🚀 go-pugleaf

Church and Army, the pilars of society, has been said. We`ve seen how
the Church has a rightful fear towards drugs as they can generate
rituals and provide trascendental experiences (as reported by drug
users). But it is obvious that the Church doesn`t have what is needed
to generate side effects. Thay can sanction but not execute. The Army,
however, has the means and the vocation. There`s nothing more
dangerous to societyin general that a corrupted Army (official); but
an Army interested in keeping drugs banned, under the motives of
having available draft material, crisp people without the sooting
effects of drugs, or the fear of less economic performance (though it
has been argued thatmost usrs are actually working people or the
quantities involved in its commerce are not explainable), whatever the
motives, can give the it the motive to engage in the active `mission`
of causing side effects. Here it must be remembered that producing
*unnecessary* side effects to the use of drugs may be a policy to
avoid providing examples of successful use of drugs, so the more
successful is or may be an individual consuming or who has consumed
drugs (even supposedly as it has been argued too that it is impossible
to *prove* any particular individual has never used drugs while
incrimination is *easy*), the more severe side effects must be
produced so that those individuals don`t act as examples of successful
use of drugs. The Army has the the tools and the training to cause
side effects, effectivey turning itself against a society willing or
at least indifferent to the recreational use of drugs, particularly
marihuana, which has a zero probability of killing people from an
overdose. This must be so more true in epochs of peace or when the
integrity of territory is not directly threatened. An individual may
be adimistered drugs in case he or she ca prove that stoppinf the use
of drugs without *real* side effects is possible, or can follow other
strategies to the same effect as according to the circumstances. A
society soothed by the effects of tranquilizing drugs is a society
less interested in fighting and supporting an Army; the more countries
alllowing the use of drugs, the less need for an Army and the udgets
armies are used to spend (the bigger in all areas), adding a further
motivatio to engage in the harassing of peaceful, responsible
recreational drug users.

And it must be stated clearly that side effects, in the sense of this
analysis, are by all means illegal and a criminal activity,
particularly when there are other solutions to keep the `drug problem`
under control, in the case it turned out to be a real problem, which,
due to the ban, is just an assumption, as drugs have acquired a
different meaning in current societies.