On Moral Arguments Against Recreational Drug Use

Discussion of articles that appear in the magazine.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 5571
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

crafted a longer response but this machine ate it...

Post by henry quirk » Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:45 pm

...the following is what I could salvage. Will try for the rest later.


"I thought you said he can't?"

Not under my scheme, no. But here in the U.S., and presumably where you are, there are tons of taxpayer-funded programs that make it possible for Crackhead Joe to smoke crack all day and night and never work and still eat, have a roof over his head, and get adequate medical treatment. What we don't have in the U.S. is a unifying system that streamlines this and reduces costs. Also: there's no real oversight for the dozens of programs that Joe can take advantage of.

In many respects, the U.S. has a socialized health care system (that well predates the ACA), it's just disorganized. Still waitin' on the formation of a politburo to sort it out.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: On Moral Arguments Against Recreational Drug Use

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Sat Apr 09, 2016 11:38 am

Impenitent wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:Is anyone here going to post to defend the continued prohibition of so-called illegal drugs?
If so, on what grounds?
DUI, taxing, universal health care

-Imp
How?

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re:

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Sat Apr 09, 2016 11:42 am

henry quirk wrote:Joe is a crackhead.

I got no problem with Joe smokin' crack.

I'm not gonna hang with Joe, not gonna have him over for dinner, will never employ him, and will not pay for his groceries or his doctor visits.

If Joe gets this (that he's on his own) then his crack smokin' is not my concern.

If, however, Joe thinks I'm gonna subsidize his appetite or living, well, Joe's in for a surprise.

Now lots of bleeding hearts, with good intentions, and less than sharp thinking, are all about subsidizing Joe. Well and fine, I say. How any person discharges his or her resources in the world is also not my concern.

Just stay the hell away from my wallet.

To sum it up...

Joe can smoke himself into perdition for all I care. I, myself, won't be lending him a hand up or out.

And: as any one likes, they can put themselves in the poor house helpin' Joe. I, myself, won't be sleepin' in the cot next to them.
Since you think you can only approach any subject with self interest, have you asked how much the proscription of drugs is costing you, in police, crime, prisons, courts?

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 5571
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk » Mon Apr 11, 2016 3:03 pm

"Since you think you can only approach any subject with self interest"

Every one is self-interested and any one who claims otherwise is a friggin' liar (or terminally stupid).

#

"have you asked how much the proscription of drugs is costing you, in police, crime, prisons, courts?"

Yeah, go back and read my posts in this thread and you'll see I addressed this.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re:

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Mon Apr 11, 2016 6:10 pm

henry quirk wrote:"Since you think you can only approach any subject with self interest"

Every one is self-interested and any one who claims otherwise is a friggin' liar (or terminally stupid).
.
This is how they fuck you! Make you think that you are better alone; you ain't. Divide and rule is the oldest trick in the book. The weak have to find common ground. The self interest of the poor is vested in the health of the nation and the economy; and against the self interest of the rich.

Unions working together pitching in to transform labour laws; living wages; and human rights. This has transformed the West from near feudalism to the model of social democracy on the 20thC. Providing decent conditions for ordinary people has created the demand that has allowed the economy to grow. Socialism finally made capitalism work for all.

This shit is fast going backwards.

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 5571
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk » Mon Apr 11, 2016 6:48 pm

"The weak have to find common ground."

Of course they do!

You think self-interest negates cooperation?

Shit, it practically enforces it!

#

"Unions working together"

No, individuals with common agendas working together, each recognizing his or her self-interest is served through a cooperative effort. Never do these individuals assume the role of ants, becoming mere parts in a greater entity. Always do each have themselves in mind.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re:

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Mon Apr 11, 2016 6:52 pm

henry quirk wrote:"The weak have to find common ground."

Of course they do!

You think self-interest negates cooperation?

Shit, it practically enforces it!

#

"Unions working together"

No, individuals with common agendas working together, each recognizing his or her self-interest is served through a cooperative effort. Never do these individuals assume the role of ants, becoming mere parts in a greater entity. Always do each have themselves in mind.
I'm talking about the history of your own country.
That's how 'individuals' organised - UNIONS.
You are brainwashed.

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 5571
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk » Mon Apr 11, 2016 7:00 pm

I know what and who you're talkin' about.

Not a single member of any union, past or present, will side with you on this. Each one sees him- or her-self as a person working with other persons, to satisfy common goals. Not a one subscribes to your anthill philosophy...well, mebbe some do, but they're stupid.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re:

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Mon Apr 11, 2016 7:09 pm

henry quirk wrote:I know what and who you're talkin' about.

Not a single member of any union, past or present, will side with you on this. Each one sees him- or her-self as a person working with other persons, to satisfy common goals. Not a one subscribes to your anthill philosophy...well, mebbe some do, but they're stupid.
You ain't gonna make it. You have no power. All you are capable of doing is sitting down and trying to avoid being buggered by your won stupidity.

I suppose you could go and get a gun; wear a "Don't tread on Me" baseball hat and try to kill the government all by yourself?
Let me know when you are gonna try, I'll take the pictures.

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 5571
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: On Moral Arguments Against Recreational Drug Use

Post by henry quirk » Mon Apr 11, 2016 7:13 pm

"You have no power"

Oh, I go where I like, do as I like, work as I like.

I may not have the ear of the powerful, may not be among their ranks, but I do okay.

What about you? Working that nine to five? Mebbe drawing unemployment or whatever passes for welfare over there? You, dependent: explains a lot.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: On Moral Arguments Against Recreational Drug Use

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Mon Apr 11, 2016 11:52 pm

henry quirk wrote:"You have no power"

Oh, I go where I like, do as I like, work as I like.

I may not have the ear of the powerful, may not be among their ranks, but I do okay.

What about you? Working that nine to five? Mebbe drawing unemployment or whatever passes for welfare over there? You, dependent: explains a lot.
You are on your own, that's why you are powerless.
And you owe what you have to people that got together.
How the hell do you think the US got invented?
How do you think ordinary people all over the western world got universal suffrage, education, emancipation?
I'll tell you why - by not being a little p**** like you.

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: On Moral Arguments Against Recreational Drug Use

Post by Obvious Leo » Tue Apr 12, 2016 2:32 am

Hobbes' Choice wrote:And you owe what you have to people that got together.
This could indeed be said for how homo sapiens clawed his way to the top of the tree of sentience on planet earth in the first place. Simply hitting each other over the head with heavy objects would not be the sort of winning strategy which could have given rise to human civilisation.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: On Moral Arguments Against Recreational Drug Use

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Tue Apr 12, 2016 10:09 am

Obvious Leo wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:And you owe what you have to people that got together.
This could indeed be said for how homo sapiens clawed his way to the top of the tree of sentience on planet earth in the first place. Simply hitting each other over the head with heavy objects would not be the sort of winning strategy which could have given rise to human civilisation.
Indeed. Humans are more characterised by their co-operation than their competition. Having spent some time studying anthropology there are numerous examples that can be hard to understand for the atomistic, self interested society that the elites seemed to want to impose on us - to their own advantage (divide and rule). Imagine Australia's first people acting only for self interest, or the San of the Kalahari, or any number of New Guinea, South American (ad infinitem) tribes. In societies that do not even have the technologies of power in impose and compel people to act for the group, the members act for the group. And most often our ancestral societies are all acephalic or multicephalic, or with horizontal heirarchies. It has only been in the last 10k years in so-called "civilisation" that compulsion, hierarchies of power, religion, and slavery have been employed to keep "unnaturally" large groups together, with the resultant promotion of psychopaths to the top of the tree.

It seems to me that were you to replace the wartime population of England in the 1940s with the same number of today's people, the Germans would not have stopped at the English Channel and walked straight in. The Germans figured out how to act in favour of Germany, just as the UK had united against them in favour of the British Empire.

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: On Moral Arguments Against Recreational Drug Use

Post by Obvious Leo » Tue Apr 12, 2016 10:32 am

Hobbes' Choice wrote: Imagine Australia's first people acting only for self interest,
Quite the reverse. Although occasional hostility was not unheard of in our indigenous people they knew no such thing as warfare and different tribal groups were known to work co-operatively for their mutual benefit more often than not. In evolutionary anthropology it is regarded as the mainstream orthodoxy that it was this ability to NOT kick the shit out of each other at every opportunity which eventually led to human civilisation as we know it today. No doubt our civilisation will duly collapse under its own greed if we fail to heed this important lesson.

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: On Moral Arguments Against Recreational Drug Use

Post by Greta » Tue Apr 12, 2016 10:54 am

I think we've seen the results of drug prohibition. There's two possible approaches. The authoritarian method is highly effective so, in a number of Asian nations the stance is basically "If you take drugs we will kill you". Then there is the western approach where governments attempt to temper the atrocities they cause, and the result is a huge buildup of organised crime.

So we have three choices:

1) To accept living under authoritarianism or a dictatorship with massive tax dollars spent on enforcement, incarceration and executions.

2) To accept pointless destruction of young lives in prison, fostering of organised crime, with huge tax dollars spent on enforcement, conviction, incarceration and treatment of addicts.

3) To regulate most recreational drugs, educate the populace in safety and efficacy, and collect taxes to handle the costs of education, administration and treatment of addicts.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests