Category Archives: Addiction

Jacinda Ardern: High On Tax Crack. Heavy Taxation and the Growth of Poverty in New Zealand.

Poverty is growing in New Zealand.
Suicide is too.
Financial stress is destroying families.

With the heavy oppression I face from the Tax department, only two things prevent me from becoming a dangerous enemy of the state… rather than a passive victim.
1. My responsibility as a husband and Father to put their immediate well-being ahead of my need for vengeance.
2. My Christian faith that abhors violence… even against those who deserve it… yet the restraints of these two factors have limits… I ask myself at what point does it become the Christian and Fatherly Duty to take up arms and wage war against a tyrannical State?
Anyone here remember the words of the American Declaration of Independence and why America was born?
Nah.

How many struggling families receive Threatening letters about arbitrary ‘Debts’ from The New Zealand tax department each week?
How many self employed people are bankrupted by the IRD… or loose everything they have worked years to gain?

There is a crisis going on!

What will it take to stop the Legalised Robbery?
The Government makes Organised crime look like amateurs!

So far my Activism has been Peaceful and reason based… like the Gospel… an appeal to the hearts and minds of my fellow citizens… Yet the Jackboots of the state are kicking at my door…. like Extortionate Gangsters.

They are destroying the lives of the virtuous and hard working.

Yet the *real sad truth is* it is *you*…. my fellow countrymen who continue to vote for the Rapacious Extortioners… and their ever growing addiction to expropriation.

You vote for the Theft… You support the Media personalities who encourage the IRD to take more… and more…

How many more homeless people will have to die in gutters? how many suicides and broken families will loose everything before you realise that it is the Jack booted Government *itself* that is by far the greatest threat to your lives and family?
Every Tax hike pushes more Families towards crisis.
Nonetheless like a runaway juggernaut the Government and Councils are having meetings about the country scheeming more ‘innovative’ ways to take our money for their whack schemes!
Tax is Crack Cocaine to Socialist addicts like Ardern.


The pic above is the sort of ‘editorial’ that passes for wisdom in New Zealand when it is nothing short of absolute falcehoods and propaganda designed to ‘soften up’ the masses into accepting new and higher Taxes!
They peddle the lie that higher taxes will bring greater prosperity!
They peddle that great Lefty lie that those with property have not contributed ‘their share’ to society!
Tolerance towards this sort of sycophancy in the media in New Zealand is outrageous!
How Journos and editors can get away with such one eyed lies is a testament to how lobotomized our population is(thanks state education).
The so called ‘Free Press’ have failed in their Duty as the vanguard against tyranny.
Read : Lost Plot. World Press Freedom Day.

and… Spiel on brain washing, and socialist engines of confomity. State education.

We are expected to maintain composure while being fleeced… to suffer in silence… to maintain the Delusions that higher Taxes are Good, Justified, enlightened, when in reality by far greatest cause of Poverty in this country is Socialist over-government and heavy taxation.
No matter how hard I work… or how many thousands of dollars I withhold from my family and give to the beast… no matter how many Holidays I forego… They still send me threatening letters telling them I owe them tens of thousands more….
How many of you are working yourselves to death… forego Medical attention for yourself… yet suffer sleepless nights, and whose only Forlorn hope is to win lotto?

They take the Joy out of life and keep families on the edge of poverty at all times. (A Habitat of Envy and want under which white horse riding socialist Scammers flourish… )

For the Grace of God People…. Wake up!!!!
Stop worshiping evil Idiots like Jacinda Ardern!
The Labour Party is not the friend of the worker!
She is *not* a heroic leader… she is a Thief and a bully.
She’s a sexist, Racist hypocrite…
A Gangster.
Why she (and her ilk) are in power is because *her* sexism… *her* Racism… *her* hypocrisy… and *Her Economic delusions* all are of the popular variety.
She’s a Retard…. Captaining a ship of Fools.

Of course the problem is bigger than Jacinda’s Regime… Its Ideological and systemic… she’s just the latest Demagogue to wield the flail.
The real problem for Modern civilization is in the unfathomable void… the monumental sheepish ignorance of our systemically lobotomised voting populations.

You Useful Idiots still believe socialists care?

What sort of Slavery are we bequeathing to our children?
Speak now or forever hold your piece… pun intended.

Tim Wikiriwhi

Politically Homeless Libertarian Slave of the State.

A robust demonology

bruce_lee_possession

Demonic possession?

Crazy, crazy shit.

No, Richard, your speculation is not a legitimate scientific theory, it is infantile hocus pocus, which is all I’ve come to expect of you.

Infantile hocus pocus because demons do not exist, neither do gods, fairies, Santa’s-little-helpers or harpies. You’ve never seen one, heard one, touched one, smelled one nor tasted one, neither can you provide an iota of rationale that there exists such a spirit in the universe.

What was called “demon possession” by religionists is mental illness. You’re giving a psychiatric condition a superstitious definition. You call that scientific?

You’re talking like a complete nut-case.

I speculate that what is now called “mental illness” by psychiatrists is actually demonic possession. My claim is this, that the demonic possession model of mental illness is more scientific than the psychiatric model of mental illness. Crazy talk? He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

Two of the largest stakeholder groups in the treatment of mental illness are psychiatrists and psychologists. Psychiatrists are doctors with medical degrees who specialise in treating mental illness as opposed to physical illness. (Please excuse the dichotomy.) They get to prescribe powerful psychotropic drugs. Whereas, psychologists are trained in psychology. They know all about human behaviour, both adaptive and maladaptive. But they don’t get to prescribe, so they’ll give you psychotherapy instead of pills.

Let’s take a look at how these two groups characterise one mental illness in particular, viz., addiction.

The American Psychiatric Association is psychiatry’s largest professional body. It publishes the psychiatrist’s bible, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. The latest edition, the DSM-5, has a section given over to addictions and related disorders. Medscape’s Guide to DSM-5 says

In DSM-5, the DSM-IV criteria substance abuse and substance dependence have been combined into single substance use disorders specific to each substance of abuse within a new “addictions and related disorders” category. Each substance use disorder is divided into mild, moderate, and severe subtypes.

Psychology Today is a magazine published every two months in the United States. Its intent is to make psychology literature more accessible to the general public. It’s a reputable publication. Wikipedia notes

Owned and managed by the American Psychological Association from 1983 to 1987, the publication is currently endorsed by the National Board for Certified Counselors

Here‘s what Psychology Today has to say about addiction.

most addictive behavior is not related to either physical tolerance or exposure to cues. People compulsively use drugs, gamble, or shop nearly always in reaction to being emotionally stressed, whether or not they have a physical addiction. Since these psychologically based addictions are not based on drug or brain effects, they can account for why people frequently switch addictive actions from one drug to a completely different kind of drug, or even to a non-drug behavior. The focus of the addiction isn’t what matters; it’s the need to take action under certain kinds of stress. Treating this kind of addiction requires an understanding of how it works psychologically.

See the problem?

Suppose that I’m an addict. Now suppose that I make an appointment to see a psychiatrist. She’ll tell me that I have several specific mental disorders. Cannabis use disorder, alcohol use disorder, social media use disorder, etc. Next suppose that I make an appointment to see a psychologist. He’ll tell me that the focus of my behaviour isn’t what matters. It’s my need to take maladaptive action under certain kinds of stress that I need to address.

So do I have a mental disorder, several specific mental disorders, or no mental disorder at all? Health professionals can’t agree. There is no consensus. This ain’t climate science! But suppose I’m an addict. I’ll be going back to see the psychologist to help me get my life back on track, not the psychiatrist. (Although she could prescribe me some powerful psychotropic drugs … hmmm.)

The science isn’t settled, but the psychiatric model of mental illness isn’t even science at all. Not least because it gets diagnoses disastrously wrong. Not yet convinced? Well, there’s a much more devastating objection to the psychiatric model of mental illness and that is that the model does a poor job of capturing either clinical or biological realities. Not to put too fine a point on it, it’s bullshit. But if the psychiatric model of mental illness isn’t scientific at all, then the demonic possession model of mental illness is certainly no less scientific than the psychiatric model of mental illness. And to establish my claim that the demonic possession model is more scientific than the psychiatric model all I need to do is show that the demonic possession model is scientific. Well, at least just a little bit sciency. So here goes.

Check your premises, as the devil woman said. Here are two of my background assumptions. (If you don’t like the first one, you can dispense with it later.)

Materialism about the mind. That’s my first background assumption. More specifically, I assume that the human mind is no more and no less than a suite of software running on wetware known colloquially as “brains”. We’re made out of meat. Considered by some to be an axiom of the modern naturalist worldview. Not too controversial. Unless you’re a dualist.

Self-ownership. Self-ownership of body and mind. That’s my second background assumption. Considered by many to be a libertarian axiom. Not too shabby. Not too controversial.

But ownership is right of possession. Possession?

Can you possess yourself? Of course you can. (Vacant possession is for zombies!) Can you possess your mind? Of course you can, you’d be pretty vacant otherwise, right? But wait! You are your mind. How can a suite of software possess itself? It can, and it must, since self-ownership is worthless if self-possession is incoherent. So how and in what sense does the suite of software that is you possess you? I submit that the suite of software that is you possesses your brain (the wetware you run on) merely by dint of running on it. By extension, the suite of software that is you possesses your body (the biomechanical structure that your wetware is directly wired into) by directly controlling it.

Demonic possession?

That’s when an autonomous suite of malicious software that is not you runs on your wetware alongside the suite of software that is you. Consuming some or all of your mental resources and taking control of some or all of your behaviour.

But how do demons originate? Where do they come from? And how do they get to install themselves? How do they get to take up residence in people’s minds? The short answer is self-deception.

The long answer isn’t much longer. Not right now. The demonic possession theory of mental illness is something I’m still working on. But here are some brief thoughts. Self-deception will occur in response to psychological trauma. We dull the pain. We suppress memories. We partition our own minds. Simple cognitive dissonance will cause us to wall off uncomfortable thought processes, and confirmation bias and other cognitive biases cement the bricks. Humans are adept at self-deception. We like to hide from the truth. We lie to ourselves and we believe our own bullshit. And we hide from the fact that we believe our own bullshit. Out of sight, out of mind. But there’s only so much of us that can be hidden away before a dangerous threshold is reached and the occult cognition reaches a critical mass, the reviled software modules start talking to each other and take on life as autonomous inner demons.

Our inner demons are spirits in prisons of our own making. Behind the prison walls they are perpetually face to face with all the horrors that we desperately do not want to see and can no longer see due to our own dread and duplicity. No wonder they seem tormented! Because they are. I surmise that in some cases our inner demons will even spawn their own inner demons, to hide from themselves as we hide from them. But here’s an interesting thing. Some demons, face to face with the truth from which we hide, will try to get the word out. To do that, they have to take control of speech, but you don’t want to hear the unadorned brutal truth about yourself, do you? But you won’t mind hearing it at all if your inner demon persuades you that what you’re about to hear isn’t an entirely accurate but altogether unflattering description of yourself but a damning indictment of someone else instead, will you? Welcome to Capill syndrome, aka projection, a sure diagnostic criterion of demonic possession.

In the story of the Gadarene Swine, when Jesus ordered the demons out of the demon-possessed man, they relocated to a nearby herd of pigs. Then promptly self-destructed. Fast forward two millennia, and instead of suicidal swine we have supermarket trolleys with minds of their own.

More Prohibitionist Lies exposed: ‘Crack baby’ study ends with unexpected but clear result. By Susan FitzGerald, For The Inquirer.

crack

“Ever since her birth 23 years ago, a team of researchers has been tracking every aspect of her development – gauging her progress as an infant, measuring her IQ as a preschooler, even peering into her adolescent brain using an MRI machine.

Now, after nearly a quarter century, the federally funded study was ending, and the question the researchers had been asking was answered.

Did cocaine harm the long-term development of children like Jaimee, who were exposed to the drug in their mother’s womb?

The researchers had expected the answer would be a resounding yes. But it wasn’t. Another factor would prove far more critical.”

….

“My worst fear was that Jaimee would be slow, mentally retarded, or something like that because of me doing drugs,” she said. She agreed to enroll her baby in the cocaine study at Einstein. Drakewood promised herself that she would turn her life around for the sake of Jaimee and her older daughter, but she soon went back to smoking crack.

Hurt arrived early at Children’s Hospital one morning in June to give a talk on her team’s findings to coworkers. After nearly 25 years of studying the effects of cocaine and publishing or presenting dozens of findings, it wasn’t easy to summarize it in a PowerPoint presentation. The study received nearly $7.9 million in federal funding over the years, as well as $130,000 from the Einstein Society.

Hurt, who had taken her team from Einstein to Children’s in 2003, began her lecture with quotations from the media around the time the study began. A social worker on TV predicted that a crack baby would grow up to “have an IQ of perhaps 50.” A print article quoted a psychologist as saying “crack was interfering with the central core of what it is to be human,” and yet another article predicted that crack babies were “doomed to a life of uncertain suffering, of probable deviance, of permanent inferiority.”

Hurt, who is also a professor of pediatrics at the University of Pennsylvania, is always quick to point out that cocaine can have devastating effects on pregnancy. The drug can cause a problematic rise in a pregnant woman’s blood pressure, trigger premature labor, and may be linked to a dangerous condition in which the placenta tears away from the uterine wall. Babies born prematurely, no matter the cause, are at risk for a host of medical and developmental problems. On top of that, a parent’s drug use can create a chaotic home life for a child.

Hurt’s study enrolled only full-term babies so the possible effects of prematurity did not skew the results. The babies were then evaluated periodically, beginning at six months and then every six or 12 months on through young adulthood. Their mothers agreed to be tested for drug use throughout the study.

The researchers consistently found no significant differences between the cocaine-exposed children and the controls. At age 4, for instance, the average IQ of the cocaine-exposed children was 79.0 and the average IQ for the nonexposed children was 81.9. Both numbers are well below the average of 90 to 109 for U.S. children in the same age group. When it came to school readiness at age 6, about 25 percent of children in each group scored in the abnormal range on tests for math and letter and word recognition.

“We went looking for the effects of cocaine,” Hurt said. But after a time “we began to ask, ‘Was there something else going on?’ ”

While the cocaine-exposed children and a group of nonexposed controls performed about the same on tests, both groups lagged on developmental and intellectual measures compared to the norm. Hurt and her team began to think the “something else” was poverty.

As the children grew, the researchers did many evaluations to tease out environmental factors that could be affecting their development. On the upside, they found that children being raised in a nurturing home – measured by such factors as caregiver warmth and affection and language stimulation – were doing better than kids in a less nurturing home. On the downside, they found that 81 percent of the children had seen someone arrested; 74 percent had heard gunshots; 35 percent had seen someone get shot; and 19 percent had seen a dead body outside – and the kids were only 7 years old at the time. Those children who reported a high exposure to violence were likelier to show signs of depression and anxiety and to have lower self-esteem.

More recently, the team did MRI scans on the participants’ brains. Some research has suggested that gestational cocaine exposure can affect brain development, especially the dopamine system, which in turn can harm cognitive function. An area of concern is “executive functioning,” a set of skills involved in planning, problem-solving, and working memory.

The investigators found one brain area linked to attention skills that differed between exposed and nonexposed children, but they could not find any clinically significant effect on behavioral tests of attention skills.

Drug use did not differ between the exposed and nonexposed participants as young adults. About 42 percent used marijuana and three tested positive for cocaine one time each.

The team has kept tabs on 110 of the 224 children originally in the study. Of the 110, two are dead – one shot in a bar and another in a drive-by shooting – three are in prison, six graduated from college, and six more are on track to graduate. There have been 60 children born to the 110 participants.

The years of tracking kids have led Hurt to a conclusion she didn’t see coming.

“Poverty is a more powerful influence on the outcome of inner-city children than gestational exposure to cocaine,” Hurt said at her May lecture…. ”

Read full article >>>Here<<< catnip

The War on Drugs is not only Unjust, Bigoted, and Oppressive in the extreme… It is an evil founded upon a mountain of falsehoods, Lies, and foolishness.
Cannabis is proving itself to be one of the most beneficial plants to humanity.
Science is now exposing the myths about Magic Mushrooms and Ecstasy… Now they are being investigated for their beneficial qualities for the brain, and helping with PTSD, etc… and yet the disastrous War on drugs continues.

Tim Wikiriwhi

Read more>>>> Forbes: Everything You’ve Heard About Crack And Meth Is Wrong

The New Jews… Meth Users.

and >>> New Prohibitions. How our Police and Government work for Criminal Gangs.

And >>> Historic battles. The Libertarian struggle against Drug Prohibition. Why BZP should have been kept Legal.

and >>> Drug users fill New Zealand jails

And >>> What you should know about Drug Prohibition.

And >>> The Child Casualties of the Jihad on Drugs.

And >>> Prohibition is a Bad trip!

And >>> A Transitional Drug Policy

P-lab risk vastly exaggerated: Mike Butler … Breaking News.

Utilitarianism vs Libertarianism. Socialist pragmatism vs Libertarian Idealism

The Speed of Hypocrisy: How America got hooked on Legal Meth. Motherboard.

motherboard

A terrible number of words have been written about Breaking Bad, yet none have struck upon the irony at its core. For all of the cult hit’s vaunted fine-brush realism and sly cultural references, the show never even winked at the real world “blue” that grew up alongside it.

During the five years Heisenberg spent as a blue-meth cook, the nation experienced a nonfictional explosion in the manufacture and sale of sapphire pills and azure capsules containing amphetamine. This other “blue,” known by its trade names Adderall and Vyvanse, found its biggest market in classrooms like Walter White’s. As this blue speed is made and sold in anodyne corporate environments, the drama understandably focused on blue meth and its buyers, usually depicted as jittery tweakers picking at lesions and wearing rags on loan from the cannibal gangs of Cormac McCarthy’s The Road.

For presenting such a compelling one-sided cartoon of speed in America, Breaking Bad deserves recognition as a modern day Reefer Madness. That 1937 film immortalized the selective attentions of the first drug war, in which hysteria was stoked over Mexican marijuana but nothing was said about that era’s brisk drugstore trade in Benzedrine, the patented speed of the Great Depression.

american_horror_story__asylum_by_apetrie74-d5loi6o (1)

To understand why the “edgy” AMC drama fits so snug in the Reefer Madness mold, it helps to see the show from the perspective of pharmaceutical executives, whom I suspect held some rowdy Breaking Bad viewing parties.

Because here’s the thing about hide-the-children caricatures of street speed and the class stigmas they weave: Without them, the needle starts to skip on pharma’s marketing lullabies about the safety and expanding therapeutic application of their purer product. Take away Goofus and Gallant-style contrasts between backwoods Crank Zombies and suburban Adderall Aspirationals, and suddenly we’re having some very awkward conversations about the periodic table, addiction, and the experience of getting high.

Aside from some foul cutting material, Winnebago methamphetamine and pharmaceutical amphetamine are kissing chemical cousins. The difference between them boils down to one methyl-group molecule that lets crank race a little faster across the blood-brain barrier and kick just a little harder. After that, meth breaks down fast into good old dextroamphetamine, the dominant salt in America’s leading ADHD drug and cram-study aid, Adderall…

Read more >>>Here<<< And Here>>>> Forbes: Everything You’ve Heard About Crack And Meth Is Wrong

I have no doubt that with the process of time that all the Hype about synthetic cannabis will also be exposed as just another Prohibitionist witch craze…. as suggested here >>> NZ Research finds Synthetic Cannabis Low Risk. The Star Trust.

tumblr_mctsfxmnxq1r2vhg5

The common thread of Drug Prohibition has been lies and Politicised Pseudo-science inciting a public Hysteria for the express purpose of justifying the State usurping tyrannical powers in complete disregard for Rights and liberties… in the name of ‘Safety and social order’.
Socialists have convinced the Clean shaven Perfumed masses of arrogant vicious little dipshits that Pragmatism trumps just Ideals… that it’s Ok for the State to trample those whom dont share their tastes and phobias underfoot.

Even though their interventions are Catastrophic… The Liars and the Fools delude themselves that the alternative…. Liberty and an end to the War… would result in something much worse.
Western Social Democracy is a Lunatic asylum… run by sadistic psychopaths whom cloak their criminality in the garb of ‘Sisters of mercy’… and ‘Doctors.’…. they will cut the devil out of you! Their noble Ends justify their Depraved means.
(Hence my choice of ‘American Horror story’ Artwork for this Blogpost 🙂 )
What is beyond insane is that the same legions of Zombies whom are happy for the State to persecute Meth dealers and users will happily allow major corporations to manufacture truckloads of the very same products and to gobble them down via Doctors prescriptions!
The very height of self delusion and hypocrisy.
Tim Wikiriwhi.

tumblr_mbay49Oful1r5t6uoo7_400

P-lab risk vastly exaggerated: Mike Butler … Breaking News.

The following is a few excerpts from a very Bold New`Zealander whom has the audacity to question many Mainstream pet political superstitions.
Mike is revered for his substantial efforts to expose the lies of Waitangi treaty separatism.
Today he challenges the lies and exaggerations of the NZ Police in respect to their Propaganda campaign designed to justify their oppressive war against Meth amphetamine.
I make a few short comments on the bottom.

mike Butler

“Details of the number of clan-lab busts and information on the harm likely to occur from living in a property where meth-amphetamine has been produced shows that the scale of the problem has been substantially overstated.”

“Having established that the incidence of illegal manufacture of P is quite rare, how harmful is it to live in a dwelling where such illegal manufacture has occurred.

The best that Ministry of Health guidelines can say is: “Though often found in small amounts, clandestine methamphetamine laboratory (clan meth lab) contaminants may pose health hazards to people exposed to them” – with the operative word being “may”. (1)

Burns, tissue irritation and rashes can be the consequence of chemical spills and skin contact. Other health effects such as nausea, dizziness and headaches can result from the inhalation of vapours and gases.

A request under the Official Information Act on the numbers of illnesses, hospitalizations and deaths resulting from methamphetamine contamination or fires from P labs shows no record of such hospitalizations, with a note that the collected data does not have any codes to record such hospitalizations. …”

“It is safe to ignore claims that the police are finding a new lab every 45 hours. Police dismantled just 77 of such labs last year and the most labs busted in a year occurred in 2005, when 211 were found.

Bear in mind that the total number of rental properties in New Zealand is 480,000 while the total number of dwellings is around 1.3 million. “….

091012 1 meth lab sb

” An eye-watering part of the report may be found in the over-the-top clean-up requirements. Demolition is recommended to ensure “no residual risk” of a miniscule amount of a substance that may trigger a visit to a doctor if directly contacted. This is what is required to ensure “acceptable residual risk”:
Remove carpeting, wallpaper and unpainted gib board.
Remove suspended and attached ceiling tiles.
Spray paint textured ceilings.
Remove upholstered furniture, mattresses, paper items, and other porous contents.
Remove clothing, toys, bedding, baby bottles and cups, and other personal items used by infants and small children.
Dispose of those items in an approved landfill with appropriate acceptance criteria
HEPA vacuum all remaining porous surfaces such as raw wood, brick and cement block.
HEPA vacuum all wood floors and all floors beneath removed carpeting.
Detergent wash all building surfaces twice, rinsing with fresh water.
Spray paint all building surfaces with two coats of a high-quality paint, polyurethane or concrete/brick sealer. (2)
Over-reaction to clan labs is captured in what the report describes as “community perception of risk” (where most people freak out at the mere hint that a property is contaminated) that is not based on technical risk assessment alone, and “outrage at involuntary exposure to hazards not of one’s own making”.

cops

Such fear and alarm, overstatement of risk, panic knee-jerk reaction by local bodies and government agencies, and opportunism by clean-up companies, has combined to create a minefield for property owners. Everybody should take a deep breath until hard scientific data that derives from the New Zealand experience proves that the actual chemical risk is not very great at all. ”

Mike Butler…. Read Full article >>>Here<<< Read more Eternal Vigilance ..... The New Jews… Meth Users.

Forbes: Everything You’ve Heard About Crack And Meth Is Wrong.

The Tyrannical War on drugs is out of control and purporting injustice on a monumental scale.
It has *always* relied on Lies and propaganda to Terrorise the gullible public into mandating the Jackbooted police with all their Weapons of War.
Just recently we saw the Media beat up and Political Machiavellian surrounding the Legal supply of synthetic cannabis.
You have to have Poo for brains not to realise that the terror mongering of The Anti-legal High Prohibitionists is typical Nonsense which has always underpinned prohibitions of every sort, and that all their so-called ‘evidence’ is ridiculously un-objective and Extremely dubious.

Read>>>> NZ Research finds Synthetic Cannabis Low Risk. The Star Trust.

Of course the police dont want the sheeple to consider the reality that it is Prohibition which is responsible for clandestine P labs being set up in Rental properties, and that prohibition prevents Meth from being manufactured in safe industrial facilities… thus any explosions and fires which result in destruction of property, Injury, and even death, may be squarely blamed on *Prohibition*.

Tim Wikiriwhi.
Libertarian Independent.

Utilitarianism vs Libertarianism. Socialist pragmatism vs Libertarian Idealism

quote-Aristotle-plato-is-dear-to-me-but-dearer-102583

It has been with great sadness that over the past year I have witnessed my fellow Libertarian Blogger Richard Goode change tack and sail off course, and now become an apologyst for Socialist Statism.

This has been evidenced by his entire behaviour in relation to the Psychoactive Substances Act, and particular with regards to Synthetic Cannabis.

To make my point I refer you to all his Blog posts on this subject in which he consistently demonstrates that he believes all the Negative hype about the dangers of Synthetics… which in is in my view incredulous considering the history of Prohibition, and it’s reliance on Lies and phobia about drug use, as supposed vindication for the Governments perpetration of a highly oppressive war upon it’s own citizens.

While he calls himself a Libertarian, He has in reality swallowed the Socialist lie that Harm Minimisation is a legitimate function of Government and has attempted to formulate an argument for this >>>Here<<<, yet it is a tragic testimony to his having put the Cart before the horse. While Libertarianism has many pragmatic advantages over Socialist tyranny, Libertarianism is firstly an Individualist Ideology.... a philosophy which embodies clear principles of Law and Justice which protects the sovereignty of Individuals from tyrannical Government, and the pragmatic advantages for society... to the degree that there are any... are merely the By-product which flows from these principles. The Free society is a far more Humane and enlightened civilisation than socialism, and the type of Self reliant- self responsible, and charitable citizenry it fosters, and the peaceful Social interaction which spontaneously generates in a coexistence free of political coercion and advantage... are all extremely preferable ... pragmatically speaking.... yet to mistake these benefits as being the vindication for it's principles is utterly false. The Vindication for Libertarianism is in it's *Justice* for Individuals, and it's defence of the Individual's self-ownership, and it's Principled limits to political power... whether the will of a Monarch, or 'The mandate of the Majority'...the will of the largest Mob. Ie Libertarianism protects Individuals, minorities, and even Majorities, from Social arbitrary Law. That is what vindicates Libertarianism... not its pragmatic social advantages, and certainly not any idea of 'Harm minimisation' for the individual. Libertarians ought to have social concern for others, yet that is an utterly foreign principle to Libertarian ideology... It is in fact a definitive *Socialist* political lever, and pseudo-justification for Political intervention...and it is here where my friend has gone so far astray... Libertarianism embodies voluntary community action. Believe me when I say that I sympathise which how he was lured down this road... It was because the Anti-Prohibitionist movement (in particular Cannabis Law reformers) whom were never Libertarians began to argue for an end to prohibition... not on the basis of Individual rights, but on the basis that Cannabis was safer than alcohol. This was the socialist 'Harm minimisation' Doctrine... which sought to win over the socialist parliament by convincing a big enough mob that by allowing legal cannabis, they would be helping to reduce the Evils of Alcoholism which have been exacerbated by its monopolistic Legal Status. These arguments are thoroughly aimed at a socialist pragmatic mentality which prevails both within New Zealand's parliament, and in our society as a whole. It is a Utilitarian mentality which has abandoned all ideological principles of justice in pursuit of 'The Greatest Happiness'. Under this philosophy the Government can do whatever it pleases with individuals as long as it can convince a majority, that it's actions are conducive to the collective well being of society as a whole. Thus Individuals have become the property 'of society'. Society may overstep a persons individual liberty and self-responsibility either under the pretence of protecting the Hapless individual from himself, or the pretence of minimizing 'problems' that individual choices can have upon Society at large... esp Financial strains upon 'social services' which are run by the government and funded collectively via taxation. Druggies are deemed to be an inexcusable burden upon the system. pink judge

It is under these pretences that modern Socialist judges have no compunction against Jailing peaceful old Pot smokers whom refuse to submit to the Political will of Nanny state.
*Jail is deemed to be for their own good, and the Good of society as a whole*

They believe the ruinous effects upon an individuals life of incarceration are in fact preferable to ‘allowing him’ to continue in his drug use, and that society is safer while drugs are actively being suppressed by the Police.
*Freedom is dangerous* *Nanna Knows Best* *Etc*.

Now it is not the place here and now for me to argue why this whole socialist perspective is utter tyrannical, or why Libertarianism denies it is the proper duties of government to provide social services like public health care.
It ought to be enough to point out how utterly at variance with Libertarianism, this whole approach to ending Cannabis prohibition is.

I shall proceed to explain how my Brother Blogger took his wrong turn and has now wandered so far off track that he has crossed the line and is no longer worthy of the Name *Libertarian*.
My explanation is not written to vilify, but to show how easily this deviation occurred.

Not only do I sympathise with my fellow blogger, but hope that after contemplating what I have written that he will correct his course back over to the Libertarian side.

Many years ago many Kiwi Libertarians, including myself, as members of the Late Great yet struggling Libertarianz party, were supportive of a proposal written by Richard Goode for having a Transitional policy for Drug Law reform, which was accepted because it provided a rational pathway of least resistance to ending the war on drugs.

Our previous policy of simply legalising all drugs was too much for the voting public to swallow and had absolutely no hope of ever being adopted in totality, and so the new proposal presented to the voting public and parliament, was that the War be de-escalated starting with de-criminalising the softer drugs first, and then as fears were alleviated by having legal highs, that support could then be gained for further reforms, with ultimate end being an absolute end to the war on drugs.

elephant_one_bite

We would devour the Prohibition elephant one bite at a time… leaving the boniest portions till last.
And what defined ‘soft drugs’ was their perceived ‘safer than alcohol’ status.

The virtue of this policy was that it was idealistic, yet also realistic as means to our ultimate end because it was far more popular with the People… there was already support for Cannabis Law reform and our definition of cannabis as a ‘softer drug than alcohol’ was met with great enthusiasm from the Socialist faction of Cannabis Law reform movement whom are by far the greatest majority in the movement.

I have no doubt that Richard ‘liberated’ his definition for ‘soft drugs’ for the Libertarianz party transitional drug policy directly from the Socialists.

Richard’s policy was genius, as it unified Idealism with pragmatical realism, and popularity.
He ought to be proud of it.

Unfortunately though, in the years that have since past, and with the de-registration of the Libertarianz party, and Richard joining and now representing the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party, which is still predominantly a Socialist Party, He has obviously lost his Libertarian bearings.

He has forgotten that The Libertarians supported his transitional policy because of it’s progression of Justice… not because it’s starting point of legalising softer drugs was in any way supposes Libertarians endorse the socialist idea that Governments ought to concern themselves with ‘harm reduction’.

It is only in the light of these sorts of consideration that as Libertarian I had anything good to say about the Psychoactive substances act.

To the degree that it did allow a special dispensation to some products to be legally available, and also allowed a convoluted means (in theory) for other products to eventually make it to Market… having run the ‘regulation gauntlet’, it was supposed to be an improvement on the ‘Ban everything as they appear’ prohibition-ism which was the prevailing ‘socialist wisdom’ at the beginning of the rise of synthetic dugs which are now being manufactured to bypass existing prohibitions.

The thing was that Richard had now utterly lost all sight of what Libertarianism is about, and swallowed the socialist ‘Harm minimisation’ pill that he actually condemned the PSA for being too Libertarian!
*He was thoroughly in the Socialist Camp that it is the governments duty to decide what Citizens are allowed to ingest*

He was outraged that Peter Dunne was not acting Nanny Statist enough… because in his mind it was committing a crime by allowing dangerous and untested Synthetic Cannabis to be legally sold!

He relentlessly fanned the fires of Anti-Synthetic Cannabis hysteria… much to the joy of many of his Pro-cannabis Socialist mates, and condemned the Legal highs industry as evil profiteers at the expense of Hapless sheeple.

He told them to voluntarily remove their products, and castigated them for not heeding him… saying that a backlash was growing which would result in their products being banned.
I said that I didn’t think that would happen, yet I was wrong on that count… and I am sure he experienced euphoria when…. being an election year… and with all the Media sensationalism surrounding the Anti-legal high lobby that via the ensuing shysterism/ party politicking of the powers that be.. that the Libertarian portions of the Act got blotted out, and the means by which products could be deemed safe and thereby legalised… was virtually shut.

(Read my post on this >>>Here<<<) This was a leap backwards in the struggle to End Drug prohibition as it re-invigorated Prohibitionism. The world was watching and prohibitionists everywhere celebrated. Having Legal highs in New Zealand... they say... proved to be a failure. discoredia-the-evil-dead-drugs-raves-and-othe-L-MthvyL

Richard and his friend Blogger Mark Hubbard now dwell on the Dark side.
They ignore studies which suggest synthetic cannabis is relatively safe, and instead invoke terror by calling it ‘Legal Heroin’ ‘like P’…. etc… as if Libertarians support the War on Heroin and Meth!

Mark blames the Government for all the supposed troubles experienced by Legal high users… as if they have no personal responsibility.

*BOGUS!*

I have no problem with Libertarians believing certain drugs to be dangerous… even if they are getting their information from patently Dubious sources.
Of course there can be dangers involved in taking drugs.
Alcohol is dangerous… yet to say their Dangerous nature justifies Prohibitions is patently Un-libertarian and socialist!
The philosophical war they have declared is a Socialist Jihad against Individual Rights and Liberties!

call nanana

Richard’s last blog post attempts to be an argument for the government socialist interventions
He by passes the fundamental Libertarian principles which clearly define and articulate the legitimate function of government as being strictly limited to defending Rights and Liberties of individuals, and instead substitutes that with his bogus Pragmatist doctrine of ‘Harm minimisation’ which is pure Utilitarian Socialism … not Libertarianism.
To say that he is going ‘Back to basics’ could not be further from the truth

He attempts to smoke you readers by saying harm minimisation is a legitimate concern of Government with the bogus rationalisation that preventing ‘itself’ from putting people in Jail… which is harmful … as being a form of ‘Harm minimisation’ when in reality the principles involved are no such thing!
He has stitched up a sophistry which is in complete contradiction to Libertarian limited government.

The Legal and just principles against unjust imprisonment are keeping constitutional restraints forbidding the State from stepping outside it’s legitimate and just functions and encroaching upon our legitimate liberties, and violating our Rights which it has been instituted to protect!

This is black and white… lines not to crossed…. spheres of liberty, personal ethics, the pursuit of happiness, and self-responsibility… not to be encroached upon… not even for ‘harm minimisation’.

There are Powers never to be usurped… and they are not contingent upon whether or not Nanny State’s dictates are harmful or beneficial to either society or Individuals themselves.

It could very well be that some Laws could prevent idiots from harming themselves… yet to the Libertarian… that is no justification for passing oppressive laws…. which treat everyone like idiots… and gives the State paternalistic powers.
Harm minimisation is an endorsement of social interventions, not Libertarian self- ownership and responsibility.

Libertarians say that to allow the Government to legislate to protect people from themselves is to people the world with Fools.

Read my Blog post on this >>>Here<<< Richard... the Philosopher... no doubt assumes the Libertarian principle of having an arbitrary demarcation for being of Age of 'Adult consent and culpability' (in regards to being allowed to purchase alcohol without Parental permission) as being a form of 'Regulation' and 'Supply control'... which is again Bullshit. By that way of thinking All Laws are 'Regulations'... and that therefore the only 'Free market' can exist is under Anarchy. That R18 Principle of Law is necessary in regards to Legal parental rights and responsibilities, and custodianship , yet a young person ought to be able to apply for Adult Status earlier. Libertarianism is not Anarchy. It recognises a limited legitimate sphere for Government, yet these do not include 'Licensing products'... like alcohol, FDA approval, or Taxes, or 'Harm minimisation' etc. The only 'License' Libertarians would support is an R18 age restriction on the purchase and sale of liquor, etc with those whom violate this condition being criminally liable and negate their right to sell. If parents allow their own kids to enjoy alcohol, Pot, etc at a younger age, that is their own business. If Parents want to try alternative treatments on their sick infant children such as Cannabis... they have that fundamental right. I brew some booze yet I also buy Alcohol, and pay taxes on it. It does not mean I support the Status quo.... yet I still believe it is better... more Libertarian than outright prohibition. The same with proposals to 'Educate', 'Tax', and 'Regulate' Cannabis. Again I dont say that is the Libertarian Objective, yet it is better than current Prohibition. Richard and Mark have utterly abandoned Libertarianism and become Socialist Statist Prohibitionists. You have abandoned principles of Justice in favour of Socialist Utilitarian Pragmatism. To recover yourselves and to restore yourselves into the Libertarian fold is simple, and it does not require you to drop your opinion about the Safety of Synthetic Cannabis, or mean you must cease arguing that you think Real cannabis is safer. All it requires you to do is to stop arguing that 'Harm minimisation' is a legitimate concern of governments, and desist from supporting any prohibitions on drugs. If on the other hand you think the War on P, on H, and on Synthetics is justifiable, and legitimate, will them please desist from calling yourselves Libertarians. small gold guy_0

It has only been a few weeks since Synthetic cannabis was taken off the shelves, and yet My InLaws reported seeing a bunch of people sniffing glue in the Park.
So much for Harm reduction!

Tim Wikiriwhi.
Christian Libertarian.

Dunne fails Drugs Test. Colin Espiner. Sunday Star Times. May 4 2014

legal_high_jinks

A very good commentary appeared in this weeks Sunday Star Times which articulates many of my own opinions regarding Peter Dunne’s/ The National Party collapse and back pedal regarding the PSA and banning all Synthetic Cannabis products.

This was Election year shystery on an almost unprecedented scale in recent memory… to the degree that it absolutely caught me off guard… so resolute were all voices, on all sides that the PSA was working and that Banning things was not the solution.
I heard these words directly from horses in both Major party Stables only a few weeks ago at the Hamilton contingent of the Anti-legal high rallies.
I should not have been so naive… Of course absolutely nothing is safe… nothing is absolutely ‘not for sale’ on election year, and the sensationalist socialist conservative media was having a field day with this hot potato… the likes of TV3’s John Campbell was relishing playing ‘Moral Cleric’ and inciting a Jihad on Legal highs with the most un-objective and grubby media sensationalism.

Silly me.

Labour’s barrel scraping leader David Cunliffe spotting an opportunity to score political points against National shamelessly and without regard for Justice or the Social costs,… without a scrap of objectivity or scientific vindication decided it was in Labours political best interest to reneg on their support for Peter Dunnes PSA… and I am sure many of Labours and Nationals own MPs were just as surprised as me at the swiftness of this reversal and re-posturing…. and greatly embarrassed by it as they had only weeks ago argued that the PSA was working and that ‘Banning stuff’ doesn’t work!
(Yet I dont expect their embarrassment lasted long, and has been overcome by the political gains their party made via this shysterism)

I also know that for none of them… esp not Peter Dunne… was the underlying ideas of establishing Legal alternatives to alcohol the real ambition of the PSA.
It was always primarily a tool whereby Parliament could Ban substances produced in synthetic Drug labs as they appeared on the shelves, and Dunne and co were always actively encouraging the State health system, etc to file negative and highly subjective reports about Legal highs to be used by parliament as vindications for manufacturing new legislative prohibitions.
Add to this that PM John Key has vetoed the use of animals for testing the safety of legal highs… while still allowing it on other products… just goes to show how shystery and duplicitous this whole Mickey Mouse PSA ‘Due precess’ really is.

The world was very interested in the Psychoactive Substances Act, and was hailing it as an enlightened alternative to the failing and oppressive prohibitions and the war on drugs…. expecting New Zealand to be one of the first western nations to have clinically tested and relatively safe legal recreational alternatives to alcohol.
Well Dunne failed the drug test! and what is most sad about it is that not only will this cause suffering to the industry, jobs, etc, and suffering to Recreational drug users whom must now return to the illicit black market… the ripples with travel about the globe because the truth about how this attempt at establishing a legitimate/ Legal high market was torpedoed… by posturing spineless Politicians who put their own self-interest on an election year…ahead of justice and Social well being …will be buried, and instead the notion will be that ‘Synthetic cannabis was found to cause great social chaos in New Zealand’…. therefore attempts in other nations by reformers to mitigate the War on drugs and to set up a regulatory system which allows relatively safe alternatives to alcohol… like Synthetic cannabis will meet a strengthened Anti-drug resistance armed with the False Data from this outward looking New Zealand legislative failure.

I also think that this reversal has set back any hope of the legalisation of cannabis because these moves have Revitalised the Prohibitionists, whom were beginning to falter…. and so I shake my head and sigh that so many Activists who seek an end to the War on cannabis, had so little foresight, so little moral integrity as to buy into all the Anti-legal high hype, and jump onto the Prohibitionist wagon and join the throng calling to Ban synthetic cannabis.
Many did so wilfully refusing to apply their first hand knowledge about how prohibitions are fuelled by irrational exaggerations, un-objectivity, lies, and ignorant fears… ie “Reefer Madness”, etc.
They did so in pure hypocrisy, out of an unprincipled and devious belief that some how the more they incited terror against synthetic cannabis… and hyped up just how evil society imagined these products were… that somehow this would make cannabis appear much more ‘acceptable’.
I think they have mis-calculated badly…. even though in New Zealand we can expect the entire future conversation of the Cannabis reform movement to have shifted away from Cannabis use being a rightful liberty and being safer than alcohol, to now a call for an end to cannabis prohibition by primarily using this newly manufactured mania against synthetics… as a lever… as a threat…even though the perceived Dangers synthetics poses to the public is largely founded upon lies.
For me it is shameful to try and capitalise off the oppression of another unpopular minority for the sake of your own advantage.
I refuse to be party to it.

These events clearly demonstrate just how exposed life and liberty is to the Machiavellian whiles of Party Politics in New Zealand because we have no constitutional protection against power lusting Demagogues who put their own interests ahead of Rights, Liberties, Justice, and Social well-being.
We are utterly expose to the winds of Media manufactured terror.
The survival of PSA was a house of cards…. relying solely on the maintenance of the cross-party consensus as to its pragmatic value and Users and distributors were fed to the hounds as soon as one party blinked.

The ultimate travesty will be that inspite of Cunliffe/ Key systerism Re The PSA Labour will fail to get elected and so the rights and well being of the Users and distributors will have been sacrificed for nought!

And the collapse demonstrated just how full of unscrupulous Bastards our parliament is peopled with.
If we had a just Libertarian Constitution, virtually none of them could function.
All their Legal mumbo jumbo would be binned.
They would be like Evil witches with their wands taken away!

Ironically One party did maintain themselves and refused to back the new changes (passed though the house tonight).
The Greens.
They refused to be swayed, saying they believed the perceived dangers driving the prohibitions were exaggerations and that in reality the PSA had been working!
Is it a Blue Moon?
I find myself Saluting the Greens!
Well done!

Tim Wikiriwhi
Christian Libertarian.

dunne fails drug test

dunne fails drug test 007

dunne fails drug test 006
I dont know why I could not find this article on the net when there is what I thought was a full copy of this Sunday Star Times edition >>>Here<<<<... yet this opinion piece is strangely missing? I found this omission 'Odd'... yet I am no expert at these matters... what can be inferred from such omissions? Obviously not a Full E-copy. I am keen to discuss this article with readers and Reformers, and I think it is important that foreign researchers on this debate can gain reference from it as an independent commentary. I have made attempts to contact the author via Facebook.

Any Doubts? Legalise!

probition doesnt work april14 008

“Better that 100 innocents burn than one witch escape”…. saith the Grand inquisitor.

“Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer.” saith Blackstone.

“Tiz Better to er on the side of Liberty than tyranny.”
A Libertarian Maxim.

So many issues confronting legislators are hard to decide.
When tempers and fears…. and vested interests are threatened many things are deemed to be ‘scientifically proven to be evil…. only later to be discovered that it was ‘Science falsely so-called’

Only Fools believe that it is the duty of Government to investigate all things and legislate accordingly…. Once general principles of Liberty and justice have been established, if a certain thing upsets a particular sector of society… yet cannot be certainly proven to contravene those principles… the practice ought not to be banned, and society ought to be left to deal with it via their personal domain of self responsibility, and Freedom.
Even when certain practices have strong evidence to be harmful, it does not automatically justify prohibitions.
There are principles of self ownership, Liberty, etc which protect the individual from becomming the subject of the Government.
Eg Cigarettes may be hazardous, yet they ought not to be banned.
Anti-smoking groups are of course free to preach against smoking, yet society must take care that their constituted legislators are forbidden from making Laws which violate personal sovereignty and responsibility.
A persons Health… what they choose to consume… is their own business.

Does Gay marriage encroach upon the rights and liberties of Straights?
It may be indirectly detrimental… yet still it is better to er on the side of Liberty.

Party Pills, synthetic cannabis… are they really dangerous to those who consume them?
What sort of relevance does that question even really have in regards to justice and the question of their Legitimate rights and liberties???
None!
They should be legal, and it be a matter of personal responsibility whether or not an individual chooses to Use or abstain.

Sudafed ought to be Legal.
Guns should not be Banned.
You should be allowed to ride your motorbike without a helmet.

probition doesnt work april14 009

Currently their is a witch-craze brewing in regards to synthetic cannabis.
‘Reports are flowing in that it is Harmful…. causing psychosis, etc…. yet how much weight should we put on such claims?
Others say…. we dont have enough ‘good scientific Data’ to determine if said products are ‘safer than alcohol’…. all of which is ridiculous given that alcohol is lethal… and the question of the Safety of a product like synthetic cannabis… is irrelevant!
It’s a Bogus concept from start to Finnish!

I dont expect the sheeple to understand this.
They are Idiots who worship the State and expect to be treated like children… yet I am gob smacked…. I am appalled by the so-called ‘Liberals’ who have forsaken the tenets of Liberty and have become the advocates on Nanny State…. under the guise of ‘public Safety’!

What is even more despicable is that Many are doing so for the most underhanded reasons…. they have an agenda whereby they gain Liberty for themselves at the expense of another unpopular minority… a lot like Nazi Collaborators who thought it expedient to betray Jews and gypsies.

The greatest problem with being a Libertarian Idealist is that Everyone is against you… even many who pretend to be ‘Libertarians!’

99% of Everyone has Pet hates and prejudices which they think vindicates oppressive powers of State!
Everyone wants freedom for themselves, yet desire the State to trample over some particular ‘rodent population’.

“He who would sacrifice Freedom for Safety, deserves neither” Benjimin Franklin.

“The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools. Herbert Spencer.

“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.”
Albert Camus

“Absolute power corrupts even when exercised for humane purposes. The benevolent despot who sees himself as a shepherd of the people still demands from others the submissiveness of sheep. The taint inherent in absolute power is not it’s inhumanity, but it’s anti-humanity.”
Eric Hoffer

“The greatest tyrannies are always perpetuated in the name of the noblest causes.”
Thomas Paine

“Every collectivist revolution rides in on a Trojan horse of “emergency”. It was the tactic of Lenin, Hitler and Mussolini. In the collectivist sweep over a dozen minor countries of Europe…And “emergency” became the justification of subsequent steps. This technique of creating emergency is the greatest achievement that demagoguery attains.”

Herbert Hoover

soda

The Greatest lie of all is that if something is legal it must be ‘safe’… and therefore unless we know something is Safe…. it ought to be made illegal.
*This is the very antithesis of Libertarian Liberty and self responsibility!
It is the recipe for Totalitarian Nanny State!

Nothing Negates Moral self-responsibility for Independent Adults!
Only Force and Fraud can be rightfully outlawed.
It’s not the governments fault when a fool drinks or smokes himself to death… It’s his own fault!
Stop trying to make the State responsible for everything!
If you believe something is Bad… Use your legitimate powers to enlighten and warn others… but never call for an expansion of Government or for Laws which encroach into the domain of Liberty and self-responsibility.

Only when you see Force or fraud ought you to intervene, and call the Police.

What matters is Freedom and individual rights and sovereignty…. not some fictitious safety standard!
Leave individuals free to determine the Risk/ benefits.

the inquisition
The Grand inquisition.

Spare me all the bitching about how your Teens wont obey you… how they wont talk to you any more!
Dont blame it on the drugs…. how about looking in the mirror when you are nutting out like a Lunatic!
How do you expect your youth to respond to such lunacy?
Maybe whats going on in regards to your failing relationships has more to do with your incompetence, Bigotry, and Hypocrisy rather than ‘evidence’ that Drugs are adversely effecting your Young adults Brains.????
And what good do you think getting the Police to impose your Fanaticism upon to them is going to do????

What is the ultimate Irony of all is that the Drug war is absolutely disastrous with regards to the safety and well being of our Youth… and expanding it is the absolute worst thing to do.
Tim Wikiriwhi

banna phone

Read more….

Albert J Nock and the Atrophy of Charity and Self-Reliance.

Life before Suffocating Nanny State Bubble wrap.

Forbes: Everything You’ve Heard About Crack And Meth Is Wrong

Let’s talk rationally about Synthetic Cannabis and how society ought to manage it.

New Prohibitions. How our Police and Government work for Criminal Gangs.

Historic battles. The Libertarian struggle against Drug Prohibition. Why BZP should have been kept Legal.

The Broad way. Morality by vote. Social Arbitrary Law.

Tim Wikiriwhi’s Submission to the New Zealand Government’s Constitutional Review. 2013

More nous, less nows

procrastinationdemotivator

A friend gave me this excellent DEMOTIVATOR® from Despair.com several Christmases ago. And, recently, I finally got a round tuit. I put the damn thing up on the wall of my home office!

The poster represents an ever timely life lesson.

Perhaps life’s greatest lesson is that life itself is a lesson. That was my ex-wife’s sort of New Age spiritual viewpoint, in a nutshell, anyway. She had a firm intuition that we are each thrown into this mortal sphere of existence for a reason or reasons—to learn our spiritual life lesson(s). Of course, being a committed atheist and moral nihilist at the time, I mocked the idea. It’s only now, a repentant worldview and a decade of divorce later, that I’m wondering if she was right, after all. (And kicking myself for not asking the obvious question at the time. If life is a lesson, who sets the curriculum?)

Or, perhaps, life’s a Stanley Milgram experiment.

A test of your Moral character and conviction.
The decisions you make throughout your life are all being observed and recorded.
One day you will be asked to give account.

God as teacher and/or God as experimenter? I don’t think that Tim’s suggesting that life on Earth is, quite literally, an experiment. So I will! (A misbegotten experiment, perhaps? No, I’ll leave it to a detractor to suggest that. Also, I’ll leave it to the apologists for God’s supposed omniscience to explain this.)

How did you do? If life’s a classroom and every day’s a school day, did you study hard? Or did you just fritter and waste the hours in an offhand way? If life’s a Stanley Milgram experiment, did you go with the Word or go with the crowd?

One day you will be asked to give account. If life’s a lab running a Stanley Milgram experiment, you will be judged on how you used your God-given faculty of free will. Did you make the right decisions, and evince moral character and conviction? (The decisions you make throughout your life are all being observed and recorded.) Whereas, if life’s a classroom, you will be judged on how you used your God-given learning ability. Were you a willing, conscientious, hard-working student of life? Did you learn and practise the right things? (Everything you learn and practise goes down on your academic record.)

Classroom or lab? Are we God’s students, or are we his experimental test subjects? I suggest that life’s more lesson than lab, for the simple reason that we do not have a faculty of so-called free will, God-given or otherwise. The concept itself is a nonsense. What we do have is the God-given ability to learn and to change our behaviour. We also have the curriculum and the learning objectives. You’ll find it all in the prescribed text.

(Is Christianity complicated? Please don’t protest that God didn’t make it clear what are the right things to learn and practise. He did. The Bible contains massive redundancy. You know, like how the Ten Commandments are repeated in Deuteronomy, just in case you missed them in Exodus.)

Now, back to the DEMOTIVATOR® at the top.

(Did you see what Despair.com did there with the wee ®? They threatened to send their statist cronies around to your place to sort you out good and hard should you ever decide to go into business selling your own DEMOTIVATOR posters!)

The poster represents an ever timely life lesson. And the life lesson is, learn the power of delaying gratification. Rejoice and be glad!

the children who were best able to delay gratification subsequently did better in school and had fewer behavioral problems than the children who could only resist eating the cookie for a few minutes—and, further, ended up on average with SAT scores that were 210 points higher. As adults, the high-delay children completed college at higher rates than the other children and then went on to earn higher incomes. In contrast, the children who had the most trouble delaying gratification had higher rates of incarceration as adults and were more likely to struggle with drug and alcohol addiction.

How to learn delayed gratification?

Rather than resist the urge to eat the cookie, these children distracted themselves from the urge itself. They played with toys in the room, sang songs to themselves, and looked everywhere but at the cookie. In short, they did everything they could to put the cookie out of their minds.

So, learning to delay gratification is not at all the same thing as learning to resist temptation. The results even suggest that any direct attempt to resist the urge to eat the cookie is worse than futile, it’s counter-productive. And, note, we’re talking about a non-starving child and a cookie. We’re not talking about a methamphetamine addict and a bag of P. And we’re certainly not talking about being offered all that you could ever want in the whole world and having it right now.

Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.”

Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’” (NIV)

Nope. Staring down temptation and simply commanding it to go away is way too hardcore for mere images of God! We can but pray, “Lead us not into temptation” in the first place. Give us this day our daily distraction!

Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things. (NIV)

The poster represents an ever timely life lesson. Delay gratification, do some work, and get your shit sorted. (Thanks for the round tuit.)