Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThere are reasons MJ tends to be a progressive drug
Disclaimer: I am not stoned writing this. Really! But it does sound like what stoned people talk about because it is about some concepts that are often more apparent to people who are stoned at the time, and there may not be an effective way to talk about them that doesn't come off a little high.
Drugs are bad. Just say no. Etc.. The very healthiest possible lifestyle probably doesn't include any recreational drug use, including caffeine, nicotine, etc..
This OP is not about whether MJ is good, bad, etc., but rather, what kind of drug is it?
I see its primary effect as loosening the connection between the executive ME... ego, consciousness... and lower case "me," being the whole of the human organism.
But, rather than function declining catastrophically the person gets along pretty well because 90% of the time our consciousness is not dictating, but rather rationalizing to maintain a dictatorial sense of control and of conscious cause-and-effect.
To help explain a tricky concept here... there is a famous "split brain" experiment involving people whose hemispheres are not integrated--usually following surgery to stop seizures. These folks can read and understand with their right eye without their more executive and talky left hemisphere being aware of it. So experimenters would show their left eye an instruction (left eye goes to right side of brain and visa-versa) and they would follow it. Then they would ask the person why they were doing whatever the instruction said, but "they" (the conscious "me" that we think is who we are) has no idea. "They" did not see the instruction. So you know what they do when asked? They make something up. They make up something to allow the "me" to continue to maintain its fantasy of control over the whole of the person. And they believe it. A mental process like, "I am leaving the room. I am in control. Thus I must have a reason. I want to go to the bathroom... that must be it. Yeah, that's the ticket." That is the kind of rationalization I am talking about here. We do this with everything. Ask us why we love something and we will construct reasons that seems plausible to our conscious narrative, our created sense of self. Because "we" don't usually know why we feel what we feel, but our "me" wants it to make sense. The point is that we have a little "me" going all the time that requires that things make sense. And we couldn't live without that, of course. And it is what makes us human and such. But that little "me" can also do some horrid or ridiculous things in defense of its fantasy of control.
Stoned people are less executive, and the web of rationalizations our conscious "me" constructs to insist that everything makes sense is weaker.
As a result, for instance, talking heads on TV may appear to be insane, and commercials doubly insane. And maybe what they are doing is, in fact, nuts. It is worth thinking about.
Taken at face value, absent the hammering 24/7 insistence of consciousness that the world makes sense, a lot of stuff really doesn't make sense. Should it?
Sometimes things are funnier. When we laugh there is usually some contradiction involved. With the gruff authoritarian "me" slightly less in control the personality isn't quite as good at tamping down and rationalizing whatever seemed funny.
Seeing things with a *relatively* innocent eye (I am talking about a relative reduction of effect... a few percent) makes people less certain and more questioning. It is a drug that meshes with what we think of as a hippie mind-set. Less aggressive, less dogmatic, more open to incongruity.
(Compare that to the promotion of the ego alcohol provides. Also fun, but a more self-agrandizing and agressive sort of fun. There is no certainty liken drunken certainty.)
So the *relative* LW preference for MJ seems sensible to me. It (temporarily and in relative terms) makes ones' own consciousness less authoritarian over ones self, and it tends to make authority appear comical.
There can be a paranoid downside to that, of course. With consciousness less integrated the "me" can feel adrift. We are, after all, talking about a small change in how we see systems of egoistic rationalization and pretense and artifice that we have constructed to get us through the day.
It is not always fun to have one's rationalizations revealed to be flimsier than one might wish. On the plus side, however, it usually doesn't take much to distract from such ruthless self-examination.
So yeah... I get MJ as a hippie drug, and I get why it is probably slightly more compatible with tolerance and non-violence and such. And versus alcohol, for instance, more ammenable to art and music and compromise and contemplation of nature and meditation, etc..
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 578 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
There are reasons MJ tends to be a progressive drug (Original Post)
cthulu2016
Jan 2014
OP
Bandit
(21,475 posts)1. The ONLY reason it was ever made illegal was as a hammer to hold over
Blacks and Latinos that seemed to use it more than others at the time...Lock em up and then they can't vote..
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)2. Yes, there is that
TheMathieu
(456 posts)3. I believe in a society that leaves many vices legal.
And shares the cost of any ill effects these vices have on our health.
An obese man should be on the hook for an alcoholic's liver problems as much as the alcoholic should be on the hook for the obese man's heart problems.