Which Drugs are Drugs?
by Grugyn Silverbristle
 

We have all seen the experiments where a laboratory mouse, given the choice of cocaine or food pellets, will eat cocaine until it dies. What does this mean?

It means that if you take an animal, lock it up in a sterile cage with barely enough room to turn around, deprive it of environmental stimulus, meaningful activity, social intercourse or any hope of escape other than death, ... do this to the animal first and then offer it drugs: the mouse will intoxicate itself to extinction.

What I have not seen is a drug experiment with animals in the wild.

Why hasn't some researcher tried scattering drugs throughout the forest so that all the animals, in their free and unexploited natural state, can partake to their hearts' content. Then tell me what happens.

Nothing. I suggest the only sign of interest will be the police helicopters buzzing overhead.

This illustrates our current attitude towards research and drugs: false data, rigged experiments and wrong conclusions. It's all a big lie, perpetuated because it can be neatly packaged into a 15-second sound-byte and used as a smokescreen for political exploitation.

Suppose, instead of removing the drugs from our environment, suppose you removed the bad people: the slum-lords, the crooked professionals, the social climbers, the avaricious, the megalomaniacs, the cheats, the greedy et al, ... remove these people but leave the drugs. What would you expect?

Nothing. just good clean folk living good clean lives.

My point is this: drugs cannot make a good person bad or make a bad person good. Most drugs occur naturally in the environment, and no one has the right to play God, to cut down the Tree of Knowledge in order to prevent others from eating its fruit. You don't own nature. Where is the crime in herbal-medication? People have used natural drugs throughout history for a variety of reasons: medicine, stimulant, psychedelic, depressant, pain-killer and yes, people-killer too. Humanity has survived.

The real crimes are those being committed in the name of this War on Drugs. Is it not offensive to the dignity of man that you or anyone else should become our self-appointed keeper? Where will this attitude of paternalistic crap end? Today it's drugs, tomorrow tobacco and alcohol, next it will be meat and dairy fat. Some people will not be satisfied until they have us all locked up in sterile cages living on rabbit pellets.

Is it not a crime against nature to intentionally exterminate whole species? No one has ever died from marijuana. Aspirin is certainly more dangerous. Why not also wipe out poison-ivy, hemlock, milkweed and ragweed too? What else do you need to destroy in order to "protect people from themselves"? Virtually all known pain-killers are derived from the opium poppy, and up until 1919, you could walk down to your local apothecary and buy as much as you wanted. Now you can't even grow it in your back yard, so tell me: has the Harrison Act really done such great things for humanity?

The Narcotics Law has achieved one thing for sure: on the pretext that some natural drugs are too dangerous for people to handle, the government has confiscated these herbs and created a protected monopoly for the American Medical Association. The economic motive behind this is very easy to understand: money. Raw opium is 40% morphine. For a morphine-pump that will ease a terminal cancer-patient's excruciating pain, the AMA charges $500 per day, at least a 2,000 percent markup, all to administer a drug that would cost something like $25 per day in a free-market. The DEA effectively rations the amount of morphine that physicians have available to prescribe, meaning the drug is likely to be administered only during the last few hours of life, if at all. They will make you cry, first. You will wait, and suffer when your time comes. I hope you like aspirin. Inquire, I dare you. Another surprise they have in store for you is this: Medicaid and most private insurance plans will not cover the cost of a morphine-pump. It seems the "dangerous" drugs have been placed in those hands that shall intentionally cause us the greatest possible pain and abuse. They got you where it hurts. Do you understand? Dying is painful, and by denying us the right to relieve pain ourselves, by known means, the AMA is making sure that we will not dare to die outside of their care. When the time comes, they shall proceed to administer treatment according to your ability to pay. I wonder, how many of you readers, when the Angel is finally standing by your side, how many of you will cry, and beg the doctors to let you go? I heard of one 86 year-old woman, under "intensive-care" at a local hospital, who died 15 times!

Ironically, I can think of one family of drugs that should be controlled: antibiotics like penicillin and ampicillin. Unregulated use of these drugs can cause the greatest public harm because misuse results in strains of disease that are resistant to virtually all known treatments. I suspect that even controlled use of these drugs can result in the appearance of unusually infectious strains, a situation that, in time, threatens to make us all dependent on a supply of antibiotics for our very survival. Isn't it strange that while our government will pursue the War on Drugs overseas to the point of military intervention, it nevertheless allows American pharmaceutical companies to ship antibiotics to foreign countries in unlimited quantities, with the full knowledge that their use in those countries is over-the-counter and unrestricted? The widespread epidemics of cholera and typhus raging throughout South America are a direct result of this policy.

The War on Drugs is a war against the American people, indeed, against all the people of the world, an excuse for government and industry and the AMA to mandate themselves a global drug-cartel, a monopoly enforced by the U.S. Military. The AMA gets to control the pain-killers, a kind of privatized estate-tax, the pharmaceuticals get to addict us all to their antibiotics, and the government gets to confiscate our liberties under the Bill of Rights.

How much further do you need to look?

Have you noticed that every crime committed these days is caused by drugs? Thieves and robbers only steal to buy drugs, you know. That's what the media tells us. Obviously, these criminals no longer have any need for food, clothing or shelter. From what the media and politicians tell us, criminals don't even need or want money - for any reason other than to buy drugs. I suppose if I could carry a dime of cocaine on my person, next time I meet a mugger he will gladly take the coke and leave me my wallet.

Wake up!

Every time there's an accident, whether auto, train, boat or plane, have you noticed that it is always because of drugs? "Mandatory drug-testing!" resounds throughout the halls of Congress, "We have a right to safe travel!". That must be the Thirty-seventh Amendment to the Constitution. Obviously, only drugs will impair job-performance. If someone smoked marijuana two months ago, that makes him a threat to society today because it still shows up in blood tests, right? But if he should have the flu, or an earache makes him dizzy, or he had too much or too little to eat, or not enough sleep: these things do not impair performance, could never result in an accident, right?

Think about this. Remember the gadgets they put in a DWI-offender's car where he has to punch a sequence of buttons or the car won't start? That is a crude performance-test, and it catches not only alcohol, but other impairments as well. A computer-game can be made into a very effective impairment-test, custom-designed for the need at hand. It will pick up exhaustion and illness and indigestion as well as drug and alcohol abuse. Why not use these instead of drug tests? That would make travel safe.

No, these safety-mongers all cry for drug tests, even knowing that those are only about 10% effective, and very expensive besides. They want drug-testing, and nothing but drug-testing will make travel safe, right? Go to hell. Wise up. They want drug tests to invade your body, to establish the fact that they have the power to look anywhere they want to look, to probe for any kind of information you might inadvertently reveal in your urine, your blood or your DNA or in your sleep. They want to establish their power to control you totally. They want to deprive us of our Constitutional Rights, because these things get in the way.

They couldn't care less about your travel safety.

I swear, you people who cry for drug-testing should be shot for conspiracy, or at the very least deprived of your right-to-vote, on the grounds that you are obviously mentally impaired if you believe this spoon-fed bunk. Wake up or drop dead.

Why do doctors in nursing homes give their patients mood-altering chemicals? It makes them easier to handle. If the client is doped into oblivion, you can treat him like baggage instead of a human being. They know what works.

The same applies to the social outcasts in our culture. Leave them their drugs and they will be pacified, easier to handle and abuse. Take away their drugs and there will be more trouble, not less. Haven't you seen enough?

As Thomas Jefferson wrote in his letter to James Madison, "People who are willing to sacrifice a little bit of liberty for a little bit of security will lose both, and deserve neither."

Meanwhile, give the poor mouse a break and let him go free. We don't need that kind of experiment.

Prohibition: The So-Called War on Drugs Serendipity Home Page