BananaForeskin wrote:I like Huxley a hell of a lot better than Leary, in that I actually do like him, although as others have point out, elitism ain't always that great. Though I like the "few" stance the better than the "all" stance in this case.
Even thought the war on drugs totally sucks, I think it does a damn fine job of selecting psychedelics users. Salvia videos or no, a large number of people who take psychedelics have some rough education on the subject beforehand and seek it out positively. One must educate oneself and go to lengths to seek out the experience in most cases. A finer selection process than one could expect from a post-prohibition established order. Comparatively few peoples, it seems, do it "just for the hell of it" with little preparation than if psychedelics could be purchased at the corner drugstore once again.
You have a point there. But i think the harm prohibition does to society is much greater in the end.
The point is that i do not believe that prohibition is an isolated glitch in our judicial systems, but that it is part of something bigger. I believe that it is part of how society looks at 'alternative' lifestyle's and experiences and certain philosophical or spiritual angles of looking at life, the world and society.
If society would be a bit more liberal and a bit more open to spirituality, then i don't think psychedelic's would be illegal at all and we probably wouldn't even be having this discussion, because society would also be more open in discussing all kinds of related issues, so people would probably know themselves far better as well.
In a truly open society, psychedelic's could never stay illegal.
People are afraid of hippies, because they think that 'peace and love' aren't rational concepts.
That's the kind of society we're living in.
They'd forbid meditating if they could.