• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

Is a psychedelic revolution underway?

Migrated topic.
ghrue84

ghrue84

Rising Star
I just feel it coming. Slowly but surely, more and more people are being made aware to the fact that (at least the organic, not including synthesized ones) psychedelics are medicines and not drugs.

To me personally, I would classify a drug as something that is addictive and has negative effects both on one's body and mind/soul/energy, and I do not see psychedelics in such a way. To me they're sacred medicines that allow us to comunicate with either our higher selves or the gods of the earth and the universe. Or they could be plant teachers, teaching us what other humans cannot. They could be a multitude of different things, but they're not something that I see as harmful. In fact, they haved helped me quit many different addictions that I didn't even know I had, that had nothing to do with what people refer to as "drugs". I've quit cigarrettes and alcohol thanks to psilocybin. I've also quit playing poker, which was pretty much my sickest and realest addiction.

Me and a group of close friends have been experimenting with organic and synthetic psychedelics for the past few years and we've never ever had what I've seen people refer to as a bad trip. Why? I cannot answer that. Sometimes I've even wished that I had a bad trip so that I could understand why those trips happen and help other people so they don't get them, but at the same time I'm grateful for having plant teachers be my lovers and my friends. Nothing in the world has shown me as much love as psychedelics have. I love psychedelics, and I wish to help propel this revolution if need be.

The world needs change if the human race is to survive, we can either adapt and evolve, or remain the egotistical monkeys that we've always been and drive ourselves into extinction. What's it going to be? The world will be fine after it erradicates us if mother earth decides it needs to be done. For once think about the future, think about the future children. Do you want them to grow up in a world where they're scared of annihilation at a young age? Or do you want them to grow up in a world where humans live in harmony and symbiosis with nature?

By any means I do not mean to say that nature is all good or all bad. It is balance as we are. It has it's beautiful side and it has it's deadly side, but by reducing the amount of nature and increasing the amount of cement and metal, nature will eventually (and is already) fight (ing) back, and with this fight there is no doubt as to who will come out the winner. Nature is the earth's deadliest and most adaptive predator. Humans are the earth's most foolishly arrogant predator.

Then again, all of this just might be bullshit. But it's just how I feel.
 
This drug vs. medicine semantic argument really gets under my skin. I understand and do not disagree with the intention, but it is not going to win anyone over unless they are already in the choir. By definition, any medicine is also a drug and any drug is potentially a medicine. This cherry picking of words that have less negative connotation does nothing but muddy the waters.

I prefer to view psychedelic drugs as tools. They are very powerful tools that cannot be replaced by any other drug/medicine. But as with any tool or drug for that matter, they MUST be treated with respect. Psychedelic drugs are not immune to abuse. They might be more difficult to abuse, but the potential is still there.

For the most part, I agree and would love to see psychedelics adopted by mainstream culture but we must be careful not to derail the advancement with illogical arguments like psychedelics not being drugs.
 
syberdelic said:
This drug vs. medicine semantic argument really gets under my skin. I understand and do not disagree with the intention, but it is not going to win anyone over unless they are already in the choir. By definition, any medicine is also a drug and any drug is potentially a medicine. This cherry picking of words that have less negative connotation does nothing but muddy the waters.

I prefer to view psychedelic drugs as tools. They are very powerful tools that cannot be replaced by any other drug/medicine. But as with any tool or drug for that matter, they MUST be treated with respect. Psychedelic drugs are not immune to abuse. They might be more difficult to abuse, but the potential is still there.

For the most part, I agree and would love to see psychedelics adopted by mainstream culture but we must be careful not to derail the advancement with illogical arguments like psychedelics not being drugs.
Click to expand...

What he said. Simple. No debate.
 
I have often wondered if some sort of awakening is apon us.

The way this path sucks you in and progresses just feels ment to be.


And the my number synchronicitys....wtf is all that about.


Me and my roomate/ best friend since starting the use of psychs as a tool of self development and learning along with meditation, psychologic/ philosopic thought seems to have awakend something That has never ceased .

Finding that many others are having simaler experiences blows my mind...

Its magical :)
 
syberdelic said:
This drug vs. medicine semantic argument really gets under my skin. I understand and do not disagree with the intention, but it is not going to win anyone over unless they are already in the choir. By definition, any medicine is also a drug and any drug is potentially a medicine. This cherry picking of words that have less negative connotation does nothing but muddy the waters.

I prefer to view psychedelic drugs as tools. They are very powerful tools that cannot be replaced by any other drug/medicine. But as with any tool or drug for that matter, they MUST be treated with respect. Psychedelic drugs are not immune to abuse. They might be more difficult to abuse, but the potential is still there.

For the most part, I agree and would love to see psychedelics adopted by mainstream culture but we must be careful not to derail the advancement with illogical arguments like psychedelics not being drugs.
Click to expand...

The problem is, the word "drug" carries within itself a negative connotation to most people, mainly because of "the war on drugs" propaganda and other factors, and the majority of people would not attempt to ingest anything that is a "drug". The general public has been "educated" to think that the only drugs are the illegal ones that the government has banned. That is why I do not like the term "drug" to refer to psychedelics. Many people think that "drugs" are just something that junkies and addicts use. They don't classify the pharmaceuticals that they ingest pretty much whenever anything hurts as a drug, yet they will classify anything they have never ingested as one. That is why I proposed calling naturally ocurring psychedelics something else (mind altering substance, or mind expanding, plant teacher).

I have not suggested at all that they're not powerful tools, or that you shouldn't respect them. But the stigma attached to the word drug is one that does not invite or incite people to even attempt a psychedelic. Many people fear drugs. Perhaps it is just that I've never met someone that's been harmed by a correctly identified naturally occurring psychedelic and I think these things will be good for whoever does them in a proper setting with the proper intention. I do not include synthetic psychedelics in this discussion, as those tend to be the ones that people abuse the most and get harmed by the most, many times because of misidentification (thinking they have lsd or a safe analog when they have nbome, or other more dangerous substances), and other times by excessive dosages like consuming a shit ton of tabs, improper set, setting and intention, mixing different psychedelics, or mixing psychedelics with different types of drugs.
 
ghrue84 said:
By any means I do not mean to say that nature is all good or all bad. It is balance as we are. It has it's beautiful side and it has it's deadly side, but by reducing the amount of nature and increasing the amount of cement and metal, nature will eventually (and is already) fight (ing) back, and with this fight there is no doubt as to who will come out the winner. Nature is the earth's deadliest and most adaptive predator. Humans are the earth's most foolishly arrogant predator.
Click to expand...

I can appreciate the passion behind your words G, thanks for sharing.

Though I do not agree with everything you're saying, I understand your intentions. Prolonging our species's existence on this planet in a balanced, reciprocal relationship with nature is starting to become more of a widely accepted notion permeating throughout the western world. But it didn't happen over night. It happened over decades, with scientific evidence to support the claims being made. Even at this juncture, there are MANY who choose to deny the facts and refuse to adapt. I agree, something needs to happen. But how do you propose we change the denier's perception, even in the face of hard data? I propose individuals enacting the positive change they want to see in the world in themselves and in their immediate surroundings, before preaching for the whole world to get on board. It's really easy to play arm-chair philosopher and shout for a universal shift in consciousness, but what are you actually doing about it to see the change in your own life? (not trying to sound like a dick, I'm genuinely curious)

Adding to Syber & MAH's argument, getting caught up in the semantics of medicine vs. drug isn't very helpful at this point. What would be more beneficial is being an examplary psychonaut - advocating for responsible use, being a productive member of society, and integrating the lessons you've learned from your experiences in the most beneficial, healthy way possible. Organizing a trash clean-up at one of your local state parks is a great way to stand up for what you believe in...enacting positive change in your life that might just inspire others to do the same. Psychedelics have the potential to play a major role in repairing our relationship with mother nature, but you can't force someone to drop L or smoke spice. It's not for everyone, and I don't think it will ever *really* be integrated into mainstream culture. The call has to come from within ;)
 
There's no psychedelic revolution underway.
During the 60's, psychedelics became available to a public, not familiar yet with these substances and their effects.
Ever since, psychedelics have been, to a greater or lesser extent, part of popular culture.

I don't think that psychedelics could be REïntroduced. They're already here.

You can't have the same revolution twice.

There ís something of a paradigm shift going-on, though. Wich is taking place gradually.
But i think that psychedelics have relatively little to do with that.
 
GolgiFapparatus said:
ghrue84 said:
By any means I do not mean to say that nature is all good or all bad. It is balance as we are. It has it's beautiful side and it has it's deadly side, but by reducing the amount of nature and increasing the amount of cement and metal, nature will eventually (and is already) fight (ing) back, and with this fight there is no doubt as to who will come out the winner. Nature is the earth's deadliest and most adaptive predator. Humans are the earth's most foolishly arrogant predator.
Click to expand...

I can appreciate the passion behind your words G, thanks for sharing.

Though I do not agree with everything you're saying, I understand your intentions. Prolonging our species's existence on this planet in a balanced, reciprocal relationship with nature is starting to become more of a widely accepted notion permeating throughout the western world. But it didn't happen over night. It happened over decades, with scientific evidence to support the claims being made. Even at this juncture, there are MANY who choose to deny the facts and refuse to adapt. I agree, something needs to happen. But how do you propose we change the denier's perception, even in the face of hard data? I propose individuals enacting the positive change they want to see in the world in themselves and in their immediate surroundings, before preaching for the whole world to get on board. It's really easy to play arm-chair philosopher and shout for a universal shift in consciousness, but what are you actually doing about it to see the change in your own life? (not trying to sound like a dick, I'm genuinely curious)

Adding to Syber & MAH's argument, getting caught up in the semantics of medicine vs. drug isn't very helpful at this point. What would be more beneficial is being an examplary psychonaut - advocating for responsible use, being a productive member of society, and integrating the lessons you've learned from your experiences in the most beneficial, healthy way possible. Organizing a trash clean-up at one of your local state parks is a great way to stand up for what you believe in...enacting positive change in your life that might just inspire others to do the same. Psychedelics have the potential to play a major role in repairing our relationship with mother nature, but you can't force someone to drop L or smoke spice. It's not for everyone, and I don't think it will ever *really* be integrated into mainstream culture. The call has to come from within ;)
Click to expand...

I've always advocated responsible use, all of my friends who I've introduced to psychedelics have had learning experiences of which they're grateful for. I don't really advocate for lsd that much either, it just feels too mechanic and not as loving or teaching to me as mushrooms or dmt. It's not like I go around telling random people I don't know to go take a tab of lsd or dmt or psilocybin, which is what it seems you're assuming. The're various assumptions in your post that bother me and trying to bait someone into giving more information that they'd like is a bit out of line to say the least, especially in a place like this.

I agree that being an example is part of changing people's perception, but another part of changing people's perception is talking positively about these substances. Don't you see? If you talk negatively about a substace, you might actually be helping them have a bad trip. What you think about a psychedelic substance that you're ingesting might have an inmense effect on how the psychedelic treats you, at least that's what I believe from my experiences. After my first two psilocybin experiences (maybe after the first one or before, tbh it's been a while so I'm not sure), I've seen the psychedelic substances that I enjoy as friends, and teachers, and they've always treated me as my friends and my teachers. No one who I've introduced to psychedelics has resented having dived into the psychedelic realm.
 
dragonrider said:
There's no psychedelic revolution underway.
During the 60's, psychedelics became available to a public, not familiar yet with these substances and their effects.
Ever since, psychedelics have been, to a greater or lesser extent, part of popular culture.

I don't think that psychedelics could be REïntroduced. They're already here.

You can't have the same revolution twice.

There ís something of a paradigm shift going-on, though. Wich is taking place gradually.
But i think that psychedelics have relatively little to do with that.
Click to expand...

I say psychedelic revolution because I feel like psychedelics play a role in it, not because people are discovering psychedelics for the first time. By revolution I mean this: "a fundamental change in political organization; especially : the overthrow or renunciation of one government or ruler and the substitution of another by the governed" (from merriam webster dictionary).

In my personal experience and other people who I've met, psychedelics have had a huge part in reuniting us with nature and truly doing something to protect it and help it.

To be honest the 60s were an absolute failure, the government spread propaganda won that battle by a wide margin to say the least, I wouldn't call that a revolution. Where I live, psychedelics have been demonized since I can recall, I wouldn't say a revolution happened back then.
 
There is something going on. I was blown away to hear the president announce this morning that he plans to address the opiate crisis with tougher sentencing. His statement and intention is in direct opposition with the current of the conversation about drugs in my country. This isn't so very off topic, because this revolution that was spoken of is simply the evolution oyf the public relationship with drugs.

The people in my state said that we want to be able to smoke recreational marijuana. The city has closed two pods in the country jail (119 beds) in order to reallocate the funding to treatment. In several other ways, the paradigm change is evident in public policy. Is this the revolution you speak of?

There are sponsors in my state trying to get an initiative on the ballot in 2020 to vote on whether to allow psilocybin in therapy. Other states have seen bills to allow ibogaine.

The idea of decriminalization, or outright legalization of all scheduled substances, a concept that would have been decried as ridiculous less than twenty years ago, is being done in a couple places and talked about in others.

And yes, the face of the psychedelic user in 2017 is very different from that of 1967. Still overwhelmingly white, there seems to be an increasing number of older,professionals entering the fray. The addition of things like ayahuasca tourism creates a very different culture than that of the sixties.

Yes, what we have today evolved out of the cultural and social revolutions of the 20th century, now it seems to be a syncretization of original ceremonial and ritual use with modern therapy, filtered through acid rock rave and festival culture over the decades.

My my, what's become of the baby?
 
ghrue84 said:
It's not like I go around telling random people I don't know to go take a tab of lsd or dmt or psilocybin, which is what it seems you're assuming.
Click to expand...

That's not what I was assuming or suggesting at all. I'm sorry you took it that way and if I was unclear. I was making my opposing assertion, which is that psychedelics are not for everybody and it's highly unlikely to be accepted by the mainstream; but if we would like to generate interest from people outside of the community, I believe the best way to do so is to be responsible and to enact positive change personally/locally. I don't really see the benefit of the semantic medicine vs. drug issue, since the two are already practically interchangeable by definition. Of course, speak about psychedelics in a positive light, tell people about your amazing experiences. I see the point you're trying to make, but I don't think referring to psychedelics as drugs is negative, I think it's accurate.

Apologies if it came off as baiting, not my intention. It seemed like there was a lot of weight behind your words in the OP and I wanted to ask if you were doing anything in your life to integrate and act upon the messages you've been receiving :)
 
If someone prefers to call these substances drugs or medicine does not bother me. What bothers me is the insistence that they are not drugs. I feel that it causes the intention to backfire when presented to myself or anyone with a technical/scientific background. If there is any hope of bringing these substances into mainstream life/culture we need these individuals to be supportive and such inaccuracies work against this.

I think this is parallel to the proper reaction to terrorism. This negative connotation of the word "drug" is largely caused by the war on drugs. When there is a terrorist attack and people stop participating in society, this only furthers the intention of terrorism. By avoiding the term "drugs", it is a similar irrational response. It's not going to convince anyone who needs convincing. It's sort of a masturbatory thing that makes those who already agree with the idea feel better about their drug use, whether it is productive or not.
 
I would say psychedelics are drugs. I would also say they are medicines at the same time. The definition is pretty clear I think.

In pharmacology, a pharmaceutical drug, also called a medication or medicine, is a chemical substance used to treat, cure, prevent, or diagnose a disease or to promote well-being. Traditionally drugs were obtained through extraction from medicinal plants, but more recently also by organic synthesis.

I agree that insisting on saying they are not drugs could be detrimental to an discussion since, well..., since they ARE drugs by definition. I think a discussion where we say, yep they are drugs, and they are also beneficial medicines/drugs because of [insert peer reviewed papers, examples, testimonials here] could move the subject along its logical path and win open minds.
 
I think global society is beginning to revert. Drugs (or medicines if you prefer) were never a criminal matter until legislation was used to break up social groups that were opposing governments during the 60's. Never in all history were these things against the law, not in any sacred text coming down through the eons. (except for alcohol, go figure)

They have, and always will be a social issue. By making them illegal we just criminalise our instincts.

Forward thinking societies like Portugal and the Netherlands have seen this and tried the experiment for themselves, decriminalise all of them and help those who can't help themselves. Sadly economics is destroying their systems because there's money to be made in prohibition, and we are now a global economy.
 
i think there is much potential for a revolution. western spice scientific research is a newish thing. like computers. i imagine psychedelics used for biomechanics or something to that effect. viewed as technology rarther than drugs. mabey just a slight perspective change could turn the world into a spice frenzy... hmmm idk. just thinking out loud
 
Things will probably ramp up because of the internet, as they definitely have done in recent years. I recall the subject of DMT being brought up by some random guy at a bar and it took me by surprise.

I think the power of the internet itself pretty much is the revolution for now, if that's what it is. I think I've saw it this way for a while.
 
There is definitely an awakening happening, not just a psychedelic awakening but a global awakening. I think that a larger majority of younger people are much more open to psychedelics now than there used to be and as the population naturally ages the opinions of the younger generation will become the opinions of the older generation. Peoples view towards 'drugs' are changing, I mean think about the greater impact of the legalization of Cannabis in America. It was just the first stone to fall, paradigms are shifting.
 
I have to say, by definition, psychedelics are drugs.

I wouldn't call it a revolution, I like to think that there is an evolution, though. Culture changes with every generation and I am hopeful that despite stops and starts and backslides that we are moving in a positive direction that keeps in mind personal liberties, safety and the right to pursue happiness. Culture evolves constantly, drugs are just one small part of culture, evolving in concert.

Once we can lump coffee and sugar and fentanyl and lsd all in the same group of psychotropic drugs, we can then begin to make attempts to sort through the jumble for meaningful categories of psychotropics. And 'psychedelics' might be one of those categories.
 
Back
Top Bottom