Poll: If you buy cocaine, you have blood on your hands.

[dragonrider]

We all know how the cartels destabilize entire countries in south and central america. They kill men, women, and childeren by the dozens, who have never done anything wrong and who don't even pose a threat to their busines in any way, with the sole purpose to frighten and intimidate people. Their thirst for blood and their cruelty are boundless. Wherever they are, there is violence, terror and suffering. Everyone around them will either be killed by them, or corrupted one way or another.

The product they sell is no necessity and there are plenty of legal alternatives.

Therefore, if you use cocaine, you have blood on your hands. Yes or no?

 

[hug46]

There is also this....Cocaine users are destroying the rainforest - at 4 square metres a gram. The amount of people that i know who bang on about extinction rebellion etc on social media while at the same time shovelling pounds of coke up their noses is quite high...

 

[Exitwound]

Why focus only on cocaine? I belive majority of people on earth haven't even tried it. But almost everybody has a mobile phone.

If you buy anything manufactured or exported from China, you are directly supporting CCP dictatorship and also have blood on your hands.

If you buy gasoline, you are supporting other totalitarian regimes relying on oil exports like Russia, Venezuela or Saudis and also have blood on your hands.

I am genuinely not understanding, what is the point of this post?

 

[Voidmatrix]

Why focus only on cocaine? I belive majority of people on earth haven't even tried it. But almost everybody has a mobile phone.

If you buy anything manufactured or exported from China, you are directly supporting CCP dictatorship and also have blood on your hands.

If you buy gasoline, you are supporting other totalitarian regimes relying on oil exports like Russia, Venezuela or Saudis and also have blood on your hands.

I am genuinely not understanding, what is the point of this post?

Perhaps a poll thread could be focused on those too. The OP seems to only be of one focus for this survey, and that's cocaine. Your points on other instances of similarity is very valid though.

One love

 

[Tomtegubbe]

I believe there are many degrees and shades in the evilness of said things. Some things are easier to avoid than others. You have to draw the line somewhere, even though it's almost always arbitrary.

 

[dragonrider]

Why focus only on cocaine? I belive majority of people on earth haven't even tried it. But almost everybody has a mobile phone.

If you buy anything manufactured or exported from China, you are directly supporting CCP dictatorship and also have blood on your hands.

If you buy gasoline, you are supporting other totalitarian regimes relying on oil exports like Russia, Venezuela or Saudis and also have blood on your hands.

I am genuinely not understanding, what is the point of this post?

The point of this post is that it's a test.

I am interested to find out, what the value of a human life is to people within the psychedelic community, if it doesn't directly suit a particular agenda or narrative, like that of the legalisation of psycho-active substances.

 

[Exitwound]

Why focus only on cocaine? I belive majority of people on earth haven't even tried it. But almost everybody has a mobile phone.

If you buy anything manufactured or exported from China, you are directly supporting CCP dictatorship and also have blood on your hands.

If you buy gasoline, you are supporting other totalitarian regimes relying on oil exports like Russia, Venezuela or Saudis and also have blood on your hands.

I am genuinely not understanding, what is the point of this post?

The point of this post is that it's a test.

I am interested to find out, what the value of a human life is to people within the psychedelic community, if it doesn't directly suit a particular agenda or narrative, like that of the legalisation of psycho-active substances.

Well then I think it's a badly designed test, because only valid/reasonable answer is implied by the original question. You won't get any meaningful result from that kind of test/question.

I think this is related to the quirk of human psychology that, say, death of a close friend for example would be much more emotionally impactful on most people than death of 1000 african children from huffing glue every day. It is the same effect we are observing right now with the pandemic. Same kind of effect is reflected in famous saying, excuse me for butchering it but, "death of a one is a tragedy, death of a million is a statistic".

I think it is because human mind has evolved for survival and if 1000 non-directly-relatable deaths would impact us a thousand times more than death of a close person, our minds would simply overload and explode.

We are just not able to grasp the full effect of our actions and maybe we are not inteded to do so.

Most would answer yes to your question, but how many would refuse a line of coke from a friend during a rave?

I mean most of us, non-holy beings, should be ashamed by only the fact of our existence, because we are standing on piles of bones of our ancestors. Or should we really?

Your original question certainly rises very interesting thoughts and questions

 

[Th3_tRuTh]

No.

While I do not support the cartels and wish mankind never discovered coffee, and thus cocaine, I do feel like even the idea of blood on one's hands is subjective. Do I have blood on my hands if I truly do not feel responsible for that blood, or even see that there is blood? I do not feel responsible for the electronics I use that ultimately support some other ugly business model that causes someone pain somewhere. Is this apathy? I don't think so. I can have compassion for people and still use something that caused someone else pain. So where is the line?

When we consider our diet and nutrition, how many of us think about the global and long-term affects of that diet? I was a fatty meat loving, ketogenic weight lifter for a few years of my recovery, never once considered that I was costing the planet about 100,000 liters of water a year. I eat differently today, but not because of conviction about the global water cost to supply my meat, but because I feel better for it. My body likes my diet today.

I do not believe that if you do coke, you have blood on your hands. I feel like that is a scare tactic message that never has the desired effect. I feel like you could take the same position with so many things, and yes it would benefit the entire planet if there were no cartels, but it would also benefit the entire planet if we stopped using fossil fuels and we all ate fresh fruit/veggies and fish, but we won't, not yet.

Change is happening, big change, but big change is slow. People will stop using coke, and buying shit they don't need, and eating shit they shouldn't be eating, etc.. It's already happening. It's just gonna take time.

 

[jamie]

I will refrain from going into the larger picture of gasoline and cell phones etc.

In the context of my own life, I have taken a negative stance towards cocaine use in the west. I have taken it less than 5 times in my life, and personally never felt a pull to go back. The last time I took it was 17 years ago.

I have seen my friends use it in excess and go downhill quick. I spent a year in a relationship with a person who had a habit of using it constantly.

I went to shambhala and bass coast music festivals for 5 years, and the ammount of cocaine consumed at those raves is incredible. You can attend a talk on rainforest conservation and then head off to the main stage with the same crew to snort cocaine and ketamine all night long and then come home and tell everyone about your higher morals and conscious community.

In terms of a drug itself, it is just a drug. The current consequences of it's presence in the west are however, enough for me to raise an eyebrow...and even call the odd person out on the discontinuation of logic that they exemplify.

I really feel these festivals and drug spaces(or w/e they are) should support a little more cocaine shaming. Other countries need us to do so.

Edit...I lied! I tried a coca leaf tea a few months ago while skateboarding. I enjoyed it, it was a nice alternative to tea.

 

[Jees]

I avoid burdening my conscience unnecessary, it is already heavy enough. Can't avoid causing suffering by just living on this earth, fact, but will draw the line somewhere. I won't buy!

 

[Hyper Turtle]

I actually think all 3 answers have some validity to them. It is a multi faceted issue.

Of course there is the direct truth that cartels do shed blood, and buying from them is supporting that, consciously or not. So yes.

There is the option of synthesized cocaine, circumventing the cartels altogether, which makes the answer a no, not necessarily.

I'd say it's undeniable that "law enforcement" carries much of the blame. I wouldn't even call it law enforcement, because when the war on drugs was started, a lot of it was enforcing laws of one country in others where that was not the law. So it was more war than anything else. Similar to alcohol prohibition, this created an environment for the cartels to exist, for them to grow filthy rich and become the way they have.

I wouldn't even be surprised at all if certain USA agencies were the ones who initially armed the cocaine cartels, as a way to covertly combat whatever political figures they disliked at the time, just as they did many of the middle eastern groups that they later went to war against. They seem to either not learn from past mistakes, or actually enjoy to stir things up and let them get out of hand in places outside their jurisdiction.

It's true, cocaine is not a biological necessity for humans. Neither is opium, alcohol, or DMT. I'm not aware of any wars having been fought about DMT specifically, which makes it an exception in that list, but i'd be surprised if a lot of the MHRB did not come from amazon deforestation.

You know, actual rainforest wood has historically not been a much less bloody business than the cocaine trade. Teak, Mahogany, you name it. Bananas. Rare earths (that's the things without which there's no feasible wind electricity, no cell phones, etc). Don't even start talking diamonds.

So yes, cocaine is an ethically dubious product, among the worst. It wouldn't have to be. Farmers across the globe could grow it. Labs across the globe could synth it. People could have their own few bushes to make a few grams per year. Even better, people could chew the leaves or make tea with them and avoid some of the worse outcomes we see happen with the purified alkaloid.

Oh wait, there's that pesky law enforcement again ...

Edit:
I'd like to hear about legal alternatives. In my country, narcotics law knows a few categories of substances. The last of which is "substances that act similarly to one of the previous categories". Cocaine is one of these previous categories. While there is a list that complements this law, to clarify the status of individual compounds, anything that is similar enough to maybe count as an alternative will be on that list within a year or so of becoming known. Coca plants and all parts of them including the seeds are illegal in most countries afaik.

 

[Th3_tRuTh]

I'd like to hear about legal alternatives. In my country, narcotics law knows a few categories of substances. The last of which is "substances that act similarly to one of the previous categories". Cocaine is one of these previous categories. While there is a list that complements this law, to clarify the status of individual compounds, anything that is similar enough to maybe count as an alternative will be on that list within a year or so of becoming known. Coca plants and all parts of them including the seeds are illegal in most countries afaik.

The fact that alternatives is even a thing is just one more reason why prohibition doesn't work, as well as an example of how prohibition causes more problems than it solves. RCs have people eating other people's faces off. I would rather people be doing coke. If all drugs were legal, there would be no cartels or dangerous research chemicals. The focus of RCs would be to find ways to get high without sickness and death, not get high and stay out of trouble no matter the cost.

I like this discussion.

 

[Exitwound]

Just legalize the plant and let people grow for consumption, not for sale and snort for goodness sake!

For some people it is a party drug, for some way of life, let everybody ruin their bodies for their own pleasure as they like it!

I don't use it btw

 

[Th3_tRuTh]

Just legalize the plant and let people grow for consumption, not for sale and snort for goodness sake!

For some people it is a party drug, for some way of life, let everybody ruin their bodies for their own pleasure as they like it!

I don't use it btw

Agreed.

 

[pinkoyd]

i'd be surprised if a lot of the MHRB did not come from amazon deforestation.

MH is often cultivated for firewood and the MHRB we get is a byproduct of that in many cases. The plant is not a rainforest species and occurs in the dry caatinga biome in NE Brazil, specifically not part of the Amazon. It also occurs as far north as Mexico, which supplies much of the MHRB for the American market.

 

[ShamanisticVibes]

I mean, this seems to be a pretty loaded question that could be used on several fronts, including using paper products, eating bananas, corn, wheat, meat, etc. I.e. paper products destroying forests, banana and other cultivars destroying rain forests, eating meat contributing to global warming, as well as greenhouse gases. And although I am aware that using cocaine is a much different end of the spectrum, there are negatives to using any consumer product. Cocaine is no different. I think that growing your own plants and processing your own product are absolutely key, here. As in doing so, you completely cut this middle man out. Also, while cartels are a large distributor, they are not the only place you can get this stuff. There are places like Amsterdam, Jamaica, and a few other countries that do use their own product rather than outsource from Central American countries. And, in the end, you are a tiny fish in the largest pond imaginable. It is not like your abstinence is going to make any difference. Even if the entirety of the Nexus, Shroomery, and Corroborree all boycott, there it will still be. I am a firm believer that processed cocaine, in and of itself, is not good for the soul, so I do not partake, but I think this is one of those questions where there is no right or wrong answer.

 

[Jees]

...in the end, you are a tiny fish in the largest pond imaginable. It is not like your abstinence is going to make any difference...

Hi SV, please don't take this as an attack on you personally, I suppose you're a cool person, I thank you for offering a window to have a little rant I feel obliged to

I think 'the difference' in the personal heart makes for one's tuning in life, and that tuning is spreading out to all people you come across like a snowballing effect. How I feel about myself, this vibe, the wave one sails in life, the frequencies you emit, your personal timbre and color, will kling onto all you meet, be it noticed or un-noticed. If you have a doubted burdened heart, it will project outwards like a virus. We all affect each other.

If I succeed in minimizing my footprint this will spread out by automation. We can't stop emitting our influences even wordless, therefore your very personal radio program better be a cool one, if possible. We're responsible for the ahum 'aura' we shine into the world. If one thinks that snowflake shizzle, please think again, I wager that this is HUGELY underestimated, look how much effect parents have beyond measure, every blink counts. Or how much bad-friends have effect...

Yes I can't be holy, yes I do burden the world, people, etc, just by living. Does this mean I could as well pile up as if it doesn't matter anymore how much I burden the world?

I really don't believe we'll be judged on the final day, therefore all I do or don't is directly dedicated to the effects it has on my daily vibe during life, consequently the vibe I emit and unwillingly yet unavoidably impose onto all that crosses my path. I think The Creating God is not in heaven or anywhere else than in ones personal simple creating gestures as days go by.

Amen

 

[dragonrider]

I'd like to hear about legal alternatives. In my country, narcotics law knows a few categories of substances. The last of which is "substances that act similarly to one of the previous categories". Cocaine is one of these previous categories. While there is a list that complements this law, to clarify the status of individual compounds, anything that is similar enough to maybe count as an alternative will be on that list within a year or so of becoming known. Coca plants and all parts of them including the seeds are illegal in most countries afaik.

The fact that alternatives is even a thing is just one more reason why prohibition doesn't work, as well as an example of how prohibition causes more problems than it solves. RCs have people eating other people's faces off. I would rather people be doing coke. If all drugs were legal, there would be no cartels or dangerous research chemicals. The focus of RCs would be to find ways to get high without sickness and death, not get high and stay out of trouble no matter the cost.

I like this discussion.

The traveller himself has repeatedly said that he would prefer this site not to become a platform for discussions on novel research chemicals.
And discussions on buying or selling drugs are not allowed anyway.

So for these reasons i am not going to tell you exactly wich substances could be used as an alternative for cocaine, or how to obtain them.

But there ARE alternatives.

The most well known are benzofurans or cathinones, but there are other categories of substances as well.

There are also plants, other than the coca plant, that can be used recreationally, in a way simmilar to that of coca.

Some of these plants are stronger than coca, others are milder, but there are plenty of them.

Khat is pretty well known, as are betelnut, kanna, nicotinia rustica, calamus or ephedra.
Small, sub psychedelic amounts of fly-agaric, also have a powerfull stimulating and euphoric effect.

In most countries it is not hard at all to find alternatives.
If you know something about psycho-active plants, how to find and identify or how to grow them, you don't even need to spent fortunes on it.

 

[VibeSurfer]

No

 

[downwardsfromzero]

this seems to be a pretty loaded question that could be used on several fronts, including using paper products, eating bananas, corn, wheat, meat etc. I.e. paper products destroying forests, banana and other cultivars destroying rain forests, eating meat contributing to global warming, as well as greenhouse gases. And although I am aware that using cocaine is a much different end of the spectrum, there are negatives to using any consumer product.

Some of these things are not entirely independent of one another. Cattle ranching is used by the cartels as a convenient money-laundering platform, for example.