spice can certainly help people with creativity and greater issues
but seriously its the spirit molecule not the political molecule

i dont live in US so this issue is hardly my concern ,
also i have never voted for i believe in no shit politicans
i will only vote when i am running for the President , ofcoure only the president in my country does not have much power so i will be running for prime minister

also just to point it out democracy is the most inefficeient form of government , as too many cooks spoil the broth

monarchy/dictatorship is the most efficient
communisum is less efficient
and democracy sucks
this is only the case with efficiency , no doubt democracy offers more freedom and choice than any other system of government we have going on now

So if democracy = more freedom and choice, but democracy sucks, then more freedom and choice sucks?

I'll take my freedom.

Democracy, LOL.. As if this existed already.....

The fake democracies existing only stand because they are taking advantage of countries where this fake system doesnt exist, sucking up the resources, benefitting from dictatorships elsewhere, selling weapons to them, manufacturing products in countries where human rights dont exist because its cheaper, testing dangerous pharmaceuticals in poor countries and paying governments to shut up about nasty consequences, stealing natural resources, etc. The so-called democracies couldnt survive without this parasitic form of relationship.

Not to mention the supposed representative democracy isnt representative at all. The politicians dont represent people, as democracy supposedly is, they represent corporations and big lobbies. Voting is just a pseudo choice you have. And this isnt just by chance, its in how the system is designed, made to perpetuate itself. "You are free to do as we tell you".

Obviously, from your post, I see that DMT (have you done aya and broken through to the spirit world?) has not helped your political views (the idea of dictatorship as the "most efficient form of government" is so off-base I don't even want to comment).

My question is, why exactly is the spirit molecule not politically charged? There is one message from the spirit molecule that I think most of us can agree on (and which was widely understood in the 60s), which is that We Are One. If we are one, then leftist politics make more sense than rightist politics, no? I mean there have to be some profound political implications of the realization that we are not just individual egos, and that our ultimate destiny is all tied together.

Most people think that psychedelics helped to make the 60s such a revolutionary era in the USA. Is that a mistaken view?

No, just a very naïve and idealistic one. These agents of altered consciousness have some novel aspects, but political
Influence doesn't seem like one of them. Doesn't matter either way, the movement of the 60s left many jaded with addiction
And selfishness. Its just part of human nature, you can't expect everyone to be as idealistic as you.

dictatorship or monarchy has been statistically found to be superior in efficiency compared to democracy , as you really don't have to pay the workers anything ! you can make any rule you want and people have to follow , also germany made 300% progress under hitler , statistically speaking , just numbers
also china being a communistic country today is developing at a far faster rate that any other , i might be an idiot but watching the news helps with shit like this
the function of a government is to govern , obviously an absolute government can govern better than a government which is not absolute
(pls note i don't support monarchy or dictatorship )

also i have yet not done aya and broken into the spiritual world i guess yet , also you are right smoking dmt has not changed my political views for i don't have any political views , politics does not matter and really does not affect me atall ,
whether MJ becomes legal or not - i will still smoke
whether mhrb is outlawed or not i will still extract
infact the truth is politicans can do whatever they want and make whatever laws , i don't give a damn , they will never be able to stop me from doing anything in my life , i am not relying on politicans to save my life , this planet or anything ,they will be lucky if they can save themselves i am totally free to do as i wish

I AM A BEING ON THE JOURNEY TO MY DEATH , WHO GIVES A FF?? ABOUT POLITICANS , I AM GOING TO DIE GOD DAMN IT , I AM GOING TO DO WHATEVER I WANT AND LET POLITICANS DO WHAT THEY WANT , anyone who is seriously bothered about politics , my advice to you is get more bothered , get as bothered as you can and if you reach your maximum botheration point , try to still bother yourself a little more , keep on doing it while i roll my spliff and finish smoking it , and yes where are the politicans , why cant they stop me from smoking the spliff , oh yes i forgot i must be above everything

yes we are all one and not a bunch of crappy individual egos , we all know that , then why are we living in such misery and separation ?
the answer is we love our indviduality as much as we love our one-ness

to answer your question , why is the molecule not politically charged ?
the molecule has a function like everything else in the universe , the molecules function might be to open the gates of creativity or the doors of dreams or who knows what ?

who knows the molecule might be very politically charged , and infact the aliens might be planning to overthrow obama's administration , is this your message ???? or wait the molecule might be planning a political move to overthrow all the politicians out the window and get us to the whitehouse this seems promising
the molecule might not even have any agenda or might be just a be a molecule

what do you think is the molecule's purpose ????? do you think the molecule has a political agenda????
if so then great , probably the molecule can become the president , i am sure i will vote for the molecule , looking forward to it

This thread took an interesting turn

Source?

Progress as measured in.... ?

lagers

Adolf Hitler only managed to build up Germany militarily and in terms of infrastructure by using loans provided by the banks of the good old US of A (amongst other nations).

The whole liberal-radical divide misses the point; the palace stays the same, only the guards ever change.Those who pin their hopes on politics to effect any substantial change will have them dashed again and again.Those at the bottom of the pile that is society usually stay there.

"Gathered debris on a dismal shore
Washed up on a social tide;
Ain't got nowhere to run to
Ain't got nowhere to hide.
This is there hell
Sprayed on the wall
Right there in pin-prick red;
There must be some way out of this place
And thats six feet down and dead"

the whole topic itself is very miserable , i apologise for adding more to the misery ,
also if i have offended any member unintentionaly with my post pls forgive , that is not my intention

my source for the 300 % statement is the shitty books i read , however i'll still try to provide some information ,,,

the hitler story has two parts - the part of progress and part of demise ,

lets consider the part of progress of germany first

World War I and the subsequent Treaty of Versailles with its severe reparations imposed on Germany led to a decade of economic woes, including hyperinflation in the mid 1920s. Following the Wall Street Crash of 1929, the German economy, like many other western nations, suffered the effects of the Great Depression with unemployment soaring to unprecedented heights (Official figures say 6 million, but historians now believe the true figure was around 11 million). Although Hitler did not see the economy as a top priority, he did see its importance in his consolidation of power and used it to his advantage. When he became Chancellor in 1933 new efforts were introduced to improve Germany's economy, introducing autarky - discouraging most trade with other nations and emphasizing economic self-sufficiency - and a radical extension of the Autobahn system founded in the late years of the Weimar republic.[1]

This system had also been attempted in America with little success. In Nazi Germany, however, it appears the system was more successful. By 1938 unemployment was practically extinct and Germany even lacked enough workers to fill the available jobs

i guess this is the part where 300% mark must have been reached ,

then the demise of germany

However this dramatic fall in unemployment levels was not all due to the creation of new jobs. Many Jews and women were forced out of their jobs and this made way for unemployed German men to take their place. However the women and Jews who had lost their jobs were not counted on the unemployment register. The Nazis considered Jews an inferior race and believed that women should stay at home so neither of these groups contributed to unemployment statistics. Furthermore, the spending rate of Hitler was far greater than the growth of the economy. In 1934 Hjalmar Schacht, the Reich Minister of Economics, introduced the Mefo bills, allowing Hitler to spend money on rearming without giving the big businesses money, therefore gradually getting Germany into more and more debt. Between 1933 and 1939, the total revenue was 62 billion marks whereas expenditure (at times made up to 60 % by rearmament costs) exceeded 101 billion, thus creating a huge deficit and national debt (reaching 38 billion mark in 1939) coinciding with the Kristallnacht and intensified persecutions of Jews and the break-out of the war

source - http://en.wikipedia.org/.../Economy_of_Nazi_Germany

since germany lost the war and basically was worst after WW2 ,
so efficiency of monarchy or dictatorship cannot be judged on germany's example atall in the first place ,
we have to think about other nations with similar ideas , UK accumulated so much wealth a few 100 years back or so , france was quite successful as a monarch nation few 100 years back aswell they had properties in all over the world infact , they owned america aswell , driving the natives away , since hitlers germany belongs to the past so i discuss the past of UK and France , however china is a good example for these days as a nation with very severe policies

thus the 300% does not hold true if the leader of a successful economy decides to go on war whether it old germany , or modern USA , war will kill all progress none the less , whether dictatorship or democracy

IF WAR IS THE RESULT OF DICTATORSHIP AND DEMOCRACY ASWELL , WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE
IF FREEDOM IS GOING TO BE SUPRESSED ANYWAYS , WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE
IF PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE ANIMALS AND KILL EACH OTHER OVER NOTHING , WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE

PLEASE NOTE UNDER ADOLF HITLERS RULE FREEDOM OF PRESS WAS BANNED AND SAME THING HAS HAPPENED TO WIKILEAKS , ARE WE REALLY LIVING IN A DEMOCRACY ?

i apologise once more for adding misery to the already miserale topic ,
this is my last post on this particular topic as i would rather see some other members add to this topic , since i have no interest in politics and it takes a lot of energy to write and discuss things that seem uninteresting to me
also now i understand --- yes yes DMT might be able to convert republicans to liberals/radicals

yup.
and I may be able to fly if I flap my arms hard enough; I may also physically remove a random woman's bra and shirt with my mind. you can too.

thanks, DMT.

Numbers of Jews.

Although this is falling off topic I do want to point out that if you kill an entire race of people in any country then fill the jobs they had with the unemployed... unemployment will go down. That's not to mention taking the jobs from all the women and giving them to the unemployed men AND not counting the women into unemployment... But how is that considered 300% PROGRESS?

?

Everyone I've met who has gotten the message that we are one seems to be very leftist/communitarian. Online is a different story. But I am entirely unconvinced that the plant teachers are apolitical.

The movement of the 60s changed the world for the better. If not for the 60s and 70s, we would still have Jim Crow and overt repression of gays and women, and other bad stuff I can't think of now. Some of that, I think, was a result of people tuning in to the universal consciousness. Perhaps some people got addicted to LSD, but I think that was a small fraction of those who tried it. If you're talking about addiction to non-psychedelics, then that's not even on topic, if you ask me, because I don't think psychedelics lead to street drug addictions. Perhaps many were left jaded with the failure of the movement, but that is not something you can hold against the movement or its ideals. We must try to do the right thing, even if the chances of success are slight.

Selfishness is not a part of human nature any more than generosity. I've been around kids, and even helped raise one. I've seen them be selfish and generous with the same person in the same timeframe. So I think it is what we learn through our culture that defines us, not so much our nature/instincts. If we are all just doomed to selfishness, how do you explain the Zapatistas and other such anarchocommunist groups in the world that function well?

Ok, so you are on a journey to death. That journey is colloquially known as "life." I assume you know (or maybe you don't yet) that you chose to live this life. Why did you choose to come here? Just to light up your spliff all day? I doubt it.

For someone who loves dictatorship, you are quite an anarchist in your lifestyle. But that anarchy is only temporary, because it is quite possible that you could end up in jail for disobeying the law. As Ralph Nader likes to say, "If you don't turn on to politics, politics will turn on you!" You might say you don't mind going to jail and never lighting up another spliff... but I'd say you're probably lying. So maybe instead of assuming that politicians will do whatever they want, you should realize that they actually do whatever we force them to, and we can force them to end the drug war (among other things) if we organize.

You say that we are all one, but yet we love our individuality--this makes no sense to me. Personally, I hate my so-called individuality. This culture instills in us the idea that it is great to be an individual, but I have not bought that, and furthermore, having been shown that we are all one, I realize that our goal here on Earth is to eliminate, to the greatest extent possible, our fake individuality. We are kind of like a person with Multiple Personality Disorder. Each part of our brain is its own person and says that it wishes to remain its own person. But "we" wish to be one united consciousness.

what culture is that? certainly not american culture, where most people don't want to appear different or "weird".
I have no desire to be a part of groupthink, which is what a so-called "united consciousness" is; f all that.
if you really think psychs have the power to change humanity to some utopian ideal, all i can tell you is wake up, because you're dreaming up something that will never happen.

I definitely embrace my individuality, because:

individuals are smart, people are stupid.

Benzyme, I assume you have broken thru to the united consciousness, since you've been here so long. What makes you so resistent to that message? You must love it while you are over there--yet here you don't remember loving it? It is not I who needs to wake up, it is you.

As far as individuals being smart--I disagree. No individual is all that smart compared to the collective intelligence. Unfortunately, we are unable to operate via the collective intelligence most of the time, because we cling to our individuality.

no.

the day I forfeit my own identity and mind to a group, slit my throat.
I'm not a mindless drone or gang member.
I'm awake.