>> Drug use threatens the ruling class, which itself remains immured in
>> existential angst
>I've heard this argument from conspiracy thrown around lightly a great
>deal over the years; I have yet to hear any particular justification why
>this is the case.
I don't believe it has anything to do with conspiracy. It follows from the fact
that by definition, the ruling class wants to rule. It can't rule unruly
subjects. Hence, it severely punishes instances of unruliness, including the
taking of drugs.
>As far as I can tell, drug use DOESN'T threaten the ruling class in any
>way at all. When people take it upon themselves to break laws, THAT
>threatens the ruling class, and thus drug users do threaten government
>wherever drug use is illegal, but that's not a justification for any kind
>of conspiracy to MAKE it illegal.
I guess that depends on the particular ruling class in question. If you want to
test the theory, try doing drugs in Turkey and see what the Turkish ruling class
does to you. (Hope you like being hung upside down while someone beats the soles
of your feet.) I don't believe conspiracy has much to do with it. You jump to
conclusions when you mention conspiracy theories from what I've posted on this
thread.
>Indeed, if anything, "opiating" the masses seems like EXACTLY the sort of
>thing we'd expect a totalitarain government to do.
That explains why the ruling class supports _prescription_ drugs as opposed to
self-administered and self-procured drugs. This element of the overall situation
does become important.
>You might argue that the Government is acting foolishly, then, but not
>that it's covering its own backside by outlawing drug use.
I find it amusing that the idea of opposition to drugs by the ruling class would
elicit such responses. Sounds like you have an axe to grind here.
>Am I missing something big here?
Did you miss that joint?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:02:13 MDT