Saturday, June 21, 2014

Pope Francis says he opposes making recreational drugs legal


Well he just antagonized the left-libertarians with this one.
Are you stoned? 
That's the message Pope Francis seemed to be sending lawmakers Friday, saying the growing worldwide trend toward legalizing recreational drugs is a very, very bad idea. 
"Drug addiction is an evil, and with evil there can be no yielding or compromise," he told participants at the International Drug Enforcement Conference in Rome.
Left libertarians are often advocates of such "recreational" drug use that Francis takes aim at here as much as you see the right libertarians get all excited about metals like gold and guns.


7 comments:

Septeus7 said...

The Pope once again opposes the Empire with this strong statement against the Free Trade Opium pushers.

While the "War on Drugs" is a waste of time and resources we must not forget the use of drugs by the Empire especially opium throughout history as a means of political manipulation and attacking populations.

The Empire pushes drugs to destroy the population's internal motivation to protect their nation from Imperial dominance via Free Trade but if the Empire can get enough people drugged up then they can't think clearly enough to fight back.

Today, abusing modern prescription is just as bad or worse than the traditionally illegal "recreational" drugs so the issue is complicated by the factor the Empire's Big Pharma Cartel.

We must understate the real issue is the mass drugging of population by the Libertarian Imperialists who wish to rob people of the sovereignty of their minds in the name of consumer markets while babbling about individual freedom.

Addicts and Drug dependent minds aren't free and libertarians seem unable to understanding that the environment in which the mind operates determines whether or not it can function properly toward rational decisions.

The idea of individualistic rationality is nonsense in terms of biology. Libertarianism is a great threat to free minds everywhere.

Matt Franko said...

wow good points Septeus...

didnt really think of it this way as far as the "free trade" angle...

Any thoughts on whether for the left it is the pharma which pushes them towards libertarianism OR if it is the libertarianism which pushes them towards the pharma?

Same for the right with all the metals, ie is one causal?

Or perhaps these things are like "coincident indicators" in humans?

Where you always see some sort of "material" (non-human priority) manifestation of some sort in the behavior of a libertarian... pharma, metals, "mammon", etc.. anything but the welfare of their fellow man...

rsp,

Septeus7 said...

Interesting questions Matt. In the left there is an anti-authoritian tendency aimed toward the psychological need to appear as a "rebel" against the system.

Leftism is aimed at "permanent revolution" and thus the psychology of the "outsider" is required for validation among alienated peers.

So if an "Authority" aims to restrict substances that one can ingest and all societies do this either due to scarcity or social necessity, the naive leftist believes that indulgence in said taboos to give them the status of being a revolutionary and follow outsider.

In reality, they are merely acting like teenage idiots. Organized and Disciplined opposition is what is threatening to establishment power which why revolution always come from the middle class never the underclass.

Think of the most recent effective revolutionaries in our society. The Gays. They are well educated and middle/upper class. They hired the best PR firms and recruited talented artists to tell their side of the story and rather than being casting themselves as "outsiders" they appealed to the commonality in the human experience through need for love and attachment.


I believe the issue of "right" or "left" is a wrong category.

On the surface, Tom Hickey here is a "leftist" and you tend toward the "right" but we all find ourselves united by a deeper truth.

Roger Erickson, I believe has the best big picture view. The issue is adaptive rate. Civilizations are destroyed when the Elite in the society manipulate the Authorities based on ideas that below the necessary rate of physically and mental adaptivity require for the level increasing complexity.

The problem is that the left don't understand is that authority and hierarchy that aren't the problem but rigidity of their psychology in their thinking is
what creates that the problem.

The right are also rigid as they feel threatened by the necessity social evolution and thus attack everything that isn't part of a romantic version of the founding myth of the culture hence the attachment toward brutal relics like gold coinage.

To win against the Drug cultures we have to look at the economy that shapes the psychology of the users. One of the reasons, I believe in the JG is because it would probably be the best anti-drug program we could ever have if done right.

Clonal said...

Septeus7, The role of elements in the Federal Government in producing the "drug problem" in the first place cannot be underplayed. LSD came out of the CIA. See project MK Ultra.

See also the effects of the CIA cocaine trafficking - GARY WEBB AND THE LIMITS OF VINDICATION

Matt Franko said...

Interesting about the gays Septeus to your point they have actually made some significant in-roads into "the church" (metonym alert!) which has traditionally rejected these people (granted some sects still are very antagonist against gays...) and have even achieved leadership positions in "the church" which is about as "mainstream" as you can get...

rsp,

Matt Franko said...

"Elite in the society manipulate the Authorities"

Septeus, I dont think you have the wording here quite correct, they dont "manipulate the authorities" they obtain "power" which is "ability"...

So the fight is over "power" (ability), ie they yes "become able", they do obtain "power", but this has nothing to do with 'authority', and true "authority" is completely missing from the scene... and it is chaos, etc...

rsp,

The Rombach Report said...

So, should we go back to alcohol prohibition again as well?