The cannabis debate

[Mr. Tea]

Like most illicit things, it's nice once in a while, and ultimately harmful if overused.
Having the occasional smoke, like having a few drinks after work or wine with your dinner, is drug use. It becomes drug abuse when you're getting caned or drunk every day - or, for that matter, gobbling handfuls of prescription drugs just to get through the day.

 

[Freakaholic]

cannabis is a right old 20th century drug, it hasn't got the same history of legal/illegal as coke or opium. People used to drink in the 18th century rather than smoke it, which was unpredictable and mental making.

I think this could be a misnomer. Reading up on the history of Mary Jane, it seems in America, there were laws about it from the beginning:

"America's first marijuana law was enacted at Jamestown Colony, Virginia in 1619. It was a law "ordering" all farmers to grow Indian hempseed. There were several other "must grow" laws over the next 200 years (you could be jailed for not growing hemp during times of shortage in Virginia between 1763 and 1767), and during most of that time, hemp was legal tender (you could even pay your taxes with hemp -- try that today!) Hemp was such a critical crop for a number of purposes (including essential war requirements - rope, etc.) that the government went out of its way to encourage growth."

I think its been an important crop for a lot of history - just not well documented history.

http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/12/22/whyIsMarijuanaIllegal.html

 

[Mr. Tea]

There's a huge difference between industrial hemp fibre and actual cannabis, though.
Namely, the former has no (or next-to-no) THC in it, so I doubt very much the Jamestown colonists were off their tits the whole time.

 

[swears]

I think weed should be illegal, it turns people into boring hippy muppets. And the concept that any substance can "open your mind" is nonsense, acquiring knowledge that allows you to see the world from a different perspective does this, not fucking about with your brain chemistry.

 

[noel emits]

I think weed should be illegal, it turns people into boring hippy muppets. And the concept that any substance can "open your mind" is nonsense, acquiring knowledge that allows you to see the world from a different perspective does this, not fucking about with your brain chemistry.

I would argue with this but I can't be bothered. Mmmm Jaffa Cakes....

 

[old goriot]

I would argue with this but I can't be bothered. Mmmm Jaffa Cakes....

ditto

 

[Mr. Tea]

I would argue with this but I can't be bothered. Mmmm Jaffa Cakes....

I'm going to write an experience report comparing Jaffa cakes to chocolate digestives for Erowid.

 

[IdleRich]

"I think weed should be illegal, it turns people into boring hippy muppets. And the concept that any substance can "open your mind" is nonsense, acquiring knowledge that allows you to see the world from a different perspective does this, not fucking about with your brain chemistry."

Yeah but I reckon people have the right to be (what you consider to be) boring hippy muppets if they want.

 

[Mr. Tea]

Christ almighty, look at the shite some people come out with:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6484653.stm

Apparently the Daily Mail decided cannabis was to blame for "Two crack addicted teenagers punching to death a baby" - WTF???

Oh, and I've got to get me some of that "super-strength cannabis "so incredibly strong it can bring on the early signs of schizophrenia from a single puff"", not to mention this new street drug 'LDS'. For fuck's sake.

 

[mms]

I think this could be a misnomer. Reading up on the history of Mary Jane, it seems in America, there were laws about it from the beginning:

"America's first marijuana law was enacted at Jamestown Colony, Virginia in 1619. It was a law "ordering" all farmers to grow Indian hempseed. There were several other "must grow" laws over the next 200 years (you could be jailed for not growing hemp during times of shortage in Virginia between 1763 and 1767), and during most of that time, hemp was legal tender (you could even pay your taxes with hemp -- try that today!) Hemp was such a critical crop for a number of purposes (including essential war requirements - rope, etc.) that the government went out of its way to encourage growth."

I think its been an important crop for a lot of history - just not well documented history.

http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/12/22/whyIsMarijuanaIllegal.html

yeah i'm talking about using it as a drug, the drug with thc, the vital ingredient not as something for making rope clothes and paper, and i'm talking about how people in the 18th century used the drug, i don't think they smoked rope.

 

[zhao]

And I'm sure that there's better music to hypnotise people with than rot like the Killers or whatever's popular - wouldn't the Taj Mahal Travellers or Richie Hawtin or Jack Rose or Halfler Trio shut down your thinking a lot more and get you concentrated on whatever mind-numbing task you're actually doing? Works for me anyway.

Taj Mahal Travellers and others you mentioned to me would fit into the category of "music that is too good to be played on the radio". that is a different kind of hypnosis than the "productive" hypnosis of commercial radio, which is a hypnosis that directs your attention back to work/consumption, and does not lead to ideas about other modes of being, other ways to spend your time and energy. commercial radio is not entirely satifying, but provides a surface distraction, and does not allow deeper involvement for long periods of time: enjoy these assembly line pop songs for 15 minutes, NOW GET BACK TO WORK!

terrence agrees with me:

"the problem with canibis is that it promotes social values and attitudes which are unwelcome in capitalist, market based systems. it's that simple."

i do think it really is that simple. and the only plausible reason for it being prohibited.

 

[Mr. Tea]

Oh come on, has anyone ever really thrown off his uniform, told his boss to go to hell and marched out of the office/factory to FREEDOM AND HAPPINESS because of a song he heard? Sounds like something that would happen at the end of a rather sappy film.
I'm not trying to deny that music can have a huge amount of inspirational power, but I think it's a bit paranoid to suggest that music would banned simply for being too inspirational. Sure, music gets banned for various reasons, usually to do with having lyrics that are explicitly obscene or seen as promoting violence or crime, and while I tend to disagree with censorship in general, I can see why these laws exist. I listened to Beethoven's 9th today, as it happens, which must be just about the most inspirational piece of music I can think of, but I guess that's by-the-bye. To be honest I don't listen to radio at all, commercial or otherwise, but when I think of music that, as you say, makes me think about "other modes of being, other ways to spend my time and energy", it's generally music that's very personal to me, often stuff that most people would consider indulgent or unlistenable, so it's pretty unlikely ever to get airtime on 'pop' radio precisely because it's nowhere near pop-ular enough.

Edit: cannabis promotes sitting around on your arse listening to music, eating stodgy food, talking bollocks and having a laugh. All of which I'm massively in favour of, in moderation. But I think any serious revolutionary is probably better off keeping a clear head, to be honest.

 

[zhao]

when I think of music that, as you say, makes me think about "other modes of being, other ways to spend my time and energy", it's generally music that's very personal to me, often stuff that most people would consider indulgent or unlistenable, so it's pretty unlikely ever to get airtime on 'pop' radio precisely because it's nowhere near pop-ular enough.

and these musics are no where "pop-ular" enough precisely because of the reasons i stated.

when having these conversations there's often a misunderstanding in terms of... scale?

i don't mean that the censor board literally bans 45 minute drone-symphonies. i mean that the way of life this society promotes, and indeed, enforces, exclude other possibilities; and marginalizes artforms which have to do with, or inspires these possibilities.

Edit: cannabis promotes sitting around on your arse listening to music, eating stodgy food, talking bollocks and having a laugh. All of which I'm massively in favour of, in moderation. But I think any serious revolutionary is probably better off keeping a clear head, to be honest.

cannabis promotes total immersion in my art with an intensity sometimes not possible when sober, and makes everything else seem insignificant. when i get high i never eat. and stay up all night being creative.

i like that old saying from T.A.Z. - "serious but not sober"

 

[Dial]

"and sometimes i think REALLY great music is not played on the radio because it's too good, and would take people's minds away from the humdrum assembly line mental state. it's better to hypnotize people with surface distractions."

I used to think something along those lines but now I reckon the truth is much more mundane, most people just don't really like music.
The other day (well a few months ago) I went out with a load of people after work to a crappy bar in central London where they were blaring out the shittest commercial disco-house you've ever heard. There was nowhere to dance and it was too loud to talk but no-one (except me) seemed at all bothered by it. The same evening I went to a night some friends were putting on at the Spitz, they were in the backroom playing loads of acid-folk, turkish jazz etc at a far more sociable volume but people who came in seemed to be totally mystified and I overheard people saying "some arty shit" and other similar things.
I get the depressing feeling that even though no-one was actively enjoying the bar music most people simply do prefer that as some kind of safety blanket rather than hearing something out of the ordinary....

Can't say I see any inconsistency here.

 

[IdleRich]

"Can't say I see any inconsistency here."

Confucius is saying that there is a conspiracy (maybe not literal) to prevent people hearing good music, I think that people don't want to hear good music, that's a pretty big difference.

 

[gek-opel]

Large numbers of people simply aren't interested in music in the same way as the nerds around here, plain and simple. Whether it is "good" or not is another matter entirely... most people, especially once they have left their teenage years have zero interest in studying music, they don't want to put any effort in, and they don't particularly have the time or space to obsess upon it. So it fulfills a series of less involved roles (background music, a pleasant melody to hum etc) and naturally they spend less time tunnelling and exploring for product which isn't immediately apparent... these people aren't morally wrong, they simply lack any interest in music beyond pleasurable nursery rhyme/lifestyle padding... they largely lack proper justifications as to why they actually listen to the music that they do, and probably lack the sense that music fulfills any role beyond the merely entertaining.

 

[zhao]

people don't want to hear good music

because of conditioning and economic realities.

i have a hard time believing that "most people" inherently are unable to appreciate Eric Satie or Turkish jazz. but it's just a matter of avoiding things which take them out of the routine safety box mind set of proscribed realities.

it takes a certain mindset to exist in the 9-5 sleep-commute-work-leasure cycle, and anything which represents, hints at, or contains other world views, behavior patterns, outside of the world of the normalized productive citizen, is naturally a threat.

i think if you grab anyone, anyone in the world, who would not otherwise attend, and sit them down in the recent Hariprasad Chaurasia and Shivkumar Sharma concert in Singapore, and they would have a rewarding experience.

 

[Mr. Tea]

Well I listen to good music - music I consider to be good, not simply for having a catchy tune but because it really says something to me and moves me - and I can listen to it whenever I want, within reason, so I don't see any problem there. In fact, if I had to listen to it while at work I'd never get anything done because it would distract me too much; I like to give my full attention to music and it's hard to do much else that requires any brain when you're too busy singing, dancing and playing air guitar.

 

[Guybrush]

Here is a recent article relating to the subject. I don’t know if it adds anything new, but the figure is pretty illuminating:

The Toxicity of Recreational Drugs

 

[Mr. Tea]

Here is a recent article relating to the subject. I don’t know if it adds anything new, but the figure is pretty illuminating:

Interesting figures, but I'm afraid I don't think it really adds anything, since no-one here is stupid enough (I hope!) to claim that cannabis is a 'deadly' drug or that it's possible to overdose on it. When I expressed doubts over the really strong stuff I was talking about its long-term mental health effects, and let's not forget that you're still (presumably) smoking the stuff, which of course has its own set of health implications for the respiratory system.