Slashdot Mirror

Bush criticizes the Clinton-Gore administration:

Two of the Administration's first actions were to cut the Drug Czar's office by over 80% and to appoint a Surgeon General who spoke openly about drug legalization.

An act which should be lauded. There are some good arguments for legalization of drugs and other consensual crimes. See Peter McWilliam's book (the text of which is online) Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in Our Free Country".

Just brilliant Mr. Browne. Only one question: Then why the heck are you in politics?

If you look into the Libertarian Party, you'll see that its history is full of people who run for an office, get elected, and then either shut down that office, or greatly reduce its size and tax intake. The other classic thing is to find one Libertarian on a city council, dissenting on every tax increase.

Mr. Browne doesn't even take the gov't funds he's "entitled" to in order to fund his campaign. He's very clear that he is in politics to restore the Constitution of the United States of America, which provides for a small Federal government with very limited powers. It does not grant the Federal gov't the power to create agencies like the IRS, the ATF, the DEA, and the INS. He just said on this very Slashdot page that the first thing he will do as President would be to free political prisoners. I mean, the man is fighting for freedom. Before you snicker at that, please take some time to answer these questions for yourself (use the Internet ... it will be a wild, and educational ride):

• How many wars has the US gov't fought in the last ten years? (Declared or undeclared.)
• How many people has the US gov't killed, both domestically and abroad, in the last decade? How many were civilians?

I have to pause here to say RIP, my friend, Peter McWilliams. Read Ain't Nobody's Business if You Do (free online, or also available at your bookstore), and think about the fact that its author died because the gov't stood between him and his doctor.

• How many political prisoners has the US gov't taken in the last decade while the prison population doubled? (If Harry Browne would free them and Al Gore wouldn't, they are political prisoners. Amnesty International considers them so.)
• How much property has the US gov't seized without due process in the past decade? In how many of those cases were criminal charges made?

This shit is enlightening, and painful, and shocking. It demands action. It's hard to open your eyes (red pill or blue pill, etc), but you have to sometime. If you're a White American, you are standing idly by while the gov't harasses, imprisons, and kills Black and Hispanic Americans for political points every day. They are doing this. It is a fact. People are dying. Families are being destroyed wholesale. Try and get used to it and then decide what you are going to do about it, if anything.

This is the perfect election to vote Libertarian. George W. Bush and Al Gore are such interchangeable bozos, it just doesn't make a difference if you "waste your vote" and we get one instead of the other. What counts is to send a message of protest, to show that there can be political change in the US, so that the 2004 election campaigns will be about real issues. Harry Browne is the candidate for President for America's third largest political party, and he said right here on Slashdot that he had a question that he'd really like to ask Al Gore and George Bush. He has not had the opportunity. A substantial Libertarian vote this November might lead to Mr. Browne or his successor being involved in the 2004 Presidential debates. By then, the media may have adjusted for all of its current infotainment leanings and we may have more actual journalism (why did David Letterman ask G.W. Bush the toughest questions he's faced so far?). You can make your vote actually count this November by voting Libertarian.

No, he's completely right. The original drug laws passed in the USA were racist. It's hardly a canard.

Opium laws were originally directed at Chinese labourers. They prohibited smoking opium, which the Chinese preferred, but left perfectly legal the various opium potions and concoctions that white people enjoyed. It's similar to the situation with crack and cocaine now.

Marijuana laws were directed at Mexican immigrants and, later, black musicians. The spanish word "marijuana" became widespread then through the fearmongering of the antidrug politicians of the day. Many legislators didn't even know that the demon-weed marijuana smoked by those damn wetbacks was the same useful hemp plant grown by Americans for centuries.

Look up the facts, they're freely available from any search prompt. You can start with this chapter of Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do, by the late Peter McWilliams. He recently died because a federal court prohibited him from using medical marijuana, but that's a story for another day.

Trees are renewable, but you can grow three hemp crops in one season in a good climate (i.e., cotton country).

It is true the Heart (along with Du Pont) killed the hemp industry over its effectiveness: when they began their campain, machines for the cheap creation of hemp paper had just been invented. It's not a coincidence. You should read Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do. Here's the link to the relevant chapter: How and Why Drugs Became Illegal

Trees are renewable, but you can grow three hemp crops in one season in a good climate (i.e., cotton country).

It is true the Heart (along with Du Pont) killed the hemp industry over its effectiveness: when they began their campain, machines for the cheap creation of hemp paper had just been invented. It's not a coincidence. You should read Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do. Here's the link to the relevant chapter: How and Why Drugs Became Illegal

Ah but there's an important distinction to be made - objectivists would probably say that there is only one true way when reason is being used, while libertarians say that intelligent people can differ, but they're not necessarily using reason. For example, libertarians support drug legalization (or at least decriminilization) just like most of us, but I don't think that they'd say that an individual's decision to use drugs is based out of pure reason per se. Libertarians would support freedom of religion staunchly, where religion has little to do with reason, etc.

The reason for this dichotomy is that libertarianism is all about one thing: freedom. Libertarians support drug legalization because drug criminalization hurts freedom. It is, at its core, paternalistic like manditory seatbelt laws (you can't hurt anyone *else* because you don't wear *your* seatbelt). And its secondary effects are devistating to liberty: random drug tests and stops, assest foriture laws, and worst of all, selective enforcement (hmmm...I wonder if more blacks are in jail for drug use because more blacks use drugs, or because cops are racist?)

In this way, libertarians are sort of like RMS: software/people should be free because it's right, not because it's practical. You can even draw analogies to the "open source" libertarians -- they champion the economic benifits of freedom. Others are more purist and simply believe freedom is a reason in and of itself.

An aside: I love the "just like most of us" part of your reply. I hope it's true -- the drug war has to be the greatest crime against freedom in America in the last 100 years. We have one of the largest prision populations in the world, something like 1/3 of black males can't vote because they have felony drug convictions, the 4th amendment (no unnecessary search and seizures) is being trapled on. If you're interested in this, check out Peter McWilliam's book Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do (which is not actually libertarian), and read what happened to him because he published it: forahero.com, "Spotlight on Peter McWilliams"

For a very sane and refreshing look at the legality of drug use and other consensual crimes check out
Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do; The Absurdity Of Consensual Crimes In Our Free Country by Peter McWilliams

Damnit, if i'm not hurting anyone else besides myself, you shouldn't be able to throw me in jail.

For a very sane and refreshing look at the legality of drug use and other consensual crimes check out
Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do; The Absurdity Of Consensual Crimes In Our Free Country by Peter McWilliams

Damnit, if i'm not hurting anyone else besides myself, you shouldn't be able to throw me in jail.

Joe Sixpack's last thought is what harm this could do. Everyone is so obsessed with "giving the rights back to the people," and the absurd notion of "Family Values" (Check this out to see what I mean about "absurd") that they don't realize what this could do to the Net and the future of it. They just want their politicians to be nice, white, all-American (whatever that means) farm boys who just "wanna do good fer you and me". This bill means as much to them as DMCA did.

We can't ignore the fact that this is probably going to pass. It's already passed both houses, and our time to speak has come and gone. We're going to sit back, bitch about it, and watch as the Net gets changed and formed and mutilated by whoever has the 'power'.

Sometimes you wonder, which is better: To care and watch them do it anyway, or to not care and watch them do it anyway.

Obviously, our "child" is getting out of hand, and it's time to take him out behind the woodshed for a good thrashing. ;-)

Really, in a democracy, the government is neither parent nor child... it is a tool. Like most tools, it can be damn useful if used properly -- and damn dangerous if used poorly...

When all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail!

How true. And we've been using government for all sorts of goofy applications that the Founding Fathers never intended, like sending people to jail for activities that harm no one (except maybe the "user"). We see something we don't like, and we say, "There oughta be a law!" ...and all too often, we get what we ask for.

I won't belabor the anti-DrugWar message... it's covered too well in other posts/sites/etc.. (Links below) But, it's time we woke up and took control of our lives and livelihoods back from this errant, power-addicted, Frankenstein-monster we call a "government".

-- TaiwanJohn

Links:
Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do is the comprehensive guide to crappy, moralistic laws that crush freedom.
Here is a tarballed/zipped version of the same book (for convenient downloading)
The author of said bookrecently died awaiting sentencing for "medical marijuana" -- which is supposed to be LEGAL in California, after Prop-215
Finally, Common Sense Drug Policy has lots of great info... I'd suggest starting with the Ads section.

[This Chapter] in particular deals with the Constitution and Confederation, and what was intended by the men who created it. The [next chapter] deals with the Bill of Rights.

The entire book is worth reading, because it will alter the way you view your rights and freedoms. Things aren't as charming as you've been brainwashed to believe: you are not free, it is not a democracy, and your government is slowly but surely destroying the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Of course, most people won't ever read the book and will go meekly along like sheep to slaughter.

Frankly, I think most of you should be getting a bit more educated, a bit more aware, and a lot more politically active. You need to wrestle control of your country back from the corporations, powermongers and religous fanatics that are destroying it.

--

[This Chapter] in particular deals with the Constitution and Confederation, and what was intended by the men who created it. The [next chapter] deals with the Bill of Rights.

The entire book is worth reading, because it will alter the way you view your rights and freedoms. Things aren't as charming as you've been brainwashed to believe: you are not free, it is not a democracy, and your government is slowly but surely destroying the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Of course, most people won't ever read the book and will go meekly along like sheep to slaughter.

Frankly, I think most of you should be getting a bit more educated, a bit more aware, and a lot more politically active. You need to wrestle control of your country back from the corporations, powermongers and religous fanatics that are destroying it.

--

[This Chapter] in particular deals with the Constitution and Confederation, and what was intended by the men who created it. The [next chapter] deals with the Bill of Rights.

The entire book is worth reading, because it will alter the way you view your rights and freedoms. Things aren't as charming as you've been brainwashed to believe: you are not free, it is not a democracy, and your government is slowly but surely destroying the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Of course, most people won't ever read the book and will go meekly along like sheep to slaughter.

Frankly, I think most of you should be getting a bit more educated, a bit more aware, and a lot more politically active. You need to wrestle control of your country back from the corporations, powermongers and religous fanatics that are destroying it.

--

It's bad enough that our jails are so full of consenual criminal that rapists, murders, and other deviants get to go free in less than four years. Now we're going to add to the overcrowding!?!?! Intellectual property is going to lead to very oppressive laws if it is not stopped!

--
J Perry Fecteau, 5-time Mr. Internet
Ejercisio Perfecto: from Geek to GOD in WEEKS!

hear, hear, hear!

In fact, see Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do (in fact, all of McWilliams' books are available online for the reading) for a complete summary of the case against precisely this.

On the other hand, specific privisions against fraud are different from general "thou shalt not email" laws. Fraud is (at least)as bad to free marketeers as to anyone else, if nothing else because it's one thing [they / we]'re often accused of ignoring if not committing.

timothy

Call me a tight-assed conservative, but I don't think that the government ought to be subsidising the erotic arousal of others. Unless I'm missing a large part of the situation, these groups are calling for blocking software to be put on government libraries' computers. This is not a call to block private transmissions on the Internet.

(I already made this argument in a reply to a reply of this message, but I think it's a particularly good one, so I'l repeat it...)

This argument makes no sense. You're not willing to subsidize my looking at online porn, but you are willing to subsidize my NOT looking at it? Blocking software isn't free. There'll be the obligatory upgrades, etc. Add to that the costs of the legal challenges (and remember, this is probably unconstitutional to begin with... see this article), and very soon my arousal is cheap in comparison.

A bit off-topic, but still related: If you want to know the real costs (both financial & societal) of enforcing these sorts of "Moral Laws", check out Peter McWilliams book "Ain't nobody's Business If You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in our Free Country." The full text is available online at www.mcwilliams.com, but the printed book is well worth the price ($8). In particular check out the chapter "It's very expensive" which talks about the financial costs of enforcing laws against consensual crimes (Gambling, drugs, pornography, etc.)

Call me a tight-assed conservative, but I don't think that the government ought to be subsidising the erotic arousal of others. Unless I'm missing a large part of the situation, these groups are calling for blocking software to be put on government libraries' computers. This is not a call to block private transmissions on the Internet.

(I already made this argument in a reply to a reply of this message, but I think it's a particularly good one, so I'l repeat it...)

This argument makes no sense. You're not willing to subsidize my looking at online porn, but you are willing to subsidize my NOT looking at it? Blocking software isn't free. There'll be the obligatory upgrades, etc. Add to that the costs of the legal challenges (and remember, this is probably unconstitutional to begin with... see this article), and very soon my arousal is cheap in comparison.

A bit off-topic, but still related: If you want to know the real costs (both financial & societal) of enforcing these sorts of "Moral Laws", check out Peter McWilliams book "Ain't nobody's Business If You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in our Free Country." The full text is available online at www.mcwilliams.com, but the printed book is well worth the price ($8). In particular check out the chapter "It's very expensive" which talks about the financial costs of enforcing laws against consensual crimes (Gambling, drugs, pornography, etc.)

I, like most people who read this... truly don't know what to say. I don't know where to begin. I've experienced some of what you've gone through, in fact there are some strange parallels in our lives. I'm not quite 25, I too was overweight & unpopular in high school (and still am, though not as bad), dropped out of university, had a sex fiend for a first girlfriend and worked for a telco. I am happy with my life now though... maybe you need professional help, or maybe you'll be able to resolve your own problems knowing that other people in this world can at least relate and do care. I'd stay away from Prozac... try St. John's Wort instead. And I'd recommend reading some of Peter McWilliams' books. They're all online at http://www.mcwilliams.com/books/
They've helped me deal with a lot of issues and expanded my ideas in a lot of ways. Remember, everything in life is a choice... we don't choose what we look like, but we choose how what we look like affects us.