does everyone here do drugs? [Archive]

Dr Mindbender

15th August 2008, 23:43

sorry if i spell like crap, you dont need to insult me cuz of irrelavent details. drug users are idiots cuz of their own decision to take drugs
People do all sorts of stupid things that ruin their lives like get into massive debt among other things. But for some reason you have chosen drug takers as the target of your vitriol.

As progressives, we dont condemn the victim but examine the conditions as to why they ended up in this state. Without exception, the common denominator is capitalism and the social exclusion and alienation that it creates.

and cause harm to themselves and countless others. as a social scientist you must know the effects drugs have on society as a whole and realize that is indeed negative as there is absolutely no benefits taking drugs. it's like saying "screw you world, i dont care anymore". people who CHOOSE to harm themselves and others ARE idiots.

Drug takers may have less resolve than stronger people, but i fail to understand how they are 'harming others'.

Prohibition does nothing apart from sweep the problem under the carpet.

Jazzratt

15th August 2008, 23:57

No we don't all do drugs, some of us do. I for example enjoy many drugs but I generally only take alcohol and nicotine with any regularity. Drugs have different effects and care taken for an array of different reasons - for example alcohol is the key drug in a lot of drinks that can be used to enhance one's enjoyment of a meal, some drugs are used to break down social inhibitions (alcohol again here, but it can also be efficiently achieved with MDMA and other drugs), some drugs are used typically for escapism (Lysergic Acid Dyethyleamide and Lysergic Acid Amide for example). The reason people choose to use their drug rather than attempt to achieve the effects in a different way or even forgo the effects altogether? Rational choice, cost-benefit analysis. If they don't mind the damage that will be done to their bodies, and the amount of treatment they will need to recieve, then they take the drug - if they feel that the benefits no longer outweigh the costs then they attempt to stop.

Crimes related to drugs are a diffwerent matter - they come in two types - the first related to supply/procurement which can be solved very easily with legalisation - making the drugs cheaply and safely available. The second category is crimes commited while under the influence - generally these offences are tied to alcohol or dissaciatives (think "angel dust") but the risk is tolerable and with a decent justice system those prone to criminal activities on drugs will be taught to control themselves on the drugs or possibly helped to find alternative ways of relaxing.

I'm going to move this to OI, because I'm interested in what the people there think of drugs and drug users. Also because you'll probably be joining them, that or be banned.

JazzRemington

15th August 2008, 23:58

sorry if i spell like crap, you dont need to insult me cuz of irrelavent details. drug users are idiots cuz of their own decision to take drugs and cause harm to themselves and countless others. as a social scientist you must know the effects drugs have on society as a whole and realize that is indeed negative as there is absolutely no benefits taking drugs. it's like saying "screw you world, i dont care anymore". people who CHOOSE to harm themselves and others ARE idiots.

I do know the effects of drugs on society and the individual...which is why I know you are wrong.

RedAnarchist

15th August 2008, 23:58

I don't drink alcohol (often) or smoke cigarettes, but I won't stop others from enjoying themselves, unlike you, you puritan fuckwit.

PigmerikanMao

16th August 2008, 00:00

I'm an unemployed, homeless, college-dropout and I like drinking, smoking cigarettes and taking all the drugs I can get my hands on. I don't think I'm cool. I enjoy those things and so I do them.

And my mental capacity is fine, thanks.

It clearly isn't if you have no problem with what you just said. :rolleyes:

Dr Mindbender

16th August 2008, 00:02

It clearly isn't if you have no problem with what you just said. :rolleyes:

maybe he just isnt as pretentious as you. :rolleyes: :lol:

PigmerikanMao

16th August 2008, 00:03

maybe he just isnt as pretentious as you. :rolleyes: :lol:

He clearly isn't, but that doesn't make him right. ;)

Jazzratt

16th August 2008, 00:06

It clearly isn't if you have no problem with what you just said. :rolleyes:

Why should he have a problem? Is it morally impure to be a college drop out? To not have a job? To be homeless? Or do you have a problem with his drug taking?

If it's the last one, why? What, precisely, is wrong with his choice of ingested chemicals?

AutomaticMan

16th August 2008, 00:08

Perhaps there are what seems like number of recreational drug users that identify as leftists because typically leftists believe in freedom and liberty, and like to take control of their lives, and let others take control of theirs, understanding that any action, providing it doesn't infringe on another's rights, is a personal decision for s/he who considers it. ;)

GPDP

16th August 2008, 00:12

I'll laugh if this is another forward/jaiden sockpuppet.

More Fire for the People

16th August 2008, 00:13

I've never used drugs.

PigmerikanMao

16th August 2008, 00:13

Why should he have a problem? Is it morally impure to be a college drop out? To not have a job? To be homeless? Or do you have a problem with his drug taking?

If it's the last one, why? What, precisely, is wrong with his choice of ingested chemicals?

The ingested chemicals are likely a factor which contributed to the former three issues he is dealing with. Not to mention that these substances are illegal for a reason (they can kill you?!) And, quite frankly, he should have a problem with being a drop out, unemployed, and homeless Not that there is any moral impurity to this, but why should he, likewise to counter your argument, accept being a college drop out, unemployed, and homeless?

Qwerty Dvorak

16th August 2008, 00:15

What a weirdo, is this guy the same user as forward?

Anyway, the only recreational drug I take nowadays is alcohol. I smoked hash and weed for a while but it got boring so I stopped.

Incidentally my girlfriend is also one of these "omgz drugs" people. I love her and I don't mind at all if she doesn't want to drink or take drugs but when she starts going on about how it's wrong to take drugs or how drug users are idiots I tell her where she can shove her backwards puritan bullshit (sometimes I'm nicer about it).

Bud Struggle

16th August 2008, 00:19

What a weirdo, is this guy the same user as forward?

He writes using the patented Forward "coz".

That should be a sign. :)

I just like to know why such an attitude about drugs? Most are just like liquor--probably not the best thing to put your body, but of minimal harm, long term. And yes, people die from them, but people die in traffic accidents and wars and falling down stairs and food poisining, too.

Also: Coffee and beer, something a bit stronger. No drugs--too old to even think it's cool. :( Oh, and a cigar on occasion--I support the Revolution by only smoking Cubans.

Jazzratt

16th August 2008, 00:21

The ingested chemicals are likely a factor which contributed to the former three issues he is dealing with.

How do you know he injested these chemicals before dropping out? And why are they a factor in his having dropped out when JazzRemington's drug use is not a factor in his qualifications? If you're going to use fallacious reasoning (in this case post hoc ergo proctor hoc) apply it consistently.

Not to mention that these substances are illegal for a reason (they can kill you?!)Marijuana is illegal in the USA because it was considered to be a "black man's drug" and a lot of drug laws are just puritan hangovers - considering, for example, the LD50 [Lethal Dose 50%] of LSD is 12,000 ug of pure LSD (the average dose is about 150 ug) the deadly effects of drugs are really overplayed.

And, quite frankly, he should have a problem with being a drop out, unemployed, and homeless Not that there is any moral impurity to this, but why should he, likewise to counter your argument, accept being a college drop out, unemployed, and homeless?It's not that he should or should not accept these things, but if he is doing so I don't think either of us are in any position to make value judgements about what he is doing with his life, much less should either of us make presumptions about his mental state because of it.

----------
EDIT:

What a weirdo, is this guy the same user as forward?

It's not 100% certain but it's more than likely.

SchrÃ¶dinger's Cat

16th August 2008, 00:23

I'm guilty of drinking tea and coffee, officer.

Dystisis

16th August 2008, 00:23

there is absolutely no benefits taking drugs. it's like saying "screw you world, i dont care anymore"..
It is more likely something like saying "Hey world, I want to find out everything you are about -- if drugs can help me do that then fine."

Killfacer

16th August 2008, 00:23

(edit- i deleted shit cus its forward and there is no need to say nice things)

Fuck off you fucking freak.

Trystan

16th August 2008, 00:27

i'm just curious, from my oberservations i've noticed the left seems prominately full of drug users. why is this? what is the mentality you guys have when you're taking your drug? do you think you're something special eh? do you think you're "cool"?

Another socksuppet? The lack of a capital letters at the beginning of a new sentences is such a giveaway! Do you think you're cool eh? Think you're a little Ayn Rand with a key board, eh? Think you're a big man, eh? Eh? Eh? Eh? Think you're a big man "coz" you're such a condescending and patronizing shit face, vomit stenched cum stain . . . eh?

I don't do illegal drugs. The only drugs I take are alcohol, nicotine, caffeine and whatever my doctor might prescribe to me.

PigmerikanMao

16th August 2008, 00:32

If you're going to use fallacious reasoning apply it consistently.

Make me.

Marijuana is illegal in the USA because it was considered to be a "black man's drug" and a lot of drug laws are just puritan hangovers

The idea that marijuana, even at the time it was banned, is/was a "black man's drug" is ridiculous. People of all creeds, races, ethnicities, and faiths have gather'd round for ages to trip balls together in the spirit of fraternity.

- considering, for example, the LD50 [Lethal Dose 50%] of LSD is 12,000 ug of pure LSD (the average dose is about 150 ug) the deadly effects of drugs are really overplayed.

Tell that to Jimi Hendrix

It's not that he should or should not accept these things, but if he is doing so I don't think either of us are in any position to make value judgements about what he is doing with his life, much less should either of us make presumptions about his mental state because of it.

My presumption of his mental state was not serious, I was only being an ass at the time. Less than 3% of all homeless choose to be so- although there is no proof he's choosing this lifestyle, I think it's safe to say he probably isn't. If he isn't then it's clear that something is keeping him down. Perhaps it's because, and I quote:

I'm ... taking all the drugs I can get my hands on
Maybe if he weren't addicted to drugs he could allocate the money he spends getting himself high to a down payment for a house?

~PMao :crying:

Killfacer

16th August 2008, 00:34

jimmy hendrix didnt die from LSD. Did he? thought it was obituates or somit.

PigmerikanMao

16th August 2008, 00:38

jimmy hendrix didnt die from LSD. Did he? thought it was obituates or somit.

I've always heard it was an LSD overdose- though some claim he asphyxiated on his own vomit (eww). In either case, just put in the name of a different musician in place of his, there are tons who have suffered the same fate.

Bud Struggle

16th August 2008, 00:43

The idea that marijuana, even at the time it was banned, is/was a "black man's drug" is ridiculous. People of all creeds, races, ethnicities, and faiths have gather'd round for ages to trip balls together in the spirit of fraternity.

No, I think Jazz is right on this one--in the 1920s and 30s it was a Black musicians drug--little by little it creeped into the White culture--at least that''s the way it was in America. Don't know about Europe or Britain.

Qwerty Dvorak

16th August 2008, 00:43

I've always heard it was an LSD overdose- though some claim he asphyxiated on his own vomit (eww). In either case, just put in the name of a different musician in place of his, there are tons who have suffered the same fate.
It's a hell of a lot more likely than him dying of LSD. So please name musician who actually died of an LSD overdose.

Killfacer

16th August 2008, 00:43

most of us cant afford the copious amount of drugs that rock stars take. Strange that.

Trystan

16th August 2008, 00:44

jimmy hendrix didnt die from LSD. Did he? thought it was obituates or somit.

It was a mixture of red wine and sleeping pills, I think.

Jazzratt

16th August 2008, 00:45

Make me.

I can't make you argue like a semi-rational person, but it would make the discussion more worthwhile.

The idea that marijuana, even at the time it was banned, is/was a "black man's drug" is ridiculous. People of all creeds, races, ethnicities, and faiths have gather'd round for ages to trip balls together in the spirit of fraternity.

I did a quick google search on the subject, this should explain it (http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/12/22/whyIsMarijuanaIllegal.html).

Tell that to Jimi Hendrix

Who died having taken too much heroin and alcohol which caused him to choke on his own vomit. This was pure recklessness on his part and pure carelessness on the part of those around him.

The only famous death possibly relevant to LSD would be that of Aldous Huxley who, while dying of unrelated ailments, had an enormous amount of the drug in his system as he had requested it on his deathbed and was requesting more when he finally succumbed to his (unrelated) ailment.

My presumption of his mental state was not serious, I was only being an ass at the time. Less than 3% of all homeless choose to be so- although there is no proof he's choosing this lifestyle, I think it's safe to say he probably isn't.

It would be safe to say that if all we knew about him was that he was homeless, as it is it seems he may well be one of the 3% (citation for that figure, by the way?).

Maybe if he weren't addicted to drugs he could allocate the money he spends getting himself high to a down payment for a house?

He can afford to communicate reguarly on the internet via this site, perhaps that too is costing him money he could use on the down payement too.

Bud Struggle

16th August 2008, 00:46

It's a hell of a lot more likely than him dying of LSD. So please name musician who actually died of an LSD overdose.

From Wiki:

Dannemann claimed in her original testimony that Hendrix the evening before, unknown to her, had taken nine of her prescribed Vesperax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secobarbital) sleeping pills. According to the doctor who initially attended to him, Hendrix had asphyxiated (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asphyxiated) (literally drowned) in his own vomit, mainly red wine.[91] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimi_Hendrix#cite_note-90)

PigmerikanMao

16th August 2008, 00:46

I can't make you argue like a semi-rational person, but it would make the discussion more worthwhile.It would, but, what can ya do?

In any case, I seem to stand corrected sir. Nevermind my opposition.

~PMao :laugh:

P.S: I'm still not taking drugs, however.

Killfacer

16th August 2008, 00:46

wikipedia verifies that jimmy died from sleeping pills and wine. Nothing illegal.

Random Precision

16th August 2008, 00:53

I've never taken drugs- excepting the occasional drink and sometimes nicotine. But I'm open to the experience if it comes along, although I'm going to steer clear of the harder stuff like cocaine and heroin.

Red_Dialectics

16th August 2008, 00:54

wikipedia verifies
:lol:
Not that I disagree, comrade, but you probably shouldn't throw that phrase around too often.

Jazzratt

16th August 2008, 00:55

I've always heard it was an LSD overdose- though some claim he asphyxiated on his own vomit (eww). In either case, just put in the name of a different musician in place of his, there are tons who have suffered the same fate.

Nobody has died from an LSD overdose, you prat. People who die on LSD do so because they've done something stupid, like take it without having a sober partner to "mind" them and then taken large amounts of the drug, which has resulted in them jumping out of windows/running into traffic/wandering down chasms or whatever. I think your misconception about LSD is possibly something to do with the "brown acid" rumour put about in the early '60s.

EDIT:

It would, but, what can ya do?

In any case, I seem to stand corrected sir. Nevermind my opposition.

~PMao http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/smilies2/lol.gif

P.S: I'm still not taking drugs, however.

Ah well, it's good that you were honest enough to concede.

Hey, the fewer drugs you take the more there are for people like me and BCBM :p

Killfacer

16th August 2008, 01:01

someone who says they got mixed up between heroine and LSD is clearly in no position to declare anything about drugs.

COVARE

16th August 2008, 01:05

regardless all recreational drugs cause harm.

Jazzratt

16th August 2008, 01:06

regardless all recreational drugs cause harm.

Make an actual argument or fuck off, time waster.

COVARE

16th August 2008, 01:11

Jazzratt

16th August 2008, 01:13

you obviously wasted your time just responding to me. case, any agent that inhibits the ability to function rationality is potentially dangerous cuz its screws you up causing violence and such, things that people would be less prone to while sober

Read this. (http://rs2kpapers.awardspace.com/theory288f.html?subaction=showfull&id=1116694321&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&) Any questions? :laugh:

bcbm

16th August 2008, 01:32

It clearly isn't if you have no problem with what you just said. :rolleyes:

What, I am not allowed to make conscious choices about my life?

The ingested chemicals are likely a factor which contributed to the former three issues he is dealing with.

I dropped out of college when I was straight-edge. I quit my job before leaving for Europe and have not sought further employment because I don't need it at this point. I'm homeless because I feel like being mobile for the next few months. I drink, smoke and do drugs because I find them enjoyable- they don't inhibit my ability to make my own decisions.

and, quite frankly, he should have a problem with being a drop out, unemployed, and homeless Not that there is any moral impurity to this, but why should he, likewise to counter your argument, accept being a college drop out, unemployed, and homeless?

Why should I have a problem with it? Why should I not accept a situation that is beneficial to me at this point in my life?

Bud Struggle

16th August 2008, 01:54

You know, you really shouldn't be put in the position to have to make excuses or justifications for your life.

It's your life--and what you do with it is nobody's business.

mykittyhasaboner

16th August 2008, 02:30

You know, you really shouldn't be put in the position to have to make excuses or justifications for your life.

It's your life--and what you do with it is nobody's business.
quoted for the fuckin truth. thats just the bottom line.

now if people like covare and forward (possible the same person?) would accpet this, we wouldnt be having such ridiculous discussions.

Charles Xavier

16th August 2008, 02:31

Drugs are counter-revolutionary. Those who push drugs into our streets are the criminals to the working class. They are a waste of time, money and dull the mind. Some create great addictions allowing some sectors of the working class to be super exploited or degenerated for their next high.

Those who try to justify their drug use with their politics are bsing themselves. They are just trying to justify their altered state of consciousness and degenerate behaviour.

bcbm

16th August 2008, 02:36

You know, you really shouldn't be put in the position to have to make excuses or justifications for your life.

It's your life--and what you do with it is nobody's business.

Sure, but I think its important to challenge this prick's ideas of drugs and drug users, not to mention unemployed college dropouts.

RGacky3

16th August 2008, 02:50

I personally don't trust a dude that does'nt enjoy a drink everynow and then, nor do I trust a chick that does'nt enjoy a drink everynow and then either.

That being said I don't trust junkies. But they obviously have a right to be junkies if they choose, but I would'nt recomend it.

Also I dont' consider Weed to be a bad drug, its not harder than alcohol, nor does it have the negative effects of alcohol. But that should'nt be the issue at all, whether or not a drug is bad or good, all drugs should be legal because its the drug users business.

Those who try to justify their drug use with their politics are bsing themselves. They are just trying to justify their altered state of consciousness and degenerate behaviour.

People who take drugs don't have to justify it, they are doing it for themselves, those who want to ban drugs must justify it, because they are banning it for other people. Authority must be justified. If someone wants to get high thats their own business, no one elses.

Now if your talking about judging someone personally yeah sure go ahead, if one of my friends wants to start shooting smack or Meth or whatever I'll tell them, "your an idiot." But judging someone personally, and making a law about it are 2 different things. I have a right to my opinion on drugs but no one has a right to enforce it on someone else.

COVARE

16th August 2008, 02:56

the drug user's buisness? what about the murderer's buisness? how come you're for legalizing an agent that causes potential harm? if you're going that way, you might as well legalize murder. just like people enforce murder as illegal, the government has the right to enforce the illegalization of all recreational drugs (including alcohol) for society's sake. contrary to popular belief, its not a victimless crime.

Charles Xavier

16th August 2008, 03:03

Drugs lead to degenerate anti-social behavior. While I don't support criminalizing the user(rehabilitation is the only solution), I do definitely support criminalizing the spread of it through the community. Drugs are actively counter-revolutionary, their spread is one dominated by criminal elements within the state. If you look deep enough you can find any politically active community having drugs peddled in their community. Drugs are not an individual choice, drugs affect families, you would like to see you Parents coming home high off heroine because its their individual choice? When theres no money to eat you want to see your mother going off to prostitute her body for some crack-cocaine? What about your teenage daughter not doing anything with her life because shes looking to out-drink a school of fish.

What about pregnant friend and their individual choice to drink alcohol and smoke marijuana? I don't think that child have any learning difficulties:rolleyes:.

Its easy to justify drug use when you got money, a nice home, and a loving family who will support your lifestyle. But 90% of the world isn't in your shoes.

Find me one Communist Party in this world, one Trade Union, one revolutionary group, even one petty-bougie Social Democratic Party who in their platform says smoke your brain up. Any real leftist will not justify their drug usage with their working class politics the two are opposites.

Religion is not the main opiate of the masses, Opium is.

COVARE

16th August 2008, 03:11

i agree with GeorgiDimitrov for the most part. he seems to be one of the few leftists that understands the effect drugs have on society. if anyone cares about the greater good, if anyone cares about society, they would realize that legalization of drugs hinders growth. how can anyone support a society a braindead morons assaulting one another? however i do not think rehabilitation is the best method because people who take drugs are clearly against society in the first place, and will likely continue despite the methods enforced.

Bud Struggle

16th August 2008, 03:11

Religion is not the main opiate of the masses, Opium is.

Or Opium is the religion of the masses.

Anyway, Georgi has a point. While doing drugs is a personal choice and not the business of society--are they indeed counter-revolutionary? Does drug use by Communists hurt the Revolution? Does drug use by Communists set a bad example for the movement?

COVARE

16th August 2008, 03:12

tomK, why do you say they are not the buisness of society if they harm society?

Bud Struggle

16th August 2008, 03:23

tomK, why do you say they are not the buisness of society if they harm society?

Because lots of things do society harm. Liquor does society harm, over eating transfats do society harm. Cigarette smoking does society harm. Lots more people die from complications do to smoking than drug use.

But society is the the be all and end of of human life. The individual is. Each person should be able to makes reasonable judgments about how he wants to live his own life. The cut off come where he wilfully hurts others. So your point above that there's some similarity between personal drug use and murder is false. The only way that analogy works is if your compare murder to me forcing you to take drugs. If I want to do drugs, or you want to do drugs, you aren't hurting anyone but yourself.

Now there is collateral dammage from drug use--people get hurt sometimes, but that's not enough to bridge the personal freedoms that you and I have or should have over our own life. Only if you could proove that certain individuals or groups of individuals are systematicly being abused by drug use--would you then maybe have a case.

No. Personal freedoms are more important than any implied damageone might do to society through drug use.

My question is rather--as a Communist does one have a moral responsibility not to take drugs because it might hurt the Communist movement in the eyes of the proletariat?

Charles Xavier

16th August 2008, 03:29

The majority of drug users in this world are of the working class, I would not want to see my brothers and sisters rotting in jail over their sickness. It most be cleaned out and addicts need to be taught alternative. It is not correct to criminalize the user, we should enforce rehabilitation on those who cannot control themselves. But never treat them like criminals. Its a path of division between working people, the community should stand united against drug use not for jailing its users.

Qwerty Dvorak

16th August 2008, 03:31

Or Opium is the religion of the masses.

Anyway, Georgi has a point. While doing drugs is a personal choice and not the business of society--are they indeed counter-revolutionary? Does drug use by Communists hurt the Revolution? Does drug use by Communists set a bad example for the movement?
The same could be said for disabled or retarded people, seriously ill people or injured people. They're not the most efficient people in the world, they don't get things done as quick as they could, it wastes resources to keep them alive and well. So is it counter-revolutionary to let them live? Is it holding us back?

Of course not. This is because leftists have as their end goal a society which cherishes individual freedom and autonomy, as well as of course the right to life. For this reason banning drug use, like executing disabled people, would not help the leftist cause.

Charles Xavier

16th August 2008, 03:36

The same could be said for disabled or retarded people, seriously ill people or injured people. They're not the most efficient people in the world, they don't get things done as quick as they could, it wastes resources to keep them alive and well. So is it counter-revolutionary to let them live? Is it holding us back?

Of course not. This is because leftists have as their end goal a society which cherishes individual freedom and autonomy, as well as of course the right to life. For this reason banning drug use, like executing disabled people, would not help the leftist cause.
I think you are completely taken the whole conversation out of context. I have always supported the helping out of those who need our help. Kicking drug use out of my neighborhood is not even close to organizing gangs to round up people in wheelchairs and execute them.

Bud Struggle

16th August 2008, 03:38

The same could be said for disabled or retarded people, seriously ill people or injured people. They're not the most efficient people in the world, they don't get things done as quick as they could, it wastes resources to keep them alive and well. So is it counter-revolutionary to let them live? Is it holding us back?

Of course not. This is because leftists have as their end goal a society which cherishes individual freedom and autonomy, as well as of course the right to life. For this reason banning drug use, like executing disabled people, would not help the leftist cause.

Woah! I'm not saying kill them or ban drug use or do anything to them. My only point is: is it COMMUNIST to use drugs or does it smack of being a tool of the Bourgeoise?

In the same way you can't (proportedly) own a factory and be a Communist--so maybe you can't do drugs and be a communist either?

Just questioning. :)

Qwerty Dvorak

16th August 2008, 03:42

Woah! I'm not saying kill them or ban drug use or do anything to them. My only point is: is COMMUNIST to use drugs or does it smack of being a tool of the Bourgeoise?
Oh, if you just mean the use of drugs in current society amongst leftists. Well I wouldn't say it is a political issue, but then I'm not a leftist.

Charles Xavier

16th August 2008, 03:46

Woah! I'm not saying kill them or ban drug use or do anything to them. My only point is: is it COMMUNIST to use drugs or does it smack of being a tool of the Bourgeoise?

In the same way you can't (proportedly) own a factory and be a Communist--so maybe you can't do drugs and be a communist either?

Just questioning. :)

The question is as irreverent as this one: can I be a communist and have aids?

Bud Struggle

16th August 2008, 03:52

The question is as irreverent as this one: can I be a communist and have aids?

Nope. No one makes a decision to get AIDS. One makes a decision to be a drug user. It's a conscious decision. Just like starting a business is a conscious decision. One could always stop taking drugs and one could always turn one's factory over to the workers.

You con't just stop being a victim of AIDS.

Qwerty Dvorak

16th August 2008, 03:53

Nope. No one makes a decision to get AIDS. One makes a decision to be a drug user. It's a conscious decision. Just like starting a business is a conscious decision. One could always stop taking drugs and one could always turn one's factory over to the workers.

You con't just stop being a victim of AIDS.
I think he's talking about drug addiction.

Bud Struggle

16th August 2008, 03:59

I think he's talking about drug addiction. OK. But the addiction can be kicked--I'm sure it would take a good deal of effort--but I don't look at those illnesses of volition in the same way that I look at true infirmaty.

KrazyRabidSheep

16th August 2008, 04:00

I do not take any street drugs, nor have I for several years (I did used to do many drugs very often), although I do smoke, and perhaps once or twice a month I visit a pub or bar.

I have to undergo random and situational drug screenings, and frankly, my job is not worth a quick buzz.

When marijuana is legalized, I will take it in a similar fashion as to alcohol (regularly, but infrequently, for recreational use with friends.)

graffic

16th August 2008, 04:15

I think most of the negative aspects of drug use is associated with the fact its illegal.

The reason Heroin is so dangerous is because black market dealers are making it as cheaply as they can, which results in loads of chemicals being put into it. When a docter creates heroin for use on a patient, the only real negative effect is drowzieness, people also get addicted alot less easier..

I think they should legalise all drugs and warn people of the dangers.

Personally I only drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes, drugs in their current state fuck your life up. Some people can get away with smoking cannabis but for me it really fucked up my mental state so I stay clear of all illegal drugs now..

Demogorgon

16th August 2008, 07:16

I drink alcohol but don't use other drugs recreationally.

SchrÃ¶dinger's Cat

16th August 2008, 07:38

Or Opium is the religion of the masses.

Anyway, Georgi has a point. While doing drugs is a personal choice and not the business of society--are they indeed counter-revolutionary? Does drug use by Communists hurt the Revolution? Does drug use by Communists set a bad example for the movement?

If it doesn't impede another person's ability, it's nobody's business to take legal action.

You can smoke marijuana, declare yourself a capitalist, and draw naughty porn for money. You can't shove marijuana down my throat, create private property contracts without social consent, and put a dildo into my five year old cousin.

What's a bad example? Even as a non-drug user I would rather stay around people with pot than people with alcohol, or cigarettes. Marijuana has more medical benefits than those two. I'll take LSD users giving us a bad name over homophobes any day.

BurnTheOliveTree

16th August 2008, 12:01

communard resolution

16th August 2008, 12:18

I have been personally affected by drug crime: a friend of mine who turned junkie broke into my place and stole pretty much everything I had.

I advocate the complete legalization of all addictive drugs. If that shit wasn't illegal, it wouldn't be so expensive and such episodes would not occur. If someone wants to fuck themselves up that's their problem, but please leave me out of the equation.

I don't particularly like junkies, but I can see that it's not the drug but the circumstance of illegality which makes them act that way. If hard drugs were legal, addiction would be everybody's personal problem, not society's. At the same time, the addict would have the chance to live a relatively normal life and not have to resort to crime, drug prostitution, etc. The spread of diseases could be curbed, which is of the greatest interest for society as a whole.

So legalize that shit already. End of story.

EDIT: The original poster is a moron who doesn't distinguish between various kinds of drugs to begin with. He also seems to live in a cotton wool world as he doesn't realize that drug use is equally widespread on the Right, never mind their anti-drug lip service. Drugs have always been there and always will be - the question is: do we really need to make everybody's life hell by outlawing them?

communard resolution

16th August 2008, 12:32

Prohibition does nothing apart from sweep the problem under the carpet.

No, prohibition creates most of the problems.

Bud Struggle

16th August 2008, 13:01

No, prohibition creates most of the problems.

I agree there. I do outreach work in a state prison and I'd say 60% maybe more of the prisoners are there on some sort of drug related offense. The cops go after the small time drug dealers and the users because they are easiest to catch. The big timers are well proteced.

And these users do commit a lot of crimes, everything from murder to petty theft to support their addiction, so their not entirely free from blame.

[An aside: here in America you can get sent to jail for a looooooog time even for simple pot posession--so be careful.]

MaverickChaos

16th August 2008, 14:20

JazzRemington congraduations. am i supposed to care? murderers can have good qualifications too you know. i dont support anything that causes harm to another innocent individual.

How can you insult our intelligence when you can't even spell "Congratulations"? Your logic is so twisted, my god these right-wingers are getting more retarded by the day.

RGacky3

16th August 2008, 17:02

The majority of drug users in this world are of the working class

Percentage wise I'm not so sure about that, obviously the majority are, but preportionately I"m not so sure, rich people love drugs too, and have disposable income to spend on it.

My question is rather--as a Communist does one have a moral responsibility not to take drugs because it might hurt the Communist movement in the eyes of the proletariat?

Its not a moral responsibility as such, but if you want people to take you seroiusly taking drugs might not help.

Also looking from a practical point of view, do you realize how much of a huge crushing blow legalization of all drugs would do to organized crime? That would piss off a lot of Gangsters, which is'nt a bad thing, also it would free a lot from prison, it would free up a lot of cops, it would stop a lot of violence, and frankly I think it would be easier to help junkies. But then no more Plan Columbia ;), and we can't have that now can we.

Bud Struggle

16th August 2008, 17:16

Its not a moral responsibility as such, but if you want people to take you seroiusly taking drugs might not help.

Bingo! :thumbup:

Trystan

16th August 2008, 17:34

The majority of drug users in this world are of the working class,

I'm not sure about this one either. A lot of rich people do drugs. Probably more than we might think, as they're less likely to get caught standing on street corners making a transaction.

nuisance

16th August 2008, 17:40

I'm not sure about this one either. A lot of rich people do drugs. Probably more than we might think, as they're less likely to get caught standing on street corners making a transaction.
The vast majority of the population are working class. So I think it's safe to say that we, as a class, take more drugs. Unless you were speaking in proportions?

Charles Xavier

16th August 2008, 19:35

I'm not sure about this one either. A lot of rich people do drugs. Probably more than we might think, as they're less likely to get caught standing on street corners making a transaction.

90 of world is working class
The remaining 10 percent may have more drugs per capita but they are not the bulk consumers. Working people are the biggest consumer class. When it comes to any commodity

Killfacer

16th August 2008, 23:37

i would laugh if you died.

CanadianCommunist

17th August 2008, 00:33

Well im 100% Canadian so i love Cannabis. I dont see what harm i am to society if i enjoy smoking cannabis on a regular basis. Its just a plant people. DONT PANIC ITS ORGANIC:D

Qwerty Dvorak

17th August 2008, 00:37

Well im 100% Canadian so i love Cannabis. I dont see what harm i am to society if i enjoy smoking cannabis on a regular basis. Its just a plant people. DONT PANIC ITS ORGANIC:D
Damn Canadians, debasing our morality

gla22

17th August 2008, 01:16

4.5 GPA over 2000 on the SAT and frequent drug and alcohol user. User not abuser.

Comrade Cuyler

18th August 2008, 21:12

why is this?
Better question: why does/would it matter?

what is the mentality you guys have when you're taking your drug?

I’m going to be speedin’ balls in 2.5 son.

do you think you're something special eh?

Of course, why else would you do drugs? Fuck the sensations, pleasure, euphoria, etc. I’m all about the image.

do you think you're "cool"?
Yes. ;)

people who take drugs do not have the mental capacity of a functional adult, from my observations, even when they are not high.

Even after a couple blasts of cryz, I’m still very functional if not on my A game.

unless you advocate causing harm to society.

I have never stolen anything from anyone for drug money, I’ve never got into a fight that wasn’t in self-defense while high, etc. so pray tell how am I “harming,” society?

clearly i'm talking recreational drugs, you know, the kind that cause harm to society.

Drugs only harm society due to prohibition. If you could pick up a vial of stone, ice, or a bag of ganj at the store like you would a 6 pack, a 5th , a pack of smokes, etc. I highly doubt that you would have all the problems that you have today associated with drugs use.

drug users are idiots cuz of their own decision to take drugs and cause harm to themselves and countless others.

Again how am I "harming," anyone but myself? Also how exactly does taking certain drugs make me an 'idiot'?

as there is absolutely no benefits taking drugs.

So the euphoria, heightened focus, motivation boost, etc. I experience is not a benefit?

it's like saying "screw you world, i dont care anymore".

No it’s saying “I want a huge adrenaline rush and high for a couple hours.”

regardless all recreational drugs cause harm.

Prove it.

you obviously wasted your time just responding to me. case, any agent that inhibits the ability to function rationality is potentially dangerous cuz its screws you up causing violence and such, things that people would be less prone to while sober

Your view of drugs (circa 1930s) is completely false we don't go into some intense madness while high and go mugging, raping, pillaging, etc.

Drugs are counter-revolutionary.

How so?

what about the murderer's buisness?

You can't compare a drug user to a murderer. I'm not killing anyone nor am I harming anyone with my drug use in any way, shape or form.

how come you're for legalizing an agent that causes potential harm?

Who said it causes potential harm in the first place?

Drugs lead to degenerate anti-social behavior.

So when I do a couple hits then go out walking around, seeing people, hanging out, etc. and then later go home and crash, that's anti-social?

Drugs are not an individual choice, drugs affect families, you would like to see you Parents coming home high off heroine because its their individual choice?

If you have children it's best to be sober, you have a responsibility to take care of your child to the best of your abilities, that being said you shouldn't be strung out on horse if you have a child just like you shouldn't be drunk all the time when you have a child. Common sense.

When theres no money to eat you want to see your mother going off to prostitute her body for some crack-cocaine?

See above. This also has more to do with prohibition than with the use of the drug itself. If you could pick up some stone at the gas station or wherever for 5.99 you wouldn't have this problem.

What about your teenage daughter not doing anything with her life because shes looking to out-drink a school of fish.

That's her own damn fault. Why the fuck should I be punished because she can't handle her shit?

I don't think that child have any learning difficulties .

That' why you don't drink, smoke or do drugs when you’re pregnant dumbass.

Its easy to justify drug use when you got money, a nice home, and a loving family who will support your lifestyle.

I don't have any of that and yet I still do drugs. Hardly anyone supports me accept me, thanks and I bust my ass for every cent I get so I think I should be able to decide where my money goes.

Find me one Communist Party in this world, one Trade Union, one revolutionary group, even one petty-bougie Social Democratic Party who in their platform says smoke your brain up.

What would getting fucked up have to do with politics or revolution? Why would anyone have that in their platform?

Dean

18th August 2008, 21:28

Can one of the puritans explain how I do harm to society when I drop some MDMA? Just to use me as a specific case study to bring out your argument.

In my experience of the drug, I have at worst been very absent-minded and difficult to hold a conversation with - at best, I skip around my town hugging people and getting numbers and smiling and being very honest and loving in general. I just don't see what harm I'm doing with that.

-Alex

Drugs are a fleeting escape from the reality of your own existence. As such, they are self-destructive - as a part of society, it is socially destructive.

That said, I completely understand why someone would want to escape the conditions of this filthy world, and I am just as guilty as the next person.

BurnTheOliveTree

18th August 2008, 21:34

Drugs are a fleeting escape from the reality of your own existence. As such, they are self-destructive - as a part of society, it is socially destructive.

That said, I completely understand why someone would want to escape the conditions of this filthy world, and I am just as guilty as the next person.

Well, my escapes aren't really fleeting, they last nearly a full 24 hours most of the time, and I'll have some every weekend pretty much, so that's like a seventh of my life. :lol:

I still don't see why escapism is socially destructive, though. If I meet people on pills and they hug me and tell me what a wonderful person I am and how soft my hair feels and all the other par-for-the-course lovely things you tend to come out with, I find my faith in humans rather restored.

-Alex

Ã‘Ã³ẊÃ®Ã¶ŉ

18th August 2008, 21:40

Drugs are a fleeting escape from the reality of your own existence. As such, they are self-destructive - as a part of society, it is socially destructive.

How can they be destructive if they are fleeting?

That said, I completely understand why someone would want to escape the conditions of this filthy world, and I am just as guilty as the next person.I don't smoke dope or take MDMA to "escape" - in fact I find it a perfectly ridiculous notion. I take drugs because I enjoy the interactions they have with my mind and body. Like a kaleidoscope, preconceptions and ideas are shattered and brought together in a pattern anew.

I genuinely believe that drugs can give you insights that you would never have had without them.

BurnTheOliveTree

18th August 2008, 21:45

I genuinely believe that drugs can give you insights that you would never have had without them.

Absolutely. I find it has lasting and positive effects on my personality, is this something you've found too? I'm far more empathic and emotionally sensitive, for example. It's destroyed any trace of a misanthrope lurking in my mind. I am generally a lot happier, too - not to say that sadness is eliminated, of course, if anything it's there more often because of the empathy, but it's a kind of healthy sadness, it feels right and natural rather than the "old" sadness which was usually coupled withn confusion, anger, frustration, etc.

-Alex

Comrade Cuyler

18th August 2008, 21:49

Drugs are a fleeting escape from the reality of your own existence.

This is an opinion I have never really understood in that I don't think of my drug use as escaping reality rather I see it as adding to my experience of reality and allow me to experience things in a different (more pleasurable) way. I'm not (usually) trying to 'escape' anything, I just want a good time.

Comrade Cuyler

18th August 2008, 21:52

I don't smoke dope or take MDMA to "escape" - in fact I find it a perfectly ridiculous notion. I take drugs because I enjoy the interactions they have with my mind and body. Like a kaleidoscope, preconceptions and ideas are shattered and brought together in a pattern anew.

I genuinely believe that drugs can give you insights that you would never have had without them.

Agreed.

Dyslexia! Well I Never!

18th August 2008, 22:02

Does it really matter what anyone puts into their bodies?

As long as they don't harm, maim or kill anybody it's fine with me I won't be joining them (having grown rather cool towards drugs of late) but they can do as they will.

You only hear about the negative drug stories because the very nature of the drugs subculture is secretive (at least a little bit anyway.)

One can always hear about some mentally defective prick becoming hopelssly addicted to his drug of choice and becoming a vegetable. What one never hears is the story of the depressed kid who had a joint or two and realised all the problems he was crushed under don't really matter and had the occaisional joint from then on.

Politics are only tied to drugs insofar as any other issue it's really not that much of a big deal current drugs policy comes from victorian thought when it was fine for the British empire to produce and sell drugs to keep the colonies docile but keep them out of the homeland.

The right wing fear that drugs are the great satan evil and will destroy society is to put it simply absurd. I'm fairly sure that if all illegal drugs where to be regarded like drinking or smoking and made available legally (and more importantly to some taxably) at a verifiable quality the destructive elements of drug culture would be enormously decreased. Those with drugs problems would not be afraid of legal repercussions and no longer would shady underworld figures control the trade depriving the criminal element of funds in the order of billions of Pounds/Dollars/Euros/Yen/insert currency here.

The main point one has to remember with discussion of mind altering substances is that you don't need to be on drugs to be an arsehole, beat your wife and/or kids, run down children in your car, commit suicide, lose enthusiasm for life, Commit war crimes or get a mental disease. In fact it's fair to say that far, far more damage has been done by sober people.

I mean do you think Hitler was smoking a well-stoked crackpipe when he gave the final solution the go ahead?

Bud Struggle

18th August 2008, 22:07

I genuinely believe that drugs can give you insights that you would never have had without them.

I never really did any drugs beside for pot (LSD--maybe once that someone slipped me--not good!) and all pot ever did was make me paranoid. In my real life I hardly ever worry about anything, things turn out OK or they don't--if I have control, I'll make them OK and if I don't there isn't much I can do about them. No worry.

When I smoked pot--I WORRIED, was i going t pass X test? could I make a living? all that crap. I smoked for a while but just didn't enjoy it. Also this is kind of funny--I sucked at playing guitar and piano when I smoked (some of course may say that I didn't need pot for that!) But all that stuff about musicians getting inspired, it never happened to me. (Of course I wan't great or anything) but I never seemed to get even a little inspiration.

It never worked for me--I have no problem with other enjoying it, somehow I just missed out.

ashaman1324

18th August 2008, 22:20

i smoke pot on a semiregular basis
i dont drink.
i recently quit cigarettes. (because im out of money:()
i think the public mindset on drugs is totally ridiculous
i never force others to be near me when i smoke, or talk about it if it upsets them
as tomk said, i never got a stroke of inspiration from pot
but i enjoy it.
nobody is hurt from it.
i gain a good time, and a dealer gains a few bucks
i find nothing wrong with it.

lombas

18th August 2008, 22:22

I seldom smoke. I do have a drink each day (say, an average of 2 glasses of wine).

I don't do drugs.

I don't support the war on drugs.

Ã‘Ã³ẊÃ®Ã¶ŉ

18th August 2008, 22:23

I never really did any drugs beside for pot (LSD--maybe once that someone slipped me--not good!) and all pot ever did was make me paranoid. In my real life I hardly ever worry about anything, things turn out OK or they don't--if I have control, I'll make them OK and if I don't there isn't much I can do about them. No worry.

When I smoked pot--I WORRIED, was i going t pass X test? could I make a living? all that crap. I smoked for a while but just didn't enjoy it. Also this is kind of funny--I sucked at playing guitar and piano when I smoked (some of course may say that I didn't need pot for that!) But all that stuff about musicians getting inspired, it never happened to me. (Of course I wan't great or anything) but I never seemed to get even a little inspiration.

It never worked for me--I have no problem with other enjoying it, somehow I just missed out.

Well, people are individuals. Maybe your particular biochemistry doesn't lend itself well to a good pot experience.

Or, if you'll permit me to speculate further, perhaps it's your personality, your ego, your sense of being which just doesn't "jive" with the feeling of being stoned - drugs can take a small part of yourself that you normally control, out of your control. Some people enjoy that experience of being slightly out of control. Perhaps you're not one of them.

Forward Union

19th August 2008, 00:09

i'm just curious, from my oberservations i've noticed the left seems prominately full of drug users. why is this? what is the mentality you guys have when you're taking your drug? do you think you're something special eh? do you think you're "cool"?

Nope I dont do drugs, don't smoke etc. I drink on occasion and enjoy regular cups of coffee, but I am assuming you mean illegal drugs.

My view is that if people want to take drugs, as long as it doesn't effect me, I don't care. Heavy drugs are a no-go and dealers should be shot. Heroin rips apart working class communities.

Comrade B

19th August 2008, 00:13

I love alcohol. Drink whenever it is possible (bit harder for a 17 year old in the US)

Don't like smoke in general.

Comrade Cuyler

19th August 2008, 00:33

Heavy drugs are a no-go and dealers should be shot. Heroin rips apart working class communities.

What about this?

My view is that if people want to take drugs, as long as it doesn't effect me, I don't care.

Not to mention shooting drug dealers seems a tad irrational don't you think?

The negative things surrounding the 'heavy' drugs like heroin, methamphetamine (my DoC), crack, etc. exist because of prohibition and poor drug education classes taught in school; fix those two problems and heroin/meth/crack addiction would be no different really than alcoholism. I also don't see why you would legalize some drugs and continue to ban others.

professorchaos

19th August 2008, 00:59

Very much enjoy cannabis recreationally and alcohol to a lesser extent. Psychedelics have been an important factor in my intellectual development and helped foster my change to a collectivist attitude. Anyone who advocates restriction of any psychoactive substance is advocating reactionary social puritanism.

Matty_UK

19th August 2008, 01:13

Absolutely. I find it has lasting and positive effects on my personality, is this something you've found too? I'm far more empathic and emotionally sensitive, for example. It's destroyed any trace of a misanthrope lurking in my mind. I am generally a lot happier, too - not to say that sadness is eliminated, of course, if anything it's there more often because of the empathy, but it's a kind of healthy sadness, it feels right and natural rather than the "old" sadness which was usually coupled withn confusion, anger, frustration, etc.

-Alex

Sounds like you're an MDMA fan to me. :thumbup1:

It really is a wonderful drug, it really gives you the ability to see humans for what they are and helps you to see yourself in an honest, uncorrupted light. It's definately changed my personality for the better too.

I agree some drugs are really harmful, but I'd really like someone to explain what on earth the problem is with mdma, which really is a secret cure for pretty much any neuroses. The worst you can get is a feeling of depression in the morning, but that can be solved by sitting up with friends and hugging them when necassary.

Dean

19th August 2008, 01:19

How can they be destructive if they are fleeting?
I was referring to the positive feelings which cloud your emotions to the reality of our existence.

I don't smoke dope or take MDMA to "escape" - in fact I find it a perfectly ridiculous notion. I take drugs because I enjoy the interactions they have with my mind and body. Like a kaleidoscope, preconceptions and ideas are shattered and brought together in a pattern anew.

I genuinely believe that drugs can give you insights that you would never have had without them.
Of course they can. I attribute much of my more positive development from 17-19 years old in part to my ability to more dynamically approach ideas. But I have no pretense about my drug use - it is to escape an otherwise shitty existence, and it is definitely destructive. It removes key mental faculties, and ultimately offers little but a contorted view of the same reality. Because drugs cannot in and of themselves create new ideas, and they rarely serve to expand rather than limit our range of neurological functionality, drugs can be rightly considered destructive.

RGacky3

19th August 2008, 01:23

The worst think any one has every given to me about MDMA is that some people have died because they did'nt get enough water, which is so rediculous it should be ignored, because if thats the reason they outlaw it, because of that small little danger, they should pretty much outlaw everything, mountain biking, if you don't wear a helmet you could die, its rediculous.

Pot did'nt do much for me, I love alcohol, it would be a much better drug if it wast'nt so unhealthy, if you work out at the gym and have a drink or 2 it ruins the whole work out.

Psycedelics are also fun, but in a good enviroment, and very seldomly. From my small experience I still like booze the best overall, other than the unhealthy aspects of it.

BurnTheOliveTree

19th August 2008, 19:16

I'm really not that into alcohol. As far as I can see increased confidence is the only nice thing you get out of it, and that can easily slip into violence or whatever. Plus there's hangovers, vomiting, people getting too emotional, saying stupid stuff, etc etc.

Sounds like you're an MDMA fan to me. http://www.revleft.com/vb/does-everyone-here-t86773/revleft/smilies2/thumbup1.gif

It really is a wonderful drug, it really gives you the ability to see humans for what they are and helps you to see yourself in an honest, uncorrupted light. It's definately changed my personality for the better too.

I agree some drugs are really harmful, but I'd really like someone to explain what on earth the problem is with mdma, which really is a secret cure for pretty much any neuroses. The worst you can get is a feeling of depression in the morning, but that can be solved by sitting up with friends and hugging them when necassary.

Yeah yeah, like I place much less centrality on myself these days, and I don't cling on to things, I don't get anxious. :) Yay, nice to know someone else has the same thing apart from me and my pill-buddies.

About the morning depression - I reccomend a vitamin pill, and then if you can manage to stop rushing, sleep. It's like a cheat. The come down comes from serotonin burn-out, if I remember correctly, and sleep combined with vitamin replenishment can restore it. All the depression you would normally feel is in your sleep that way! Although, I don't find it that bad on the odd occasion I forget my vitamins, I just feel really flat more than anything else, and a bit bored.

-Alex

Forward Union

20th August 2008, 11:40

What about this?

What about what? There is no contradiction here. Only if you lump "drugs" into one monolithic catagory. The first comment was specifically in regard to Heroin. Not drugs like Marijuana, which are very different and incomparable.

Heroin use directly negatively effects the community in which it happens 100% of the time.

Not to mention shooting drug dealers seems a tad irrational don't you think?

No. They're no different from any other bussinessman, they knowingly ruin lives and destroy communitites for profit.

They should be shot.

They should not be given any special privelages for having the bussiness of drug dealing as opposed to say, arms dealing. Because Drugs happen to be illegal and therefor anti-establishment in some way.

The negative things surrounding the 'heavy' drugs like heroin, methamphetamine (my DoC), crack, etc. exist because of prohibition and poor drug education classes taught in school

To some extent, I don't disagree with what you are saying. And do believe that drug education needs to be improved. But lets not confuse things, methamphetamine is very different from Heroin, which is very different from Cocaine etc. We can't accurately lump them all together.

Heroin (im sticking to this but we can discuss another drug if you want) is almost always fatal, and immensly addictive. There's no doubt about the awesome and destructive force of this poison. As Anarchists and Communists who believe in strong communities capable of self governance and autonomy we should not promote drug use of this kind.

True to my libertarian ideals, I don't actually agree with Heroin beign illegal. Mainly because that doesn't combat the problem. It currently is illegal, and yet the substance has caused great suffering for the working class communitites in my town. Though, not my own neighborhood.

Comrade B

20th August 2008, 20:14

They're no different from any other bussinessman, they knowingly ruin lives and destroy communitites for profit.

They should be shot.
Many people are forced into dealing by their own addiction, or due to extreme poverty. I have no problem with executing big time bosses and heads of manufacturing the shit, they are the real evil business men but most dealers are as much responsible for the evils of their work as Walmart Cashiers are for the evils of Walmart

RGacky3

20th August 2008, 20:38

Many people are forced into dealing by their own addiction, or due to extreme poverty.

I don't know about that, the few pushers I know do quite well.

I have no problem with executing big time bosses and heads of manufacturing the shit, they are the real evil business men but most dealers are as much responsible for the evils of their work as Walmart Cashiers are for the evils of Walmart

I have a problem shooting anyone, Business men arn't 'evil' niether are drug dealers, they are just doing what they think they have to do to survive. Why shoot them? Out or revenge?

They should not be given any special privelages for having the bussiness of drug dealing as opposed to say, arms dealing. Because Drugs happen to be illegal and therefor anti-establishment in some way.

I agree they are not different then businessmen (petit-bourgeousie, most drug dealers are rather petit), but not that they should be shot. Its unnessesary and pointless violence, and who are you or anyone else to judge someone, judge the system.

True to my libertarian ideals, I don't actually agree with Heroin beign illegal. Mainly because that doesn't combat the problem. It currently is illegal, and yet the substance has caused great suffering for the working class communitites in my town. Though, not my own neighborhood.

Your right about Heroin, I know many junkies, and its a horrible drug, but murdering drug dealers is'nt the answer.

Ken

17th September 2008, 06:30

im a welfare leech. i dont take any drugs and drink... only rarely.

burn the shit, burn it all. then let people make their own weed/heroin. its useless to progression and a known hinderance to productivity.

Zurdito

17th September 2008, 06:47

I do not drink, smoke, or engage in any drug usage (unless you count caffeine!). I try not to give people an excuse not to take me seriously.

damn. most young workers in the west at least (and I include latin america and eastern europe), I bet have taken drugs. you spend all day in a factory or call centre, you have some cash at the weekend, what do you do? in my experience, drink a shit load of alcohol, buy somepot, and a bag of coke when you can afford it.

yeah, some don´t:usually conservative ones or religious ones. i.e., the ones who have bought into middle class prejudices. and the ones you likely won´t recruit anyway.

I don´t agree with drugs becomign part of the left´s identity, we hsould not follow lifestlye politics. but personally in my experience most young workers won´t take you seriosuly if you aren´t even prepared to smoke a joint with them at the weekend or are too uptight to do a few lines of coke.

bcbm

17th September 2008, 06:57

its useless to progression and a known hinderance to productivity.

drugs > productivity

Ken

17th September 2008, 06:58

but personally in my experience most young workers won´t take you seriosuly if you aren´t even prepared to smoke a joint with them at the weekend or are too uptight to do a few lines of coke.

:(

Zurdito

17th September 2008, 07:32

:(

ok let me rephrase that. if you really don´t want to I don´t think it will rule out any chance of getting along. also you could have a purely poltiical relationship

I just think that the snobbish anti-drugs kind of attitude shown by the post I was quoting would be a barrier to getting along as a friend with the majority of kids in most owkring class communities, in my experience.

Outinleftfield

27th September 2009, 23:48

JazzRemington congraduations. am i supposed to care? murderers can have good qualifications too you know. i dont support anything that causes harm to another innocent individual.

How does smoking pot on a semi-regular basis cause harm to another individual?

The only way anyone can think pot is harmful to society or even to the individual user is if they buy into bourgeois drug war propaganda.

There are many scientific studies that have proven the medical benefits of cannabis, including suppression of tumor cells, and reducing the risk of Alzheimer's. If you really think cannabis is harmful the only information you ever got on cannabis is from the government and its capitalist sponsors.

People are constantly saying things like "I'm against drugs because drugs harm society" without giving any reasoning to support that position. Theyre parroting things they heard and never questioned.