Psychedelic Bump XVI

I loved and connected with that quote the first time I read it. I think it pretty well explains religion in general. I need to look into Alex Grey. Also that picture very closely resembles a picture that I conjured up in CEV's during one acid trip. It started as one person, just like the one in that picture, and then split up into hundreds of boxes with the same image of the person in them and then the people all started to move in unison while the boxes moved together flying through my field of vision.

Edit: The second picture. I wasn't very clear about that.

 

As to looking into Alex Grey let me recommend this film:
Alex Grey: CoSM

I also just finished reading his book "The Mission of Art" which is very powerful (and, by the way, he makes the EXACT same claims about art that I have seen Terrence McKenna make in art lectures on YouTube...).

The first image is by Grey and titled "Nuclear Crucifixion"
The second image is by Grey and titled "Cosmic Christ" and is a representation of his notion that human enlightenment and our positive achievements, sufferings, and strivings toward our own God-nature, flow together to constitute a universal force or being known as the Cosmic Christ. You can see more detail of the painting and hear Grey explain it on the movie I linked.

EDIT: The link I provided is to a Google Videos version of CoSM. The movie is also available on Netfix Instant and of course DVD. If you can access it by either of those channels I recommend it over the GoogleVid because those options will give you better quality. If those aren't available to you, of course, watch and enjoy the Google version.

ANOTHER EDIT: Here is the McKenna lecture I was referencing in case anyone is interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzIUNQ9HxzU&feature=related"]Terence McKenna - Opening the Doors of Creativity - YouTube

 

What's with all this talk about 2c-e being scheduled in the U.S?

 

There's a couple bills going around, I dunno google, all sort of stemming more or less from the couple of high profile deaths in the states last year. It's not just 2C-e, it's a whole bunch of things.
It's the same old paranoia/propaganda/omg do something crap that has run policy in this country for decades. You know, reference your sig line...
Sometimes more rational voices rise above the din, but rarely. There's a hold up in congress at the moment... but I don't think it'll hold.

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/drug-law/ron-pauls-son-rand-blocks-ban-synthetic-drugs

 

How do I have a relationship with an icon? An icon is only a symbol, a metaphor, not a living or even dead thing.

Pop, when you say "jesus christ specifically", it sounds like there's a classroom of gods and you are at once somehow acknowledging that there are other legitimate "god options" and yet cherry picking which one to be best friends with. It just sounds weird to this atheist/pantheist You know even amongst the Abrahamic religions, "YWHW", "God", and "Allah" all refer to the very same entity. Be aware of your cultural programmings and how they might cloud your vision to true divinity in the name of being filial to what our fathers called it and did. To me God is the eternal "not that" . . . as in, point at jesus -> "not that." point at myself "not that" point at the universe "not that" . . . always the bigger, further, older, beyond. Ah, labels.

 

I hear you man but folks are saying that the DEA is spewing out that 2c-e is scheduled now. I haven't heard anyone saying that about other rc.

 

I'm gonna get some heat for this, but to be honest, I don't blame them for trying to ban RC's. These are dangerous drugs if used irresponsibly, and lets not kid ourselves here - legal drugs that you can buy off the internet will fall in the wrong hands very easily. Scales can be expensive and hard to get, and if these drugs - which a question of milligrams can be the difference between tripping and OD'ing are being passed around in schoolyards, it's a recipe for disaster.

The frustrating thing about all this is that the Government is bitching and moaning about all these ''new dangerous drugs'' when in reality they are pretty much a direct result of their stupid failed war on drugs. If say LSD, Cacti, and Mushrooms were legal and available, I doubt that RC's would be popular - or even exist on the same level that they do now. A 150 pound man would need to eat 54 grams of pure mescaline, his body weight in shrooms, or a retarded amount of acid before he's in any physical danger. If kids are OD'ing, it's the government's fault!

They are only reaping what they've sewn at this point...

 

I really enjoyed and connected with "The Mission of Art" I wouldn't mind reading it a second time.

Can't this be justification for most of the drugs that are already scheduled?

 

what do you mean?

 

Meaning the reasoning you think these RC's should be banned is probably along the same lines of thinking that made most psychedelics and drugs scheduled in the first place. And then you go on to say they fail on a War on Drugs when all this would be doing is adding fuel to the fire.

RC's shouldn't be lumped together as like a class of drugs anyways, there are several different types of RC drugs and 2cx's have had a extremely low OD'd rate over the past 2 decades with most those incidents having a certain amount of ambiguity surrounding them.

 

I'm saying RC's are much more dangerous than classic psychedelics and the reason why they are so popular is because the classic, safer psychedelics are banned. I'm all for freedom of choice to take drugs or not to take drugs, but the sad truth is that a great number of people taking those drugs are not responsible drug users.

I dont blame them for trying to control RC's because the result of accidently ingesting a double dose of 2ce (or whatever) can be much more serious than ingesting a double dose of shrooms for instance. These are powerful substances, and due to the way our society is made, there is definetly a lack of education surrounding them.

Yes, its their own fault for banning organic psychedelics in the first place, but it doesnt change the fact that a problem was created.

Regardless of what the government thinks, I dont really know that it's right that any kid with a little money can order lethal amounts of psychedelics.

It's a double standard for me to be saying this, for obvious reasons, but it's not people like me or like us that I'm worried about. It's about 16 year old burners eyeballing bumps and snorting them off their keys.

 

And not everyone in the 60's and other decades were responsible drug users either...

2cx's perhaps may not be as safe compared to some of the classics in terms of toxicity but What I'm saying is the justification for banning classic psychedelic falls along the same line of your reasoning for RC's, and whether you think classic psychedelics are safer, other people may not. A recent example in regards to classic psychedelics is a couple people throw themselves out a window/bridge while drunk and on shrooms in Amsterdam, so now they restrict all shroom sales from tourists.

A problem was created because we rush to ban these things and promote scare tactics instead of providing sensible, reliable information about them. Even with all the reckless teenagers (and adults) who have probably used and abused 2cx's over the past couple decades there are only a handful of overdose reports, so few that I've not even seen them charted on any Drug harm/abuse studies.

 

^not to mention the fact that making these RC's illegal would do nothing to help the problem because the drugs will still be around, they just won't be distributed nearly as safely. There will be more black market sale of RC's which could only make them more dangerous because you wouldn't necessarily know what you were getting. They would also likely be banned from any kind of research, which is just plain stupid.

 

shivaya, i think most of us can agree, at least i can, that kids shouldn't really have access to these RCs. but the fact is that they do. making them illegal won't change that. what we need is like GB said, a better education system. just say "know!"
just say NO doesn't work. because you eventually figure out they were lying about marijuana and lsd, etc. so then it's natural to think they were lying about heroin, crack, and meth.

again, to echo GB, we need to be provided with reliable, sensible information, rather than scare tactics and media hype.

they aren't outlawing these drugs because they are dangerous. they are outlawing them because THEY aren't making money off of them. i'm not just saying that, i TRULY believe it.

why don't they ban tobacco and alcohol tomorrow? why don't they ban acetaminophen? nope. they even make that one in doses for BABIES. they could give a fuck about public safety.

not that this is exactly what you were saying, but it reminded me of a few summers ago at a fest in the woods, where i scored some L for the first time in YEARS. my buddy and i ate some, and later on in the night were discussing this phenomenon when you think you see something over there, across the fire, but when you look closer, there's nothing.
my friend said "every time across from me....not there." it was hilarious, and to this day seems to have some deeper meaning behind it.
you may have just shown it to me.

 

the future is this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=ib5p7F0kRWU

 

They're wrong. MN banned 2Ce after that incident, and then OK and PA, those were state actions not the dea. 2C's, cannibinoids, and some caths are on the list in those bills. That's federal.

Just like all drugs, including alcohol. Certainly not all substances are the same, but ask yourself where the line is to be drawn.

Or maybe they are just the logical result of the human nature to explore and experiment?

That's silly don't you think? Is a kid getting drunk and crashing a car the government's fault too? I am leary of trying to find blame outside myself for my own actions.

Exactly.
Throughout the history of prohibition, there have been 3 main motivators. Use of substances in culture and ritual that are 'strange' or misunderstood and considered a threat, an obstacle to someones greed for money and/or power, or the response by government to fear whipped up within the citizenry. Usually a combination of these. This current one is being pushed through mainly under the guise of the last one, which is at the heart of this. Reckless use of these things by irresponsible people caused a couple of incidents and deaths, and reckless reporting whipped the citizenry into a frenzy. All one has to do is read the stories that went round to realize there was/is practically NO reporting of relevant facts, mass amounts of misinformation and flat out lies. And politicians continue to do what they do.

Absolutely. Marijuana has no history of OD's. Again, failed policy based on false science.

Same could be said for alcohol.

Yes, there is. Is it possible that THAT is the problem? Education is more than 'just say no'. Telling people to wear a condom or just dont have sex doesn't stop STD's. But that doesn't stop them from trying to push that as 'education'.

I don't know that that is the case now. It's not particularly easy for a kid to order something online and have it sent to his home. But how does making things sched 1 stop that? When I was a teen, it was always easier getting weed and psychedelics than to get beer. Well for me personally. Driving things underground has NEVER controlled things, it actually makes things worse. I would submit to you that the LSD scene was safer and more educated pre-1967 than it was afterwards. The availability of it after the ban was unaffected. What was affected was the trustworthiness, the safety and purity, once it became black-market.

:2thumbsup:

More truth. Worse than stupid.
But then again we have lawyer-politicians making scientific policy.
Who knows what kind of real good for society has been lost due to banning LSD, 2C-b, MDMA and others?

I can't buy that completely. Even in a few jurisdictions where proposals to tax the hell out of weed have been put forth they get stomped down. Maybe its much more cultural, at least in the last several decades, after the culture of prohibition took root at the end of the 19th century. Alot of drug companies and governments could make money off of psyches. Pushing that past the prohibitionists would never fly.
Have you seen how many people are actually voting for yahoo's like Santorum and Gingrich? Don't underestimate the numbers of these sort of people in this country. It's a disease.

I know thats a rhetorical question... Take away Budweiser and Jack Daniels, give em psychedelics, and who do they vote for now?

I can't do shit about any of that except write my legislators once in awhile, and be concerned with personal responsibility. I rail against reckless drug use once in awhile, try to pass on harm-reduction concepts, and leave it at that.
Knowledge is freedom.

 

I must spread some reputation around before giving it to Voyage again.

 

Seems to me like you've made a bit of a jump here. I don't think popularity is cherry picking, but that he feels an intuitive connection with Christ. Seems to me like your own cultural programming is at work in as much connecting cultivating a relationship with Christ as being closed minded or incomplete. Ah, labels, Mr. "pantheist/atheist," indeedy.

 

you're right voyage. i do really think though that if they happened to already be making money off of "RCs" or 2ce or whatever, and it killed a couple people, it would be no big deal.

the other reasons you listed are a majority of the reason in this case though.
mainly the scared, wrongly informed public, and also the strangeness of and cultural "fear" toward psychedelics

 

Look at how many people die of prescribed medications every year (In the millions). I remember a news program mentioned that more people have died from prescription drugs in the last 10 years than all the world wars combined.