Prompted by “We don’t make the laws”: http://www.drugwarrant.com/2015/05/we-dont-make-the-laws/
“We don’t make the laws; we just enforce them.”
Members of law enforcement righteously state the refusal to become involved in the legislative process, because of the obvious and serious conflict of interest (basically their funding) against public safety.
“…as any of us who have attended a legislative session about medical marijuana legalization know – seeing the law enforcement officers in uniform there attempting to influence the process, even to the point of giving testimony regarding what is ‘medicine.’ We see the police associations lobbying and spreading misinformation.”
I never attended any such process, because I feel my public contribution is best applied in the court of public opinion (the true highest court of the land). The evidence of outrageous government behavior regarding certain drugs is mountainous, so the idea of leveraging government processes against government processes seems fruitless overall (the government is obviously corrupt, at least when it comes to the war on some drugs — and they demonstrably refuse to voluntarily back down from that corrupt stance without enough public pressure).
Momentum towards ending the war on some drugs (actually, just the war on cannabis for some pathetically hypocritical reason) is due to the Internet being used to spread the literally “slam dunk” case against that war (full logical grounding confirming that “slam dunk” quality is in my Respect Cannabis campaign introduction), so not activists lobbying directly for government action towards remedy (as the ‘must trust the government’ traditional political leftists — spending ample resources towards such pointless lobbying — fundamentally need us all to believe).
“Forfeiture Funds Used to Oppose Marijuana Legalization”
Within the prompting article is that title in the form of a link to another prompting article, but I can stop quoting the aforementioned prompting articles now, because that title alone nails the aforementioned conflict of interest.
Hypocrisy is a form of reason abuse (usually wielded as “spin”). When combined with outright lies (extreme reason abuse) and then publicly spread (with righteous presentation styling) for decades and counting (even to a powerful degree to form entrenched law), humanity has a seriously dangerous societal problem — adult bullying is shamefully rampant against public safety.
The schoolyard analogy works perfectly here. One way to deal with a bully is for all of that bully’s victims to get together and kick the crap out of that bully.
The only enemy of corruption is sufficient public exposure.
Zooming out to humanity’s scope, that exposure presses upon oligarchical bullies (in the private and public sectors — including people with badges and guns) to back off, or face serious consequences. Of course, violence is not the only remedy. Revolutions match the aforementioned crap-removal-by-kicking quality, but a nation of laws provides other means that will hopefully prevail. Otherwise, prepare to live in a society dealing with revolutionary violence, which includes the horrendous amount of psychosis and group-level grudges rippling within the effort to rebuild society.
“The pen is mightier than the sword.”
Entertainers (including mainstream news outlets with a business plan effectively insisting upon matching the need to max entertainment value — even at the deadly expense of the “people’s right to know”) are the primary wielders of the “pen”.
The Internet effectively insists upon revolutionizing the “pen”, and society (apparently including the entertainment industry) fails to realize the humanity-benefiting opportunity. Information ripples, and when humanity applies civility, the most pressing information pertaining to humanity ripples through the entirety of our species (proper information flow is required for civility), while localized informational pertinence (e.g. awe-inspiring weather being reported daily on television at the national level) ripple only towards people truly impacted by that information. The Internet allows inexpensive global information flow, so allows wielders of the “pen” to reach a sizable audience (e.g. honest and intelligent people) without sacrificing educational nutrients in the form of reason abuse.
Imagine monkeys throwing crap at each other (which they regularly do). Now imagine human beings throwing metaphorical crap at each other. I dug up an article on the intelligence in crap-throwing:
“A lot of people who have gone to the zoo have become the targets of feces thrown by apes or monkeys, and left no doubt wondering about the so-called intellectual capacity of a beast that would resort to such foul play. Now however, researchers studying such behavior have come to the conclusion that throwing feces, or any object really, is actually a sign of high ordered behavior.”
Reason abuse is the metaphorical crap, so the notion that humanity has escaped the clutches of ‘shameful animalism’ is pitiful. The problem is so bad that such crap forms public pressures supporting law abuse (e.g. war on some drugs).
Since there is no science confirming the end of personal experience upon death, but there is ample science confirming the purely cyclical nature within (and the seamless energetic quality of) reality (read Reality Waveform Theory for full logical grounding), reincarnation makes sense in terms of probability (so wise planning). Purpose is subjective (reality — the ultimate scope matching existence itself — can factually never be destroyed or even damaged), but while too many people choose to focus on personal gratification as their primary purpose (everyone else be damned by the inevitable metaphorical crap-throwing accompanying selfish purposes), healthy people understand the need for maximum balance (despite inevitable imperfection within reality) — in this case, the balance between achieving enough “selfish” satisfaction in this lifetime with focusing upon improving society for the next lifetime (just in case). That improvement thankfully indirectly contributes to survival in this lifetime (a stronger group — e.g. your community — matches increased odds for survival), so forms a win-win for the healthy person.
We are demonstrably animals with technology, and I am never offended by our animalism seamlessly connecting us with the many millions of species on the tree of life spanning billions of years, which is seamlessly connected as an overwhelmingly complex set of energy currents with reality itself (including that technology effectively a response by reality itself with respect to our species’ understanding of reality).
Part of those energy currents are what we call informational, so as we scientifically work towards better energy efficiency with respect to powering our technology, such effort logically extends to cover the entire energetic flow of our species and the essential relationship we have with other species and our environment.
That effort must include evolving away from dominant societal forces believing (and convincing that) reason abuse is clever.
The Rule of Reality (i.e. scientific confirmation of reality’s need for balance within reality as a fundamentally naturally governing force) means the schoolyard bully is not only always being watched by literally the most powerful being that is reality itself (strictly logically speaking), but punishing balance is unavoidable upon the exercise of bullying.
The nation of sanctioned bullies is actually the “internation” of sanctioned bullies. That unavoidable punishment is the primary message of the wielders of the “pen” for public safety. Any smirking abuser of that “pen” is a fool (not dominantly powerful in any ultimate sense), logically speaking.
Ending the war on some drugs begins the ‘war’ (i.e. properly — including entertainingly — leveraging the “pen”) against unhealthy stress to maximally keep people from abusing drugs (or anything else leveraged as compensation for unhealthy stress). Ending the war on some drugs preferably comes from ending abusive reasoning, because that abuse is the ultimate source of all of humanity’s internal problems (e.g. famine, poverty, war, genocide, etc.) Those internal problems do not increase the risk of external problems — those problems equal external problems (unavoidable natural punishment in any of an infinite number of forms).