I can definitely understand peoples’ issues with it being consumed, especially in a political context, but how do yall feel about “weed”? I won’t hide my feelings, I am very much pro-weed, it’s not great that I started in my mid-teens but in my area it’s FAR from uncommon. I don’t smoke daily or anything, I’m not addicted to it (people say it’s non-habit forming but any drug can be addictive with enough frequent usage) but I do smoke and dab w/ friends often. That’s not why I believe in legalization tho, my main thing is you shouldn’t make a naturally occurring plant an illegal substance. I’d point to the DEA’s destructive (legal) burning of thousands of naturally occurring marijuana plants found in nature; This seems eco-fascist to me and to deny the uses of hemp as a production material seems dogmatic to me. The USSR used hemp for industrial purposes during the war and it helped in a major way. I’m sure most of us are familiar with the badge given for Hemp growers. If you have any criticisms, I’m more than open to it, but I feel that marijuana won’t be easy to get rid of in future society and would probably be put to use in different more productive ways.

  • ghost_of_faso2@lemmygrad.ml
    01·
    1 year ago

    The paper ends: “aggressively targeting alcohol harms is a valid and necessary public health strategy.” Which means the reader is left with the message that the data are not really about relaxing other drug laws so much as tightening alcohol laws.

    I wouldnt say that suggests tighteing laws, I think they mean by this addressing alchohol addiction and its root causes, not using a auth measure like banning to deal with it but focusing on it via a public health approach.

    I’d say that’s a mixed message as they are concerned (subtly) with e.g. the connection between drugs and racial policing, which means using the paper e.g. to decriminalise cannabis rather than to campaign against alcohol. I suppose these aren’t mutually exclusive but, then again, when this graph is usually cited, it’s usually in favour of making cannabis legal rather than prohibiting alcohol.

    Thats because it shows relative harm; if Alchohol can easily be shown to be detrimental to society on a factor of literally 100000’s of more deaths attributed too it vs cannabis it makes no sense why its illegal and one is legal.

    I agree on your wider points about how a socialist society studying this would likely come to different conclusions, the paper isnt even considering ideological basis but within the scope of it they likely never wanted to try to begin with, as its more of a study done by a chemist implementing sociological methodology without considering ideology.

    Also re: there are more booze drinkers than heroin users;

    Usage in decriminalized societies and legalized socieities of all narcotics goes down during leglaization. People gain access to medicalized routes of de-addiction rather than thrown in a prison cell with gangsters, murderers and drug dealers.

    Also ideally in a socialist society we would ban all advertising, especially for narcotics so people dont get ‘encouraged’ to do anything and instead know how drugs effect you, how to manage them and the risks vs rewards.