51% Yes - 49% No
https://naturalmedicinecolorado.org/
As soon as it kicks in, I'm growing pounds of psilocybin to give away. At least five colonies in a constant rotation. :vot
51% Yes - 49% No
https://naturalmedicinecolorado.org/
As soon as it kicks in, I'm growing pounds of psilocybin to give away. At least five colonies in a constant rotation. :vot
Reactionaries and liberals can certainly use them, but I'm a huge proponent of their medical usage and sociopolitical potential. They cause productive introspection and put you in a kind of cognitive chaos mode that scrambles up negative thought loops. If someone's politics are the result of their alienation, psilocybin's really good at snapping you out of that alienated mindset and at least making you question yourself. That's an intervention point for all kinds of Guy who are driven by some pathology. If it's combined with hippie mysticism then it's a distraction and means of social control, but if it's used therapeutically or in a supportive culture it's undermining all the barriers between you and a less traumatised/conditioned/unconnected you.
It's nothing but mysticism and a lot of it is focused on the individual.
There's a reason they are are loosening up on all these drugs. It's too give the public another distraction.
:bruh-moment:
I know. Big brain time for sure.
There's mysticism if you're prone to mysticism. There's psychiatry if you're prone to materialism. You can't call the neurological impacts hippie bullshit and those are what have potential. This ballot initiative was a popular vote, not a top-down mandate.
It has neurological positives on some of the population. Not all.
Yeah people want another escape than having to do the scary task that is dealing with are impending doom and inaction on it.
It's another great escape
Lamotrigine has neurological positives on some of the population. Not all.
Vyvanse has neurological positives on some of the population. Not all.
Alzheimers drugs have neurological positives on some of the population. Not all.
You just have a really reactionary and dumb understanding of this issue. I'm not saying, nobody is saying, that these are drugs for everyone. A few comments down I even stated the criteria under which I give people psilocybin, and if there are contraindications I don't. If someone has contraindications for any drug they just don't take it. Those who do benefit from it take it.
It has no positives and has been pushed to sell a drug that doesn't work.
Do you even know what reactionary means? People throw that word around now a days.
Reacting negatively to any change in the status quo which might be socially positive because you don't read and go with whatever the worst option is. You might not otherwise be a reactionary, but your take here is so stupid that it's literally what I've heard out of the reactionaries against this bill in Colorado Springs. Minus "but think of the children!" you've actually hit every talking point.
No. Being a reactionary is looking at the past as perfect an example of what today should be. And wanting to bring that to the modern day.
Which is what you're doing. Continuing the past because you don't understand the basics of the alternative.
Yes. My insight that looked at them past ways these drugs where used as controlling agents is reactionary i guess some how.
It's such a vague conspiracy that runs counter to how this initiative passed that yeah, it is. The only difference is that you said government instead of big pharma. Protect Colorado's Kids used big pharma as their control boogeyman.
Again, just read Pollan's How to Change Your Mind. It's not the authority on the subject, it's not the primary research itself, but it's an introductory book about the part of this you don't understand. If all you otherwise have is a conspiracy theory you haven't yet defined, what am I supposed to call you? Certainly not comrade. You want to preserve a worse system for the sake of your ignorance. To keep these drugs criminalised knowing what that means and how much a means of control that is. The nicest word I could call you for saying something so fucking stupid is reactionary.
Im not saying to keep them criminalized
Where did i say that
That's you jumping to conclusions.l and throwing out words that aren't appropriate than trying to make them stick when you are called out about not knowing how to use it properly.
Legalize it. Im just questioning why it's happening now? The same thing that happened to herb will happen to shrooms. It'll become so strong that all these positives you talk about will slowly disappear. It'll just be another doping agent to keep the populace in line.
Comparing it to cannabis is again just not understanding the fundamentals of this class of drug. It's happening now because people have read books like How to Change Your Mind and seen what tryptamines actually are. The research ban was lifted and the subsequent flood of research has shown the psychiatric potential in the way research before hippies was beginning to hint at. It being in the realm of hippie mysticism is a consequence of it not being available in research settings or clinics. That's the repression and control, this is the popular and scientific response against both.
I'm not reading the book bro. Why should I. Where do you think in your happy badgering that you've convinced me to do anything?
All you have done is shove words in my mouth and when i call you out you just try to flip the script.
You should read it for the same reason you hopefully read anything else. You don't currently know something and might be capable of learning. When your current position is this misinformed, reading anything about it would be to your benefit. It doesn't even have to be that book but that's normally the book I give to people before they understand anything about these drugs or how they're used. If I shove any word in your mouth it will be more correct than the ones you shit out of it. Those are some good words so I recommend them in particular.
deleted by creator
That's why I only read Sex Book.
The thing is, they weren’t. The CIA tried, and failed miserably. Why would the state invest millions into suppressing these substances and prohibiting scientific research on them if the master plan was to use them as some kind of, what, mass mind control? How would that work exactly? Even the mass distraction argument doesn’t make any sense when we all carry around distraction/mind control/surveillance devices in our pocket. They have the distraction thing covered, they don’t need psychedelics for that. You really are just spouting ignorant, paranoid tinfoil hat nonsense. I wouldn’t call it a reactionary stance, just a really dumb one.
Corp controlled psychedelics will have very little positive affects on society.
Yes, but no longer throwing people in prisons because they have some fungus in their pocket will.
deleted by creator