The Drug Agenda
In the United States, you may have noticed a phenomenon gradually appearing. It started out in isolated locales as what appeared to be an attempt to pass laws allowing “medical” use of marijuana. Naturally, there are any number of arguments which can be made against the medical use of marijuana. The truth is, alleviating the suffering of cancer and glaucoma patients is the least concern of advocates. The real objective is the general legalization of marijuana. Medical marijuana is just a first step toward full legalization. Make no mistake about this.
I won’t argue for or against the merits of marijuana legalization. I will say this, though. Interdiction has not reduced the amount of marijuana use. This is because, regardless of supply, the demand for marijuana remains. If you want to reduce marijuana consumption, your best lever is to reduce demand. And judging by the march of pro-marijuana laws in the U.S., the marijuana genie is out of the bottle, not to return. In just a few years, most if not all the states and the federal government will likely consider marijuana use legal. But that’s not my point or my concern here.
Most recently, if you were paying attention, you might have noticed posters actually advocating the use of marijuana as a “safer” alternative to alcohol.
In addition, you may have noticed a significant rise in the tendency to portray marijuana use as “normal” in films and TV. I’ve lost count of the number of recent films and television shows which have inserted added inapplicable marijuana use into their plots for no other reason than to portray it as “normal”. Fortunately, it is not. By comparison, twenty percent of the American public smokes cigarettes. While marginally acceptable perhaps, cigarette smoking is thus not “normal”.
Make no mistake. This is an agenda item. I can’t tell you who or what is behind pushing this position. But it’s quite clear that it’s there.
Marijuana is often compared to alcohol. Yet the total cost in broken and wasted lives from alcohol is almost impossible to calculate. And alcohol is considered a perfectly acceptable substance to imbibe.
Marijuana is generally considered a drug for which there are no negative side effects. While excessive alcohol consumption destroys the liver and has other serious health consequences, no such negative health effects have been noted for marijuana. (Though if you’ve ever smoked marijuana, you’d have to agree it’s a helluva lot tougher on the lungs than cigarette smoke.)
What’s interesting is that the negative effects looked for in marijuana studies are physical. There appears to be a deliberate omission of the study of its more subtle but debilitating mental and emotional effects.
Fortunately, Ron noticed these effects beginning in the early 60s, and correctly pegged them as blocking spiritual progress. In fact, the phenomenon became so pronounced that the bottom part of the Bridge had to be reworked to accommodate this problem.
Ron had a lot to say over the years about drugs and their effects. But finally in 1981, he issued HCOB 4 April 1981 The Biochemical Personality. If you haven’t read this issue, you should. Via a small study of current and ex-druggies, Ron isolated just a few characteristics common to them. I paraphrase them below:
- Lack of ambition/Loss of ambition/”Don’t care”/”Nothing matters”
- Introverted/Out of PT/Lack of reality
- Drug-induced neuroses/psychoses
- Attitudes which express a failure or refusal to perceive/predict the consequences of actions and/or future
- Couldn’t (wouldn’t) (didn’t) communicate
- “It wasn’t really me”/”Not me” (Out of Valence)
- Anti-learning attitudes (overtly expressed opposition to learning, as different from an inability to learn, or loss of interest in learning)
- Hidden hatreds
- Objecting to any order or demand in present time that requires their attention
- All “druggies” fit the description of “stuck in a long gone incident fighting enemies that no longer exist,” but this is probably more accurately worded as: “stuck in a long ago incident covertly resisting while appearing to cooperate with their oppressors“
I’ve known and worked with a lot of druggies and ex-druggies, not only on staff and in Scientology, but outside it. For a number of years as a young man, I worked in fast food, construction and transportation. In addition, one of my step-brothers was a heroin user before landing in prison. And though I have never suffered from this, there is a lot of alcoholism in my family, on all sides. So I’ve had a lot of opportunity to study drug users up close. This doesn’t make me an authority on the subject, and I have not done the scientific legwork Ron did. So take what I say with a grain of salt. But I have also noticed the following:
- Druggies tend to be ARC breaky. They ARC break rather easily and must often be handled with kid gloves. Moreover, they will often hide their ARC breaks from you. This charge then accumulates over time. It may then erupt unexpectedly later, and for reasons the druggie can’t adequately explain. (You don’t want to be around when this happens.)
- Druggies often, if not usually hate or resent organized religion.
- Druggies often, if not usually have very relaxed moral standards. (I’m being polite in putting it this way.) For example, casual sex tends to be the norm rather than the exception for such people. This may simply be part of our current society’s indoctrination; I don’t know.
- Druggies tend to be almost militantly non-judgmental when it comes to the conduct of others, no matter how reprehensible such conduct may be to you.
- Druggies tend to accept casual violence more readily, though this may simply be part of our current culture.
- Druggies tend to have a wooden manner. Their facial expressions tend to be far more subdued than non-druggies. (Ron has remarked on this characteristic.)
- Druggies tend to be singularly unambitious. (Ron has remarked on this characteristic as well.)
- Druggies seem to be unable to adequately reason from cause to effect, and will often select wrong cause or target (relates to the above characteristics from the bulletin, but also seems to be a common characteristic in society; maybe because of drugs?).
- Druggies have a near unanimous aversion to authority. (Again relates to the above points made by Ron.)
Ron stops short of predicting what percentage of drug users will end up with a “biochemical personality”. Nor does he survey what precursors there might be in a person’s personality to make them more or less susceptible to becoming a “biochemical personality”. In short, he simply identifies some of the major characteristics of the “biochemical personality”, but doesn’t go into how many, how often or how much of what drugs would induce such a condition. Such things apparently depend entirely on the person involved.
It should be noted here that alcohol abuse, in additional to excessive use of many truly medicinal drugs, will produce all the phenomena above. This includes Ritalin and similar stimulant drugs used to “treat” the psychiatry-invented and increasingly fashionable diagnoses of “ADD” and ADHD”, now common among many school children and adults.
So as those with a “drug agenda” attempt to portray marijuana– and other drug– use as “normal” and “harmless”, the above is what we as a society are going to end up with. We’ve seen this for the last fifty years or so already, but it apparently has escaped the notice of anyone else. At best, some of it is material for late-night comedians, when they remark on the goofy things drug-takers do.
Forget the drug-induced deaths and whatever physical consequences there may be from marijuana use. Such things didn’t work when it came to warning people about smoking cigarettes; twenty percent of the U.S. still smokes. Early death and physical disease don’t work to warn people against excessive alcohol use, either. In either case, it takes quite a lot of use/abuse to produce this kind of physical damage or death.
But the onset of the symptoms of the “biochemical personality” appear far more quickly than any physical damage. And I would venture that they appear with far more certainty than the physical symptoms of abuse. Push these points, and perhaps you have some hope of stemming the tide of marijuana demand. Certainly they’re being ignored by the “drug agenda” people.