.

[Veg_Athei_Socialist]

Wouldn't the legalization of these drugs help decrease the consumption rate of said drugs? When criminalized, it becomes scarce. When scarce, the consumption rate will go up. We've seen this under the comparison of the Netherlands with the US on the consumption rate of marijuana.

Yes. It happened in portugal and the consumption rate declined.

[Foldered]

It's called natural selection.
I'm very weary of this phrase and I imagine I'm not the only one.

[Os Cangaceiros]

The decriminalization of all drugs would lead to the utter collapse of any society.

Oh wait...

R7FshBjkS6U

[Saorsa]

codeine goes with robitussin.

Nothing goes with robitussin.

[danyboy27]

The decriminalization of all drugs would lead to the utter collapse of any society.

Oh wait...

R7FshBjkS6U

the world is not the same everywhere, different people different need, different result to differents things.

[The Vegan Marxist]

the world is not the same everywhere, different people different need, different result to differents things.

We're talking about material consumption, not people in general. Under material consumption, no matter where you are, if scarce it becomes overly consumed, if available then it's less consumed. Every area where marijuana is legalized, the consumption rate is lower than every area where marijuana is criminalized.

[danyboy27]

We're talking about material consumption, not people in general. Under material consumption, no matter where you are, if scarce it becomes overly consumed, if available then it's less consumed. Every area where marijuana is legalized, the consumption rate is lower than every area where marijuana is criminalized.

Not all drugs are like weed, some of them are quite nasty and create a strong dependence fast.

there is a huuge difference between legalizing crack and heroin and legalizing pot.

why do you think the CIA did tremendous effort to flood black neigborhood with cheap crack, and why do you think the first european who came to america freely distributed alchool to natives?

a drug that is innofensive for a society x might just spell doom for society y, that why the decision of legalizing a product must be up to the people.

[Os Cangaceiros]

why do you think the CIA did tremendous effort to flood black neigborhood with cheap crack, and why do you think the first european who came to america freely distributed alchool to natives?

The CIA did not put "tremendous effort" into flooding black neighborhoods with crack. That's the type of conspiracy theory nonsense that discredits the left.

What the CIA did do was (knowingly) protect Contra drug transports, which were then linked into the drug distribution network of the United States. Enslaving black people with crack was not the goal of the CIA; contributing to Contra success against the Sandanistas was the goal.

[9]

Not all drugs are like weed, some of them are quite nasty and create a strong dependence fast.

there is a huuge difference between legalizing crack and heroin and legalizing pot.


I think you do not know very much about heroin addiction. The fact that it is illegal means that addicts will steal whatever they can from whoever they can - break into shops, peoples' homes, etc. - and pawn it in order to get their fix or pay back dealers that they owe money to. It is an easy way to get killed. The fact that it is illegal also means that it is very impure - it is often cut with all sorts of dangerous and even deadly chemicals - and the quantity of actual heroin in the stuff varies wildly. This is one of the main things that leads to death from overdose. Heroin being illegal does absolutely nothing do deal with the actual problem of heroin addiction, but it makes it a whole fucking lot worse and more deadly.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Regulating morality is completely useless if the goal is to actually help people rather than simply demonizing them. People do drugs - make them illegal and or non-existent and teenagers will start huffing spray paint, glue, and whipped cream (middle school was so fun:lol:). Archeologists know that people have experimented with drugs everywhere and at all times, so laws and fines - not going to do much.

What makes drugs particularly damaging now is the profit-driven aspect of it. If people are not in need of scarese jobs, why would anyone want to become a drug pusher? Without the black market for drugs, gangs would not exist. Without social stigma from addiction, people who did develop chemical dependencies would be less likely to try and hide it and be in denial of the problem.

If we are talking about de-criminalized drugs in a society where people have more control and decision-making power at the workplace, lives are more stable because people aren't worries about being thrown out on the street, and we have more free time to relaxy, enrich ourselves, study, and whatnot, then a lot of the pressure that drive people to drink or seek mental and emotional oblivion through opiates or pills will be largely non-existent. Students wouldn't be in direct competition with each-other, and so there's be less kids taking uppers to keep up and binge-drinking to wind-down. I think these kinds of things would eliminate most of the emotional things that drive people to abuse substances.

Of course, with curiosity and whatnot, people would still get addicted - obviously alcohol and pot both become mentally addicting to many people even though it's not universally physically addicting. I can't imagine someone in this kind of society cooking up cocaine let alone crack in their house - enough home-made coke to get addicted?

I think for addicts - even in modern society - a controlled environment where nurses can give them a dose of X addictive drug along with treatment if the user wanted could do more to combat addiction than all the police, courts, and mandatory treatment in the world - and at a fraction of the cost and much much more humanely.

[danyboy27]

I think you do not know very much about heroin addiction. The fact that it is illegal means that addicts will steal whatever they can from whoever they can - break into shops, peoples' homes, etc. - and pawn it in order to get their fix or pay back dealers that they owe money to. It is an easy way to get killed. The fact that it is illegal also means that it is very impure - it is often cut with all sorts of dangerous and even deadly chemicals - and the quantity of actual heroin in the stuff varies wildly. This is one of the main things that leads to death from overdose. Heroin being illegal does absolutely nothing do deal with the actual problem of heroin addiction, but it makes it a whole fucking lot worse and more deadly.

even if the Heroin was free and 100% pure, its still damaging, and EXTREMELY addictive, even physicly addictive, some people are condemned to drink metadone for the rest of their lives beccause if it.
beccause of its extreme addiction, it will eventually destroy the people who consume it, beccause even uncuted the substance itself damage the lung, muscular tissues and fuck up with your chemical balence.

Most of the folk my dad knew who where doing heroin didnt die beccause the shit was cut, but beccause they became so weak, stoped eating, and eventually even a smoke could have killed them at the advanced stage of degeneration they where.

call me a nut i dont care, this shit is bad, fucking bad.

[Veg_Athei_Socialist]

Pen & Teller's Bullshit! has an excellent episode about the drug war if anyone is interested. I'd post the link but my post count isn't high(no pun intended) enough yet.

[9]

this shit is bad, fucking bad.

I pretty much addressed this here (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1773417&postcount=128). Yes it is bad - it is horrible. So how do you justify defending measures which make it worse?

[The Vegan Marxist]

even if the Heroin was free and 100% pure, its still damaging, and EXTREMELY addictive, even physicly addictive, some people are condemned to drink metadone for the rest of their lives beccause if it.
beccause of its extreme addiction, it will eventually destroy the people who consume it, beccause even uncuted the substance itself damage the lung, muscular tissues and fuck up with your chemical balence.

Most of the folk my dad knew who where doing heroin didnt die beccause the shit was cut, but beccause they became so weak, stoped eating, and eventually even a smoke could have killed them at the advanced stage of degeneration they where.

call me a nut i dont care, this shit is bad, fucking bad.

We know that heroin is bad. No one is saying that. What we're saying is that, if kept criminalized, it'll remain overconsumed & initially will remain harming more & more people. If decriminalized, as shown by many global studies, then the consumption rate will go down - meaning less "bad stuff". We can't just wish for heroin to leave us & then it goes away, & we sure can't force people to stop doing it. It's a human's decision on whether they want to fuck their body up with it or not. But with the act of decriminalizing it, we can at least take the step of taking the consumption of such down. The way I see it, that's the most we can do to help fight against heroin consumption.

[Yazman]

With something like heroin that actually is dangerous, keeping it illegal is fucked up and only makes things worse. You condemn heroin addicts to be defined by society as criminals, and be forced to take heroin in dirty, unsafe, disease-ridden (and spreading) conditions or worse, fill up the prison system and suffer even more.

If it is legalised, we can have addicts and their usage be managed in a clinical setting, by doctors in a safe and secure way that doesn't spread disease.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Didn't you hear? We'll put LSD in the water, ketamine in the table salt, and all cigarettes will be dipped in THC.

It'll be awesome.

[danyboy27]

We know that heroin is bad. No one is saying that. What we're saying is that, if kept criminalized, it'll remain overconsumed & initially will remain harming more & more people. If decriminalized, as shown by many global studies, then the consumption rate will go down - meaning less "bad stuff". We can't just wish for heroin to leave us & then it goes away, & we sure can't force people to stop doing it. It's a human's decision on whether they want to fuck their body up with it or not. But with the act of decriminalizing it, we can at least take the step of taking the consumption of such down. The way I see it, that's the most we can do to help fight against heroin consumption.
Look i am not saying that we should criminalize the stuff, but if a society want to ban the distribution of drug in primary (elementary) school for the sake of childrens, what wrong with that?

If people want to fuck up their bodies with all sort of chemical, i couldnt care less.

But i should have the right to send my children in a drug free school, i should have the right to work in a smoke free environnement, not having my lung filled with crap from smoker, i should have the right to walk in the park without being bothered by addicts who are allucinating or doing a bad trip.

i too have the right not to take drug and not having my life affected by drug, just like some other people should have the right to take drug and be stoned.

has i said earlier, i am not saying it should be criminalized, but i have right too.

That why i think people should be allowed to vote on such issues to establish general guidelines to allow everyone to live peacefully together.

[bcbm]

yeah, people who oppose criminalization are all just itching for the day when heroin will be distributed to eight year olds.:rolleyes:

[khad]

I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this but whatever. What are your insights on the recreational use of drugs in a communist society? I myself am against the use of any FDA approved pharmaceutical drugs what so ever. But on the other hand am all for the occasional shroom trip. I believe you should be able to produce all the drugs you want but not be able to sell them for profit.


I have a question for you comrade. What did people do before chemistry and pills were invented. They died. It's called natural selection. Pills weaken the immune system, my friend, so people then become dependent on them. They cause a list full of side effects that are worse than the disease itself. As for surgery, opium has been used since Mesopotamian times. In my opinion smoking a puff of opium would be a hell of a lot better than any other opioid.

Under socialism, degenerates like you need to be institutionalized for your own good, because you'll probably be beaten to death otherwise.

Anti-social Malthusian bullshit at its finest.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32317823/ns/health-addictions/


When his grandson Shamsuddin, 1, cut his finger in the jam of the door, Beg blew opium smoke into the child's mouth, a common practice in this part of the world which is now resulting in rampant child addiction. He doesn't want his grandchild to become an addict, but he says he has no choice. "If there is no medicine here, what should we do? The only way to make him feel better is to give him opium."

[Os Cangaceiros]

yeah, people who oppose criminalization are all just itching for the day when heroin will be distributed to eight year olds.:rolleyes:

Didn't TC at one point endorse cocaine use for children? :lol:

[Glenn Beck]

Didn't TC at one point endorse cocaine use for children? :lol:

Well that's not too far from the American Psychiatric Association's position eh :cool:

jk guys simmer down

[danyboy27]

yeah, people who oppose criminalization are all just itching for the day when heroin will be distributed to eight year olds.:rolleyes:

then again i dont support criminilisation, read my last post carefuly.

i just want to be able to live without drugs while leaving others the freedom to do so, and that why i said peoples should be able to decide anything drug related that might affect the community, and i dont think personnal use of drug have anything to do with community.

[GreenCommunism]

I myself am against the use of any FDA approved pharmaceutical drugs what so ever.

i somewhat agree with some anti-psychiatry stance, just look at ritalin and how over-prescribed it is. also many mental illness are over-diagnosed. i think that for alot of people pills are not good. even if you really have the illness they often don't help you and i mean for mental illness. for other illness i would support it.

also it isn't 300 pourcent more death, it is more than that because they are used by much more people.

danyboy, what do you want to do? you can not like heroin around you etc. but you have to live with people having different lifestyle whether it is illegal or not, those who are for drug legalization argue that the drug problem would be much less of a problem if it was legalized, and i personally don't agree that there would be less use if it was legalized, i think there would be just as much. stigma would remain.

as for children i think that having laws to prevent their access would work just like it does with alcohol. i don't think people would look at those who give heroin to kids the same as people who supply alcohol to kids.

[bcbm]

then again i dont support criminilisation, read my last post carefuly.

i just want to be able to live without drugs while leaving others the freedom to do so, and that why i said peoples should be able to decide anything drug related that might affect the community, and i dont think personnal use of drug have anything to do with community.

yes, and my point was that i am pretty sure nobody advocates forcing drugs down anyone's throat, so i don't know why you decided on such an absurd example.

[danyboy27]

yes, and my point was that i am pretty sure nobody advocates forcing drugs down anyone's throat, so i don't know why you decided on such an absurd example.

Beccause, according to your thinking, or at least the way i understand it, since its all about the individual choice to consume drugs, then we shall all be allowed to come to our workplace stoned or drunk and we should have the right to take drug, including tobbaco at our workplace, in the park or other public spaces.

what i answer to that is, the freedom of the people who consume drug stop where the freedom of people who dosnt consume begin, and vice and versa.

has i said earlier, i dont oppose to drug consumption, but i think compromise on both side should be discussed to come to general agreement in the population in order to satisfy everybody.

[black magick hustla]

i hope my water has lsd in it it would make every day a fucking dream quest

[maskerade]

i hope my water has lsd in it it would make every day a fucking dream quest

unfortunately tolerance to LSD builds up rapidly, in practice you can only take it every 4 days. It's the same with shrooms :(

People need to remember that drug addicts are also human beings, and we need to treat them as such, not as demonic destroyers of society. Decriminalize personal possession, use, and provide clean needles and safe environments for people to use their drugs, preferably with the help of health professionals - I even believe in providing heroin for people with severe addictions, and I don't see this as a radical position. If we criminalize use people will never want to seek help, as seeking help means admitting to being a criminal. This is what we have in Sweden, and it's fucking disgusting. You can't get into the parliament in Sweden unless you agree with the PC establishment that drugs are bad and people who use them should be executed.

I can only speak of experience from Sweden, but the repressive drug policies we have here are fucking Orwellian. Police can force you to take a drug test if you look suspicious or if they think you are under the influence. If you get caught with any substance, you have to visit social services for a urine test once a week for six months, and it is one of the few things which stay on your police record for all your life.

And the worst thing about Sweden's drug policy is that there is no one who opposes it - the Left party want to decriminalize use (which isn't even criminalized in America), which is a step in the right direction, but it stops there.

I'm not an anarchist, but anyone who tells people what they can't do with their own bodies is too fucking authoritarian for my liking. The state does not own my body, I do.

[proudcomrade]

If people want to fuck up their bodies with all sort of chemical, i couldnt care less.

Okay, I am debating with myself whether or not even to bother getting into this debate, knowing full well what will likely result; however, this statement was so troubling to me that I had to address it.

Do you honestly not care at all that these substances fuel wars and gang violence (and could continue to do so after the revolution, via the capitalist profit incentive that would still be a beacon for antirevolutionary rogues)? You also do not care about the lives threatened by overdoses, murders, habit-fueled robberies and vehicle accidents, the destruction of human potential as the substances erode the minds of the users, nor about the human social bonds ruined in the wake of drug use?

I may very well be missing something crucial here; but to me, this kind of attitude is something that I would sooner expect from the likes of libertarians. By all means, please do correct me if I am misreading your statement. I only hope that I have understood you wrong.

[bob1988]

any and all drug laws are ridiculus, drugs are fun im gona go enjoy some now

[9]

Okay, I am debating with myself whether or not even to bother getting into this debate, knowing full well what will likely result; however, this statement was so troubling to me that I had to address it.

Do you honestly not care at all that these substances fuel wars and gang violence (and could continue to do so after the revolution, via the capitalist profit incentive that would still be a beacon for antirevolutionary rogues)? You also do not care about the lives threatened by overdoses, murders, habit-fueled robberies and vehicle accidents, the destruction of human potential as the substances erode the minds of the users, nor about the human social bonds ruined in the wake of drug use?

I may very well be missing something crucial here; but to me, this kind of attitude is something that I would sooner expect from the likes of libertarians. By all means, please do correct me if I am misreading your statement. I only hope that I have understood you wrong.

I only hope that this moralizing lecture isn't coming from someone who defends the very drug laws which are responsible for a large percentage of the destructive trends which he has just spent three paragraphs moralizing about.

[Blackscare]

Smoking pot? You don't get paranoid from smoking up some mary jane.
Not everyone man. I don't happen to get paranoid smoking weed, else I couldn't have ever been the pothead that I was. Mixing Adderal and weed, on the other hand, I would not recommend. Unless you have some 40's to balance it out :D

[Blackscare]

Stuff below.


Do you honestly not care at all that these substances fuel wars and gang violence (and could continue to do so after the revolution, via the capitalist profit incentive that would still be a beacon for antirevolutionary rogues)?

Gang wars and violence caused by prohibition and failure to regulate drug production/consumption?

If these drugs were produced in legitimate industrial/agricultural endeavors and were able to be sold legitimately in stores, it would make not a lick of sense to continue a black market for them. Mass production and safe, legal transport and distribution of drugs would drive down costs and be more efficient than the violent black market drug trade we have today. Consumers who had options would not choose to deal with "rogues" in the first place, and would also fail to see the benefit of (probably) paying more for something they could walk into a corner store and purchase.



You also do not care about the lives threatened by overdoses,

Overdoses often happen because non-regulated substances like heroin are sold at different potencies and are of course, not labeled. A person used to shooting up a certain amount of a certain batch of heroin could buy a different batch and unknowingly shoot up too much. I don't have to point out the benefit of a regulated industry in this case.


murders, habit-fueled robberies and vehicle accidents,

Statistical evidence shows that lifting prohibition has a positive effect on addiction rates, firstly. The way to counteract these issues is proper education and more importantly, changes in class relations that lead to these types of situations arising. The myth that poor areas are poor BECAUSE of drug abuse hinges on the idea that those in society, who all supposedly start with the same opportunities, descend into poverty as a result of their drug abuse and wind up in poor areas. Of course, the truth is that populations stricken with poverty and hopelessness produce disproportionately higher addicts precisely because the starting factors in a person's life in this situation have a tendency to lead them towards drug abuse.

[proudcomrade]

"Moralizing"- oy vey, you guys are priceless sometimes. Show me precisely where I ever called anyone a degenerate, sinner, scum, etc., or called for all potheads to be banished to Siberia immediately. Show me where I ever verbally supported arrest of people seeking medical detox. While you're at it, add some valid arguments to that pointless ad hominem post.

Re: the line-and-quote argument above ^^^, human nature does not work that simply. There is much more at play in the drug equation than the results of the laws themselves. There will always be an element willing to exploit the worst parts of human nature for their own gain. Under your naive little deregulation scheme, they could and would make their own basement-concocted shit, and sell it cheaply and black-market in order to undercut the competition at the local pharmacy. Meanwhile, overdoses will still happen to stupid youth who don't know better. Violence and psychotic episodes will still happen to users with unknown biological predispositions to it. Vehicle accidents will still kill innocents when idiots fail to respect their own limits. People with psychiatric conditions or troubled personal lives will quickly get in over their heads while attempting to use the shit as medication and/or a psychological crutch.

I don't mind disagreeing with comrades on the subject, but there are times when debating these things gets to feeling like I'm dealing with a bunch of sullen fifteen-year-old nephews, honestly...

[bcbm]

ageist prick.

[proudcomrade]

ageist prick.

Now now, son...

[ChrisK]

Re: the line-and-quote argument above ^^^, human nature does not work that simply. There is much more at play in the drug equation than the results of the laws themselves. There will always be an element willing to exploit the worst parts of human nature for their own gain. Under your naive little deregulation scheme, they could and would make their own basement-concocted shit, and sell it cheaply and black-market in order to undercut the competition at the local pharmacy. Meanwhile, overdoses will still happen to stupid youth who don't know better. Violence and psychotic episodes will still happen to users with unknown biological predispositions to it. Vehicle accidents will still kill innocents when idiots fail to respect their own limits. People with psychiatric conditions or troubled personal lives will quickly get in over their heads while attempting to use the shit as medication and/or a psychological crutch.


What's with your treatment of human nature? I think its pretty clear that human nature is not something that is set, but rather something that changes with the material conditions of society. Thus, in a socialist or communist society, the material conditions that cause abusive behaviours would be eliminated, making drug problems few and far between.

Also, you completely ignored the posts about how actually legalizing drugs in many countries have decreased both use and crime. If anything, all those problems you list will decrease if all drugs are legalized. I'm not too sure why you buy into the belief that drugs are all bad, when the government even admits that they're having trouble finding any correlation's between use and harm in illegal drugs.

[Os Cangaceiros]

the line-and-quote argument above ^^^, human nature does not work that simply. There is much more at play in the drug equation than the results of the laws themselves. There will always be an element willing to exploit the worst parts of human nature for their own gain. Under your naive little deregulation scheme, they could and would make their own basement-concocted shit, and sell it cheaply and black-market in order to undercut the competition at the local pharmacy.

You mean kind of like what's happening in Africa right now (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/why-africans-are-dying-for-a-drink-1973041.html), due to the heavy influence of prohibitive government regulations?

By your account of "human nature", people should still be dying from bathtub gin en masse in the United States.

[incogweedo]

this is how i see it:
A human should have the freedom to put whatever they want into their bodies.
BUT they must be willing to accept the fact that they are responsible for their own actions, they cannot blame problems on the drugs, the dealers, or their friends/peers that also do the drug.