Drugs, Murder and Mexico

j0hn we have a new thread morality and the globalized consumer landscape totally ready for some self righteous jerks to post inside of

no iatee I meant barn in the swedish sense of the word, my bad

barns are v. inefficient living spaces

― iatee, Thursday, September 29, 2011 11:33 AM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark

Geir Home-gro

yeah except I don't think anyone is going to quit doing coke because they didn't consider what the source was

I mean you can condescend on people who drive SUVs or eat too much red meat or whatever, the point is the change really has to come at a larger level so this discussion is kinda useless

it's condescend to

lol

yeah I don't know what I was thinking there

this thread makes me want to barf like 800x over

cosigh

good point you guys

I'm contemptuous of the smug entitlement to euphoria of many first-world cocaine users but i think the desire for said euphoria is pretty ubiquitous and I'm equally contemptuous of the patriarchal desire to forbid something as simple to grow and make as cocaine; the forbidding is what has jacked the price and that's more the root of the evil as anything else.

good point you guys
no really, thank you.

oh come on there's a little enjoyment to be had in the fact that a thread about drugs turned into a 200 post stoned dorm room bullshit marathon with two guys talking past each other for hours at like 2 am.

i think the whole "well i'm suspicious about the motives and/or superiority complex of anti-drug/anti-drug violence crusaders and also most of you guys eat cow" is an interesting way to analyze in terms of human psychology but i'm also suspicious of that argument being used as a method to distract from the points being raised, cf. al gore warning about climate change and right-wingers pointing the finger at his private jet and all "btw didn't you claim to invent the internet?" most def the history of anti-drug (and alcohol) movements are filled with puritanical and iron-fisted creeps who like to feel morally superior so it's an understandable take. i agree w/ aerosmith's second-to-last post, basically.

barns are v. inefficient living spaces

So anthropocentric!

Maybe we shoud give the cocaine to the cows. How does that parse ethically?

Like, would you eat veal if you knew that cow had been high to the gills his entire life?

And would you eat a cow that had gills. ~think about it~

oh come on there's a little enjoyment to be had in the fact that a thread about drugs turned into a 200 post stoned dorm room bullshit marathon with two guys talking past each other for hours at like 2 am.

nope, sorry -- sounds more like a symptom of the problem more than anything else. way to get distracted. at least i can honestly say that i have contacted a legislator directly about this issue and raised awareness. i am not a morally superior puritan or an iron-fisted creep btw.

xp You prob already are, don't tomatoes already have fish DNA in them?

I'm contemptuous of the smug entitlement to euphoria of many first-world cocaine users but i think the desire for said euphoria is pretty ubiquitous and I'm equally contemptuous of the patriarchal desire to forbid something as simple to grow and make as cocaine; the forbidding is what has jacked the price and that's more the root of the evil as anything else.

bingo bingo gringo

i think the whole "well i'm suspicious about the motives and/or superiority complex of anti-drug/anti-drug violence crusaders and also most of you guys eat cow" is an interesting way to analyze in terms of human psychology but i'm also suspicious of that argument being used as a method to distract from the points being raised, cf. al gore warning about climate change and right-wingers pointing the finger at his private jet and all "btw didn't you claim to invent the internet?" most def the history of anti-drug (and alcohol) movements are filled with puritanical and iron-fisted creeps who like to feel morally superior so it's an understandable take. i agree w/ aerosmith's second-to-last post, basically.

al gore's kinda dipshit when it comes to this stuff, tbh. ~pr matters~ and he knew that enough to...make a movie. now that he's the public face of something - which was entirely voluntary - of course he's going to be the easiest person to call out for hypocrisy. if you want to be the world's spokesperson w/r/t global warming, you should probably play the part.

i think accusing folks who feel certain ways about drugs of wanting to feel morally superior is a pretty nice political tactic but doesn't really change the core issue.

you see my point though xp

the lesson here is grow your own drugs

I'm contemptuous of the smug entitlement to euphoria of many first-world cocaine users

I think this has been pointed out before but it's really not their fault the whole industry is so corrupt and violent.

'our fault' you mean?

that's some serious razzle dazzle iatee

are all of your racist outbreaks just cocaine binges?

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/2/popcorn_2.gif

btw,

http://www.thestranger.com/binary/98a1/Feature1-570.jpg

It rots your flesh!

cool now i dont have to worry abt worms

THAT is an excellent reason not to do blow

just snort levamisole directly, it doesn't support murder and gets you equally fucked up

then the cartels will just move into trafficking levamisole

Rereading last nights argument I still don't get jho's perspective here.

http://i.imgur.com/cnYOi.jpg

A paramilitary group called Mata-Zetas in Veracruz

(en frances)

Better than cocaine
This thread dispute between Nate and Trife resembles two hearty, healthy young chimps sparring
a) for territory
b) to see which of them is more mature
c) to see which can get the protection of 'the elders', sitting nearby chewing on twigs while being deloused by females.

Nate mentions cocaine, Trife steps into the clearing with a challenge that he has experienced neither the white powder nor, in fact, sexual intercourse (staking a claim to seniority by implying that he has already sampled both). Nate appeals to the elders to expel the aggressor but is met with indifference. Trife chases him into the brush with the cry 'eat my ass you clueless cum bubble'. As literature or evidence of intelligent life on earth, zero. A mark added for Trife's assonance and alliteration: 'ass' and 'clueless' have alliterative endings, 'clueless' and 'cum' alliterative beginnings, and 'cum bubble' is a nice piece of assonance. For humanity, though, bathos and probable deletion. 1

― Momus (Momus), Sunday, September 28, 2003

^^ the most vicious drug war on ILX

i think icey has been p otm here. i don't think he's really hung up on 'self-righteousness'; in the context of this thread, I think that these 'cocaine as consumer choice' derails come across as a bunch of ppl thinking they're fighting the cartel by choosing not to do a bunch of coke that they were not going to do anyways...? i don't think icey is out of line by thinking that may not be the most meaningful response to the situation at hand.

at the same time, omar is right; cocaine use should be subject to not only legal but social censure, and should be drained of every last drop of countercultural frisson so that it can be seen as the terrorists' wares that it is. but it feels like the official stance of this thread is that cocaine should be legal, and that nobody should use it: you don't have to be obsessed with self-righteousness to see that this might be a wee bit incoherent...

anyways: so yeah, Rick Perry...

You may as well continue hunting at a place called Niggerhead. It's not like you staying at home is going to stop racism or anything.

wait a second

cocaine should be legal, and that nobody should use it

i agree with the first part, but not necessarily the second. where are you getting that? speaking for myself, that has never been what i had in mind w/r/t political abstention.

but it feels like the official stance of this thread is that cocaine should be legal, and that nobody should use it: you don't have to be obsessed with self-righteousness to see that this might be a wee bit incoherent...

this is misleading. the 'official stance' if there is one (there isn't) would be 'cocaine should be legal, nobody should use it until it's legal'

cokestrawmanning

iatee: plenty of examples itt of ppl conveying skepticism of the eventual legality of cocaine, so I don't feel at all bad with leaving out the 'until...' part

LL: iatee otm about there being no 'official stance'; that was my way of saying overall it seems that everybody agrees that coke should be legal, but that in the last few hundred posts, it seems that there is a majority in agreement that using coke makes you a bad person. you weren't one of the people agreeing with this; I didn't mean to include you in that. I should've been more clear.

PP: read the whole post, dude.

plenty of examples itt of ppl conveying skepticism that people will stop doing cocaine too

Hell, I've read the whole thread, dude.

there's really no contradiction or hypocrisy in saying coke should be legal and people should try to not use it.

that logic would have held re: booze in in '20s