This blogpost comes originally from a link in the radical faerie tribe:
radfae.tribe.net/thread/2d...f0924073dd
~~~~~
The image (which should show up) is meant to bring consciousness to the reality that the self-taught/folk ways of some (i.e. who choose meth to deal with their stresses) are part of a major context which can help to connect us to each other, rather than, as popularly pushed (every systematically), away from each other and towards the confines of ideologically-challenged mind-set (i.e. professionalized consciousness); in the image, for instance, we see a deeply pained person stuck in the concrete sidewalk of everyday life, flanked by persons with various rigid mind-sets. They all are going nuts, but the two on the side are able to continue to go about their daily routines. The other is stuck. We might ask, are we to go around and ignore him, assuming he's some "drug addict", or do something more human?
~~~~~

I see that the topic of crystal meth persists in this community, and I wonder if questions like the ones below have been brought up before. These comments come in reply to reading the beginning of the recent article "Tweaked: Crystal Meth, Sex, & HIV" in the most recent issue (#35) of "Clamor" Magazine. (www.clamormagazine.org)

Here are my thoughts/questions so far:

First, i wonder if the Clamor Magazine article could be veiwed as a POSITIVE provocation towards radical excellence! ...Depending on how much quality input we put into Clamor, the authors of its articles, and/or communities around such provokings.

Secondly, I think of looking for the insights of analysis made of propaganda techniques by the Institute For Propaganda Analysis (while remembering that many 'users' of such have what Noam Chomsky cynically calls "a good education" and may not be conscious of being tooled by "information" from "reputable" sources). Especially in paragraph 4 on page 16. (1)

Thirdly, I think of yet a new parade of domesticated enemies and how people labeled as "tweakers" are largely inarticulate and unprepared for the "good intentions" of those whom are quite willing to mobilize against the alleged menace, while those who ask that people actually *think through* the situation more critically, are labeled as "possible" 'users' or 'pushers'.

So, the hyped-up climate (of "well educated" domesticates) is to follow the "informative" orders of formal, state-subordinated authority. Such a climate indicates that continual interests of encroachment (and mystification) have picked up their pace. In the context of what is going down in current u.s./european political interests, this situation may not be as moot as one might assume.

On the other hand, are there actual *sources* and *studies* named by the "information" outlets which we may investigate? Why or why not? (sidenote to insert here: this Clamor article is an example of the situation between the use of the word 'propaganda' to explain anarchist ideas and the use of the word 'information' to explain dominating ideas)

Fifthly, the "reputable" method to "stop" the apparently bad situation is not thought through too carefully by those claiming autonomous desires. So we are basically to 'follow orders from on high' and instructed in the methods of "tough love"-styled restriction and blocking of people who once were full members of our community making. And we are to automatically defer to and trust this authority--i.e. professional methods of intervention.

Crucially,
we are not led to realize the value of holding onto any authentic, autonomous, "I'm Okay, You're Okay" style bridges which we may've made previously with the person under suspicion, or actually 'caught' in possession of such substances.

Suddenly, they aren't as fully human as the rest of us.

Suddenly, their behavior is reduced to something that cannot be listened to, and cannot have "rational" input to humanity and our projects. All they can do is subordinate while alleged help is administered. This is the prevailing conception, even tho there is evidence to dispute such (2).

Suddenly, we don't *believe* that there's even a *remote possibility* that the mystified 'drug' could be a tool autonomous radicals utilize in a beneficient way, much less a possible *processing method* of being, seeing, or processing towards mutually beneficial outcomes, much less wisdom which we cannot right now conceive of. No, such fantasy is *completely* beyond the collective imagination, or at least what passes for such.

All this *without evidence*, *without critical thought*; we are led to the way of believing that works to destroy and water-down our autonomous experimenting (with community, independent thought, etc.) and solidarity connections with yet another whole group of people. And, decisively, we are 'pushed' to fall back on the alleged importance of 'experts' who are directly subordinate to statecraft.



**************************************************************
further angles to explore:

1) source on propaganda analysis: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inst...a_Analysis ; Chomsky's words on "a good education" can be searched for via www.scroogle.org

2) on addiction, the despised, imperfect (and oft unknown) dissident psychiatrist Thomas Szasz, MD:
"Do Drugs Cause Addiction?" [PDF file]:
See link at: www.szasz.com/debates.html See also R. Davies' book _The Myth of Addiction_ : www.druglibrary.org/special/...ction.htm
On related topics (specifically THE drug hysteria of the 1980s), see, in "hip Mama" magazine: "Crack Babies" All Grown Up & Talking Truth to Insults page 8, "Regime Change issue" #32, 2004 and "The Demon Seed That Wasn't: Debunking The Crack Baby Myth": www.citylimits.org/content/...eView.cfm
and
debunking 'crack babies' myth:
www.youthcomm.org/FCYU-Feat...03-10b.htm

3) Noam Chomsky speaking of this sort of pattern of hype (which always has at least a germ of truth):
excerpt from:
www.zmag.org/chomsky/tal...control.html

[quote]
"You had to crush them to defend yourselves. We have our ways, too. Over the last ten years, every year or two, some major monster is constructed that we have to defend ourselves against. There used to be one that was always available: the Russians. But they're losing their attractiveness as an enemy, and it's getting harder and harder to use that one, so some new ones have to be conjured up... So it was international terrorists and narco-traffickers and crazed Arabs and Saddam Hussein, the new Hitler, is going to conquer the world. They've got to keep coming up, one after another. You frighten the population, terrorize them, intimidate them so that they're too afraid to travel and cower in fear. Then you have a magnificent victory over Grenada, Panama, or some other defenseless Third World army that you can pulverize before you ever bother to look at them -- which is just what happened. That gives relief. We were saved at the last minute. That's one of the ways in which you can keep the bewildered herd from paying attention to what's really going on around them, keep them diverted and controlled...."
[/quote]

*********************************************


obligatory note by author of this blog:
I do not trust "man-made" or "designer" drugs, but wish to think carefully about the 'given' issues of today. Surely there are serious dangers to using substances, alleged poisons or otherwise, in the context of 'too much' or in the mode of 'typical shallowly-conscious alternative-culture' "consumer" types. On the other hand, if communities feeling "overwhelmed by" such challenges are committed enough to "radical" ways of being and living, I wonder if such situations as these may be "ju-jitsued" into potentially radically excellent articulations and becoming.