• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

What the bear had to say at ega 2009

PsiloSubNaut

Bluelight Crew
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
2,920
Hey guys, i found this when i was cleaning out my car and couldn't be bothered typing it up or finding an online version so i just scanned it (lazy, i know)

Bear Owesley was a bit of a character, great for a funny story and had some good points to make (although he may have got on some peoples nerves lol)

Here is a print out from his first speach at EGA 2009

Talk 1 - 'The economic consequences of black markets, specifically in reference to drug prohibition'.

thebear.jpg


thebear2.jpg


We drug users aren't the minority and this "war on drugs" is making all the wrong people rich...

There is vested interest in keeping drugs illegal

What is your view?
 
Nice work Psilo - thanks for the scan. I'm not an economist (if such a word exists), however I'm not so sure about 1/3 of the world's purchases being underground...

Other than that, an informative and interesting report. I didn't know that about prohibition.
 
I like the idea's portrayed in that letter. I understand it, I like the point about not having a right to tell us what we can and can not take. However this letter is not refrenced and could all be hear-say.

Interesting read. I don't feel like getting into this debate at the moment, however thanks for the food-for-thought psilo.
 
I'm not so sure about 1/3 of the world's purchases being underground...

No one can put an exact figure on it and i'm not going to say either way on the 1/3 figure

All i know is that drugs ranging from marijuana to heroin cost only a fraction of the street price to produce.

That said, do some math on the production cost of a pound of weed and then compare that to the street price

You can do the same with MDMA, METH, COCAINE, HEROIN, LSD, KETAMINE etc. etc.

They all cost a fraction of the street price to produce, they are all widely available on the black market and they are making millions-billions of $ this way.

It's against guidelines to state prices but just have a go at a few sums and you may see why he put the figure at 1/3 of the worlds purchases.

It may not be as big as the grain market but it certainly brings home far more bacon.
 
i don't have a reference for this, but I learnt in criminology that drug trafficking is the most profitable practice is in the world.
yes, it only costs a fraction of the cost to produce to what you pay for when you buy it from your dealer and also at the street. But not all of this is profit, remember that it costs considerable money to traffic. Transport needs to be paid for, bribes need to be given at all levels (particularly in the country that it is produced) etc. However, there is still a huge margin for profit.
 
^^^ the money payed to traffickers and other bribes also falls into "underground purchases"

The drug is worth much more per kilo than the price to ship it to wherever in the world.

and to shut up those who want a reference...

I can't prove this was handed out at EGA but i'm sure other BLers who attended got copies

Here's a link to another bear rant http://www.thebear.org/essays.html#anchor433446

The True Reason for Drug Prohibition



The authorities don't have any valid arguments against pot, their purpose in opposing legalization is to prevent any chinks in the armour, or cracks in the wall of prohibition. All propaganda against drug usage is false and/or misleading.

The authorities likewise don't give a stuff about what any particular drug does. The stance that pot is a dangerous drug of abuse is only a surface excuse, propaganda for the masses. Marijuana was made illegal in the 1937 to remove a threat to the synthetic fibers made by DuPont, just as the same company has connived a ban on Freon, now that their patent on it has run out, under the pretense that it is "harming the ozone"-- a claim completely without any proof whatsoever. DuPont has never had any interest in the welfare of people. The law against LSD was put into place in 1966 primarily by Sen. Thos. Dodd, who set up and put through the law in 1966. The only real function of the drug prohibition is to create a black market trade, otherwise known as "money for nothing".

The addition of any particular drug to the prohibition is a matter of the same policies which will maintain the illegality of all drugs to the bitter end. The drug trade is now the single biggest money operation in the US economy, and the money it produces is used to see to it that the laws will not change. I was told recently that the current value of the drug trade is estimated at $500 billion, a figure which agrees with the statements I heard about the amount of money leaving the US for cocaine in 1980, which was said to be $1 billion/day passing through Miami, at that time the main portal for the trade. Watch them invalidate the plebiscites in Arizona and California for the medical use of pot. I can almost gaurantee that these laws will never be implemented, for the authorities cannot tolerate any "erosion" in the wall of prohibition.

Pot isn't even important to those in the big-money drug trade, except for maintaining a solid wall of prohibition, the same reason I noted above for the uselessness of proving scientific merit for the use of any prohibited drug. Money does indeed drive these things, which is why you have no chance to change anything No one gives a minute's notice to thoughts of "hypocrisy". It isn't a question of what's "good for you" or "what's bad for you". Alcohol is not as good a way to create money-for-nothing as heroin and cocaine (too easy to make at home), plus it was put outside the rules by the repeal of Prohibition. Wm. Bennett, like the current fool, Barry McCaffrey, in charge of the "war on drugs", is only a lackey of the money which runs the US government, ie "Big Business", and the biggest business in the US is drug-running, so give it up...barring a revolution or a new constitution, the US congress will never change the way election financing is structured, and that is one of the most important principles these interests will protect at all costs. This is a serious threat to the social stability and future of the country, so everyone must try to understand the real reasons behind it.

The example provided by the unwillingness of the US Congress to impeach Nixon, and now the statement by members of the House of Representatives that Newt Gingrich's use of political campaign funds to establish a school to teach people how to subvert the system by playing dirty politics is "no worse than jaywalking", shows how far from reality these powerful figures in the government are, and gives us little hope for reform.

Back to the top




A Crime against Nature


The earth is an old place, and we humans are an old "race". We have been in close association with all the living things on the planet for millions of years. Man has adapted and uses many animals and plants in his world, but one plant is special. Special in a way that no other plants even come anywhere close to. Man's relationship with this plant is so ancient that all the near relatives of the plant have disappeared through evolutionary pressure and we don't even know for sure in which botanical grouping to place it. This plant is cannabis.

Most probably the association is at least hundreds of thousands of years old, way back in prehistory. The plant is unique, and the form of the plant is very simple, reflecting ancient structures which most plants no longer retain. In the Chinese orthography the word for cannabis, "ma" is a pictograph with the meaning "house", with the pictograph "plant " shown growing under the eaves, for the cannabis plant is very much a compost loving plant. The ancient relationship is not due to the provision of fiber, nor for the edible seeds, because the association predates the production of cloth and cordage, and likewise began before the use of large amounts of plant origin foodstuffs.

It is in fact, the resin and its wonderful effects on the mind and perception that has made the relationship so unique. The plant's sole reason for producing the resin is to induce men to cultivate and propagate it. In fact experiments have shown that the resin does not affect herbivorous animals, only carnivores. There is no other carnivore but man who could do anything useful for the cannabis plant. I know from my own experience that animals such as deer seem to consider the plant just like any other plant, as food, and do not seem the least affected by it. On the other hand, as little as half an ounce of the same plant will make a dog unable to stand up.

If you consider the antiquity of this special "dance" and the plant's distinct form and structure, this plant has given itself to us in a very special way. Nothing about the plant is other than a good, gentle thing. Growers have found that the plant seems to sense the sort of effects, the "high", that the grower likes to experience, and will strive to produce that for him (or her). It is common in the areas where it is grown to be able to identify the person from his/her smoke, regardless of the genetics of the seed.

I have a real hard time relating to the kind of attitude which leads us, on a world wide scale, to attempt to destroy a plant which has made its very existence dependent upon our cultivation, and which only wants to make us happy. For money, of course, as Jack Herrer so eloquently points out in his booklet "The Emperor wears no Clothes". First we had the prohibition against alcohol, and when that ended the enforcement and bootleg organizations needed a new source of easy money, and the poor cannabis plant, due to circumstances unrelated to the euphoric effects, namely the useful fiber which threatened Dupont's new synthetics, was one of their victims.

It is the laws which are the greatest sort of crime against nature. The plant is of such ancient association and use, that no possible argument can be made against it on either health or moral grounds. If we are to consider health, then why do we have to put up with some very dangerous things such as alcohol and tobacco, both of which are manifestly lethal... who's the fool here? We cannot make people stop using things which they want to use by passing laws, in fact those sort of laws are not really within the "rightful" authority of governments, since they are so destructive to the social fabric. To be accurate, the very concept of "government" is a very recent thing compared to the relationship between man and cannabis. Tribal man has never made "laws" which were not the will of the whole community, this is a modern aberration. We cannot properly deal with the world without re-evaluating the social and governmental systems we have, and trying to reform them to more nearly match the ancient tribal structures which guided us for most of our existence. It is only logical to live by the rules which we evolved over hundreds of thousands of years, rather than trying to reduce everything to a situation which only benefits a small portion of our population.

The cannabis plant is a truly special emissary of the plant world to man, and is a great teacher of appreciation for the wholeness of the lifeforce which animates this planet. It is a very beautiful plant, with a great vibrance and serenity, the very essence of the feminine creative energy. The Princess of the plant world, who gives us a wonderful gift in return for our care and attention.

I will note that the male cannabis plant also is valuable, as it is the males which yield the long fibers for making hemp products. One of the things which seem to have been lost is knowledge of the practice of growing only the males, set closely together to force them to become very tall and without branching. This can produce fibers of nearly 6 meters in length.

One of the more remarkable uses for the euphoric smoke is that of enhancing one's perceptions. Sound, such as music is full and rich, colours are intense, and the effect on the perception of sex is little short of heavenly. Although I will admit that I didn't really notice a large effect on my sex enjoyment until I was about 40, it is very noticeable with increasing age. It not only increases sensation, it seems to prolong orgasm to a noticeable degree.

So far as an artist's visionary ability, I don't think that there is much disagreement as to the value of cannabis to all artists and creative people. In all the years that I have been associated with music and art, virtually everyone I have met is fond of cannabis. In that vein, who really wants to go to a party where you can't have a meaningful conversation due to an alcohol induced stupor in the participants?
 
I don't think asking for a reference for that sort of claim is unreasonable.

Cheers for providing the info though. It is great to be more informed :)

Sorry for being a grump chemi

I had no way of referencing it other than the statement that it was given out at EGA last weekend

All sorted now :D
 
Sweet. Been trying to find out wtf h talked about from the organisers on the forum that shall not be named, they haven't been very forthcoming.
 
Sweet. Been trying to find out wtf h talked about from the organisers on the forum that shall not be named, they haven't been very forthcoming.

That's strange

I'll try dig up the other papers that were handed out during the bear

Other than paying out on governments and the drug war, he mainly told stories about getting dogs high and his mate who rode a horse that he had fed LSD while tripping on LSD himself. Apparently the horse loved it

Other stories included how much humans loved drugs and as you can imagine, no one at EGA disagreed with that one ;)
 
I don't know about his figures either. I posted this in another thread: http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showpost.php?p=7516090&postcount=32 which estimates the world's drug trade to be about $320 billion per year... less than the annual revenue of Walmart and significantly smaller than the legal pharmaceutical market.

A bit of googling seems brings up quite a few estimations of between $100 billion and $1 trillion. To say it is the real cause for the current economic breakdown seems a bit far fetched to me.

He makes some interesting points on prohibition though :)
 
Thanks for the link belarki, interesting read

Who really knows the true cost

All we know is it's a shitload of money that probably isn't going to the best part of society

I'd hate to add up the thousands i've spent on black market drugs over the years. Many many thousands on my personal use alone...
 
Nice post Psilo. I've been a fan of the bear for years. A very informative and interestig read. Its funny how what he says makes almost complete sense, but we all know nothing will ever come of this.
 
"we all know nothing will ever come of it"

Hm, I'm the sort who likes to hope. And, Bear is not the only one:

http://www.tdpf.org.uk/blueprint%20download.htm

I don't know how successful that publication will be in the UK, especially after this incident a couple of weeks ago:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/oct/30/drugs-adviser-david-nutt-sacked

Professor David Nutt, the government's chief drug adviser, has been sacked a day after claiming that ecstasy and LSD were less dangerous than alcohol.

Nutt incurred the wrath of the government when he claimed in a paper that alcohol and tobacco were more harmful than many illegal drugs, including LSD, ecstasy and cannabis.

:(

Thanks for the link though Tronica; a good read!
 
The sacking of professor Nutt could be the start of something bigger to come

Others have resigned in protest and he has a hell of a lot of backing from other pro drug lobbying groups

Once again i am not holding my breath...

I get away with everything i do so it doesn't effect me other than maybe the price drop that legalization would bring
 
Somewhat off topic, but did anyone happen to catch Stephen Bright's talk?

Yes, I know him and am familiar with both his talk and the paper that accompanies it. He directly cites the Neo-analysis here at Bluelight. I wasn't at the talk in full so can't really comment on how it was received at the time.

I have the paper from the EGA bulletin and can scan for you sometime, PD, if you want to read :) Unless the bulletin is avaialble online? Not sure if it is...
 
Yes that was a real scandal when Professor Nutt was sacked. I don't know the current status of it all; hopefully the fact that most of his colleagues resigned in protest will have some kind of effect. It's just another sign of how our governments and our academics so often move in different directions... often to the detriment of said academics who might want to keep a stable job...
 
Here's a classic response to a factual article...

here come the druggies
[info]lee_ji_me wrote:
Wednesday, 11 November 2009 at 08:23 am (UTC)
I hate misguided articles like this...most of the people who agree with it will be drug users
I understand the argument about the gangs and the illegal trade but allowing drugs to be legal will never change this! If drugs are legalised then the trade will only go into a darker territory of supplying more and more and cheaper and cheaper. You cannot allow this floodgate to open because human nature is WEAK
a society has to set parametres and boundaries against the odds or else human nature will deteriorate to such a level that it would be even worse than now to live on a planet with so many weak and misguided individuals indulging in self destructive behaviour patterns and living with no sense of optimism about life because they are inherently selfish. Drug users are for the most part very selfish and self obsessed people.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...and-end-this-futile-war-on-drugs-1818167.html

It's people like this that keep these drug laws in place

1 angry person will kick and scream louder than 10 people who don't really care either way

One reason why we need to push our view as much as the anti-drug campaigners
 
Top