Drug use in a revolutionary movement

[Bakunist]

I read recently about the strict policy of the Zapatista communities in regard to drug use. For those who are unaware, they are against it resolutely. Some interesting points were brought up in the argument against drugs especially if one were to consider capture by an enemy and how intoxication might compromise tactics, information, or worse yet, lives. I use the word intoxication because it is a word attached to many mind-altering substances, including alcohol, which is indeed a drug.

The question of repression inevitably comes to mind here, because men being told what to do by other men is a touchy subject for most if not all of the revleft members.

We don't live in a world free from intoxicants, so the need for a discussion on how this should be dealt with inevitably arises.

Im not sure where to begin this discussion, so let me just ask: would it be considered hypocrisy to have consensus among all involved that an anti-drug policy during periods of revolutionary formulation for protection of sensitive information were needed and then to dispense with said policy after great changes have occured?

[Dimentio]

I read recently about the strict policy of the Zapatista communities in regard to drug use. For those who are unaware, they are against it resolutely. Some interesting points were brought up in the argument against drugs especially if one were to consider capture by an enemy and how intoxication might compromise tactics, information, or worse yet, lives. I use the word intoxication because it is a word attached to many mind-altering substances, including alcohol, which is indeed a drug.

The question of repression inevitably comes to mind here, because men being told what to do by other men is a touchy subject for most if not all of the revleft members.

We don't live in a world free from intoxicants, so the need for a discussion on how this should be dealt with inevitably arises.

Im not sure where to begin this discussion, so let me just ask: would it be considered hypocrisy to have consensus among all involved that an anti-drug policy during periods of revolutionary formulation for protection of sensitive information were needed and then to dispense with said policy after great changes have occured?

Well, I would like to see how military discipline would be kept up in a group of revolutionary guerillas if they frequently intoxicated themselves. :D

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

*shrugs* I would think that when you're engaging in a guerilla war, intoxication is best left to a minumum. Though in general I have no problem with what the new left called "life drugs," marijuana, certain psychedelics, the problem resides with the "death drugs," speed, heroin, cocaine, ketamine etc.

[BIG BROTHER]

well i wouldn't want to be in a military unit full of high soldiers, so yea the rule against it makes sense.

[Cooler Reds Will Prevail]

It would depend on the existence or absence of a revolutionary situation. I agree that during an actual uprising or time of revolutionary upsurge, it would be imperative that comrades were not intoxicated. However, while in times of organizing I don't see any real serious problem with recreational drug/alcohol use in our free time. They should still be discouraged in my opinion, but people can still make their own personal choices on the matter. I know RCP has a relatively strict rule on that for cadres though (no drugs or getting drunk).

[disobey]

In any free society drug use is down to the individual, however, as you say, this compromises the decision making ability of those involved in any sort of struggle then some sort of policy against drug use would be necessary. So in my opinion it is imperative to dissuade comrades from drug use if possible.

If you look at a lot of the social problems (both actual and perceived) in the more wealthy western countries especially, there are clear links between violent crime and drug and alcohol use. However what is completely ignored by both the mainstream media and politicians is recognition that the root cause of substance abuse and the drugs trade is capitalism and the black markets (or "real economies") that are created alongside it due to poverty and inequality, as well as money laundering through their corrupt banking system which enables, for example, opium to be grown and transported from Afghanistan to meet world markets and their distribution often decided by agencies not even accountable to governments, such as the CIA's well known drug trafficking scams.

The use of such substances can and often is used to discredit movements. Such tactics will always be used and stereotypes created - such as the association of "Hippies" and other counter-culture stereotypes with marijuana. Of course the ruling class benefits to some extent by allowing more hard drugs onto the streets in order to increase consumption, requiring increased policing and restrictions imposed on the population by the state - like the American "War On Drugs".

[Dean]

A revolutionary movement should not have discipline in the conventional sense. If the movement is to succeed, passing on info should generally not be a problem.

[gla22]

Drug use can compromise a revolutionary organizations ability to succeed. Drugs are for after the revolution.

[apathy maybe]

In a free society drug use is compulsory. Before the free society it should be compulsory too. If everyone is too high to go to work, then capitalism collapses.

So yeah, toke up!

(Seriously, I'm sure that in a serious, volunteer army, fighting for freedom, people will be smart enough not to do drugs. Outside that army, what people do is their own business, and if you start enforcing rules about drugs, then you stop being a free society.)

[KurtFF8]

In most actual revolutionary situations, drug use should obviously be limited as it's a war. Wars aren't won by people who are high most of the time.

The reason that revolutionaries in the US in the late 60s and 70s turned to drugs was because they were engaging in revolutionary activities from a rather privileged situation (at least the white middle class revolutionaries)

The Panthers for example produced anti-drug propaganda and tried to keep their members more clear minded because they were in a much more serious situation. This is actually probably one reason that there was some animosity towards the weathermen by some of the Panthers.

[mykittyhasaboner]

if revolutionaries were high all the time, they would get lazy and sidetracked. "Hey maaan, this gun is like, too loud man...we shouldnt have used those silencers to make pipes...hey look some food, lets go fuckin eat it!"

drug use during a revolution is a really bad idea, i doubt anyone would even want to drugs during a revolution. because its not exactly a relaxed, comfortable situation, which is preferable for any drug usage. revolutionaries shouldn't sell drugs either.

[Decolonize The Left]

If we are referring to a large group of class conscious individuals, in solidarity engaged against the capitalist class with excellent understanding of their situation, I don't see how there could be wide-spread drug use... It just doesn't make sense. These individuals would clearly understand the imperative necessity for sobriety during the fight and would respect that necessity.

Now, after the revolution is a different story. It appears as though at this time it would be up to the individual.

- August

[OI OI OI]

Of course there is no room for drugs and alcohol in a revolutionary situation. I wouldn't want people drugged or drunk instead of fighting (Except if those people are the forces of reaction which I would prefer to be drunk/high:)).
There should be a lot of anti-drug/alcohol propaganda during a revolutionary period
http://www.tululuka.net/alco/posters/alko13.gif

For example this propaganda picture from the USSR says " It's not yet too late, Stop"


Also from the Spanish Revolution this is what the CNT - FAI did about this issue


"One CNT poster, which was made in Barcelona for the Departamento de
orden público de Aragon, pictured a corpulent man smoking a cigarette
and comfortably resting in what appeared to be the countryside. The
colors of this piece were unlike those of most other posters; the
figure was not red or black but yellow, reflecting the tones of sunny
Spain. At the bottom was printed the caption, The lazy man is a
fascist. Another CNT poster, made again for comrades in Aragon,
displayed a man who was also smoking a cigarette, a symbol, one may
speculate, of indifference and insolence since committed workers and
soldiers were not shown smoking. This individual was surrounded by tall
wine bottles, and the poster contained the caption, A drunk is a
parasite. Let’s eliminate him."source:http://www.escholarship.org/editions/view?docId=ft5h4nb34h&chunk.id=ch4&toc.depth=1&toc.id=ch4&brand=eschol

[Yes]

Don't quote me on this because it's unsourced, but a reason they may have to ban drugs is so the Mexican government can't make them out to be drug lords :lol:

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

People's chemical habits are their own business, as far as I'm concerned.

[Decolonize The Left]

Don't quote me on this because it's unsourced, but a reason they may have to ban drugs is so the Mexican government can't make them out to be drug lords :lol:

Not only does this make little sense, but it's also slightly derogatory...

- August

[freakazoid]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SX7m4fqTLKU

[shorelinetrance]

People's chemical habits are their own business, as far as I'm concerned.

ok bill hicks, with that logic we could have a bunch of drunk troops charging into battle, i know it's a bad example, but you understand my logic of how drug usage can temporarily and sometimes permanently impair cognitive functions.

during times of revolution, drug usage is a bad idea.

[Hiero]

The reason that revolutionaries in the US in the late 60s and 70s turned to drugs was because they were engaging in revolutionary activities from a rather privileged situation (at least the white middle class revolutionaries)

They weren't revolutionaries. Counter-culture activists I guess, but not revolutionaries.

[KurtFF8]

People's chemical habits are their own business, as far as I'm concerned.

But we're talking specifically about in a revolutionary context here, not as a general rule. It should be fairly obvious that to have a successful revolution, wide-spread drug use should be actively discouraged, I mean look at that video that was the LSD test for example.


As a general rule, I would imagine that most of the left would agree that it isn't the business of the collective to forbid personal drug use unless there are specific situations where it harms other people. (The classic critique of "victim less crimes".


They weren't revolutionaries. Counter-culture activists I guess, but not revolutionaries.

I'm talking about the revolutionaries specifically here though. I would imagine regardless of your opinion of them, you would consider the Weathermen revolutionaries, and they certainly promoted drug use. I would say that the only way they had that ability is due to their privileged situation. This isn't a critique of them, as it could be well argued that they used their privileged situation for revolutionary ends, they just obviously failed at the end of the day.

The reason they didn't take an approach like the panthers I would say is because of the major overlap of the counter-culture and the radical movement of the time. The two things aren't the same of course (as is often claimed by some) but there was certainly overlap.

In the end of the day though, I agree with the Panthers line on the subject:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/90/CaptialismplusdopeBPP.jpg (image from wiki)

[Yes]

Not only does this make little sense, but it's also slightly derogatory...

- August
:confused: How is it derogatory? If there were drugs being used by EZLN don't you think the government would try to sway public opinion away from them using that as a scapegoat? Just like how several leaders of the Black Panther Party were killed in "drug related violence" :rolleyes:

[Bakunist]

August, I too see reason in Yes' post: as disobey pointed out; "the use of such substances can be and often is used to discredit movements", and in fact this has happened to the Zapatistas, as several villages have been raided, even as recently as last year by the mexican army, under the premise of looking for drugs. Several hundred machete-wielding villagers quickly counter such raids though.

As far as propaganda geared toward anti-drug sentiment and actions are concerned, I tend to agree with this tactic.

On another note, I think it is fairly widely known that the governments of the world have, and still do use natural and artificial drugs to influence populations (pharmaceutical industry for example?) granted, some may not be able to survive without such scientific chemical advances, but this and the black market drug trade are a whole other issue.

*excellent link freakazoid

[progressive_lefty]

In good leftwing tradition, I think it is important to oppose drug use. This is where I differ from most lefties and environmentalists, I think we could do without drugs in our society. I have never taken drugs in my life and never will. Malcolm X spoke out against drug use that was destroying African-American communities as did the Marxist inspired Black Panthers.

[comrade stalin guevara]

Yes in the revolution there should be no drugs even tho myself smoke ganja i would give it up in the revolution

[Lost In Translation]

I would think that drug use is down to the individual during a revolutionary phase. However, if the drug use is hampering our efforts, then maybe drug use should be opposed.

[Unicorn]

In good leftwing tradition, I think it is important to oppose drug use. This is where I differ from most lefties and environmentalists, I think we could do without drugs in our society. I have never taken drugs in my life and never will. Malcolm X spoke out against drug use that was destroying African-American communities as did the Marxist inspired Black Panthers.
Wasn't it related to a conspiracy theory that the FBI was distributing drugs to black communities?

[comrade stalin guevara]

The panthers tried to sell marijuana to fund it.,
The cia then out sold them with cheap afghan heroin

[Lost In Translation]

The panthers tried to sell marijuana to fund it.,
The cia then out sold them with cheap afghan heroin

Sources please comrade stalin guevara. I didn't know about what you just wrote about, so I need to find out more :)

[comrade stalin guevara]

http://www.freedomarchives.org/BPP/docs/BPP_Veterans_Persecuted.pdf

Try that comrade im not sure if it says any thing about the drugs my source was my comrade 60yr i belive he is reliable maybe he got his info from his visit to the ussr im not sure but he has not lied to me or any one before.

[Wanted Man]

I think it should be possible for members of the party/movement to use drugs, as well as get drunk. However, anyone turning up for an action while intoxicated should be barred. Drugs and alcohol also cannot be united with having a good meeting. Of course, there is no objection to going for a drink afterwards. I guess the same would apply in a revolutionary situation.

From what I've heard, in some countries, communist parties do actually demand of their members to not use drugs ever. I guess it's also a security thing, when you're much bigger and more serious than some left movement in western Europe.

[Lost In Translation]

Let's inject HGH's on leftists during a revolutionary movement. That will give us some extra punch (with dire consequences).