Guest guest Posted June 13, 2001 Report Share Posted June 13, 2001 No. What's established is that social factors - - such as powerful marketing and advertising forces - - influence people. Such forces don't make anyone 'powerless', but they are strong influences. And it takes knowledge and determination to resist them. Cigarettes are an obvious example. But look at examples that are not so obvious. Take fast food. Mc's seems benign. But does fast food meet a human need, or merely fill an 'economic demand'? And what is the relationship between changes in the food industry, other socio-economic changes, and the startling epidemic of childhood obeisity in the U.S.? Economic demand can be manipulated, even created, by social factors. The Opium War shows 'demand creation' at its most raw, with military force used to push a noxious product. But advertising and promoting cigarettes is a more subtle variety of the same thing: profit-driven demand creation for products which are harmful. Monopoly capitalism is the system we live under. And that system does do things which hurt people. One of the things which has been done is the promotion and advertising of cigarettes, which has included misrepresentations of the product's dangers and false advertising. Cigarettes have been promoted, not to help people, but to earn profits. You may think greed and economics has nothing to do with the cigarette industry. You may blame tobacco-related deaths on the 'bad brains' of smokers and former smokers. No doubt you have a powerful prescription drug, or even a brain operation, to suggest. I think that learning about the tobacco conglomerates, sharing that information with colleagues and comrades, and entering into the social and political arena to combat the industry is a better way to go. These social influences can be resisted, if we educate ourselves and work together. Capitalism and greed most definitely are involved in cigarette production. Capitalism and greed are involved in the production and promotion of other bad products, too. It helps to understand our society and economy, and to resist harmful products and harmful producers. But you have no interest in such concerns. You just point the finger at people who have been harmed and scream: " Untermensch! " " Bad brain! " " To the operating room with you! " Re: Anti-depressants: > So, > > We establish therefore that the issue of capitalism is irrelevant to > the issue of whether a drug treatment is of value, since capitalism is > used to produce everything, from the noblest to the vilest? > > > > > > Yeah. And why are people down on the tobacco industry? They are > just > > making people happy. Psychotropics, like cigarettes, are good for > you, or > > else people would not use them. That is called capitalist market > democracy. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2001 Report Share Posted June 13, 2001 I'm against "regulation" too. In this and in just about anything else you can name, including prostitution. I am too, altho I'd be willing to compromise in exchange for decriminalizing prostitution. But ideally, let them have a VOLUNTARY Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval from the docs, declaring them scabbie-free. --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2001 Report Share Posted June 13, 2001 There again you put ludicrous words in my mouth. I have made my disdain and revulsion toward laissez-faire capitalism known often enough on this list. I made no comment on capitalism, I merely pointed out that as capitalism is involved in the production of everything from the most honorable to the most vile, and hence that capirtalism is involved in the production of something has no relevance to the merits of that something. If anything, thats actually in agreement with some of your response on the subject. Since it is clear that you arent in the least bit capable of understanding what other ppl say to you, or at least remaining faithful in your reporting to what they actually say, I relaize that not only are you not worth talking to but this should be avoided as I cannot be forever running around in circles correcting your misrepresentation of me. You do this anyway of course, which is why I replied to you in the first place, but I will just have to hope that ppl will read what I actually say and not what you claim I say. Why is it I wonder, that I have never, ever sseen you express agreement for a single person on this or any other list, even those who actually share similar viewpoints, and least on some issues. NO matter how valuable their contributions to combatting the problems of steppism, to you they are always the vilest of traitors. You are obviously paranoid. I seuggest you become a lawyer. Publish your lies and be damned. > > > > > > Yeah. And why are people down on the tobacco industry? They are > > just > > > making people happy. Psychotropics, like cigarettes, are good for > > you, or > > > else people would not use them. That is called capitalist market > > democracy. > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2001 Report Share Posted June 13, 2001 Is this the whole story, though? There are no huge marketing campaigns advocating the use of illegal drugs, and look how popular they are? Joan > > > > > > Yeah. And why are people down on the tobacco industry? They are > > just > > > making people happy. Psychotropics, like cigarettes, are good for > > you, or > > > else people would not use them. That is called capitalist market > > democracy. > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2001 Report Share Posted June 13, 2001 > Is this the whole story, though? There are no huge marketing > campaigns advocating the use of illegal drugs, and look how popular > they are? It's called the D.A.R.E. program Joan. Seriously, it is possible that hysteria about drugs might actually exacerbate the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2001 Report Share Posted June 13, 2001 > > Is this the whole story, though? There are no huge marketing > > campaigns advocating the use of illegal drugs, and look how popular > > they are? > > It's called the D.A.R.E. program Joan. > > Seriously, it is possible that hysteria about drugs might actually > exacerbate the problem. I think you're probably right. I'm around young people everyday, mostly 18-19 year olds. There seems to be a general consensus among many of them (and I'm not so ancient that I've forgotten what it was like to feel the same way- still do in many ways) that such programs might as well be called G.E.E.K. (I'll have to come up with something clever for that to stand for). Most of them are smart enough to see the scare tactics and are turned off by what they see as a " goody- goody " attitude. They have heard so much about their baby boomer parents doing drugs (at least, the media has portrayed this to them), they often feel as if these programs aren't being straight with them (which is right). Sometimes that probably contributes to drugs seeming all that much more cool or intriguing. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I could come up with all sorts of notions about who else in government might have realized this as well and what the real intent of the ads is, but I'll leave that to I do have one conspiracy theory of my own. I find it very interesting that, right around the time California's Proposition 36 is gaining national attention and growing support, a certain high profile individual is repeatedly followed, arrested for the simple act of using drugs, and hailed before the media and the rest of the world as a victory for the " treatment not prison " battle. Downey, Jr - Poster Boy for Proposition 36. Coincidence???? Hmmm. Yep, even God and the 12 steps have to advertise. Joan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2001 Report Share Posted June 13, 2001 > > > Is this the whole story, though? There are no huge marketing > > > campaigns advocating the use of illegal drugs, and look how > popular > > > they are? > > > > It's called the D.A.R.E. program Joan. > > > > Seriously, it is possible that hysteria about drugs might actually > > exacerbate the problem. > > I think you're probably right. I'm around young people everyday, > mostly 18-19 year olds. There seems to be a general consensus among > many of them (and I'm not so ancient that I've forgotten what it was > like to feel the same way- still do in many ways) that such programs > might as well be called G.E.E.K. (I'll have to come up with something > clever for that to stand for). Most of them are smart enough to see > the scare tactics and are turned off by what they see as a " goody- > goody " attitude. They have heard so much about their baby boomer > parents doing drugs (at least, the media has portrayed this to them), > they often feel as if these programs aren't being straight with them > (which is right). Sometimes that probably contributes to drugs > seeming all that much more cool or intriguing. > > If I were a conspiracy theorist, I could come up with all sorts of > notions about who else in government might have realized this as well > and what the real intent of the ads is, but I'll leave that to > > I do have one conspiracy theory of my own. I find it very interesting > that, right around the time California's Proposition 36 is gaining > national attention and growing support, a certain high profile > individual is repeatedly followed, arrested for the simple act of > using drugs, and hailed before the media and the rest of the world as > a victory for the " treatment not prison " battle. Downey, Jr - > Poster Boy for Proposition 36. Coincidence???? Hmmm. Yep, even God > and the 12 steps have to advertise. By the way, I'm not suggesting that he or anyone else should go to prison for drug use. Peele just wrote an article that I liked a lot about how the treatment option is not much of an improvement, though, and I certainly agree with that. > > Joan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2001 Report Share Posted June 13, 2001 > > > Is this the whole story, though? There are no huge marketing > > > campaigns advocating the use of illegal drugs, and look how > popular > > > they are? > > > > It's called the D.A.R.E. program Joan. > > > > Seriously, it is possible that hysteria about drugs might actually > > exacerbate the problem. > > I think you're probably right. I'm around young people everyday, > mostly 18-19 year olds. There seems to be a general consensus among > many of them (and I'm not so ancient that I've forgotten what it was > like to feel the same way- still do in many ways) that such programs > might as well be called G.E.E.K. (I'll have to come up with something > clever for that to stand for). Most of them are smart enough to see > the scare tactics and are turned off by what they see as a " goody- > goody " attitude. They have heard so much about their baby boomer > parents doing drugs (at least, the media has portrayed this to them), > they often feel as if these programs aren't being straight with them > (which is right). Sometimes that probably contributes to drugs > seeming all that much more cool or intriguing. > > If I were a conspiracy theorist, I could come up with all sorts of > notions about who else in government might have realized this as well > and what the real intent of the ads is, but I'll leave that to > > I do have one conspiracy theory of my own. I find it very interesting > that, right around the time California's Proposition 36 is gaining > national attention and growing support, a certain high profile > individual is repeatedly followed, arrested for the simple act of > using drugs, and hailed before the media and the rest of the world as > a victory for the " treatment not prison " battle. Downey, Jr - > Poster Boy for Proposition 36. Coincidence???? Hmmm. Yep, even God > and the 12 steps have to advertise. > > Joan If we had hemp farmers, know how much money just the drug company's would lose? Yeah - it's a conspiracy--I call it Greed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2001 Report Share Posted June 13, 2001 > If we had hemp farmers, know how much money just the drug company's > would lose? Yeah - it's a conspiracy--I call it Greed! If it were legal, and we did, who would control them, though? I'm sure someone would try - probably some drug company. This is where I don't understand Szasz, and I've brought this up before. He seems to be against prohibition, but also against regulation. This seems like a wonderful but possibly impractical/unrealistic idea. If people started farming hemp, someone somewhere would insist on regulating it, would they not? Enter government (big business not far behind). Joan > > > > Is this the whole story, though? There are no huge marketing > > > > campaigns advocating the use of illegal drugs, and look how > > popular > > > > they are? > > > > > > It's called the D.A.R.E. program Joan. > > > > > > Seriously, it is possible that hysteria about drugs might > actually > > > exacerbate the problem. > > > > I think you're probably right. I'm around young people everyday, > > mostly 18-19 year olds. There seems to be a general consensus among > > many of them (and I'm not so ancient that I've forgotten what it > was > > like to feel the same way- still do in many ways) that such > programs > > might as well be called G.E.E.K. (I'll have to come up with > something > > clever for that to stand for). Most of them are smart enough to see > > the scare tactics and are turned off by what they see as a " goody- > > goody " attitude. They have heard so much about their baby boomer > > parents doing drugs (at least, the media has portrayed this to > them), > > they often feel as if these programs aren't being straight with > them > > (which is right). Sometimes that probably contributes to drugs > > seeming all that much more cool or intriguing. > > > > If I were a conspiracy theorist, I could come up with all sorts of > > notions about who else in government might have realized this as > well > > and what the real intent of the ads is, but I'll leave that to > > > > > I do have one conspiracy theory of my own. I find it very > interesting > > that, right around the time California's Proposition 36 is gaining > > national attention and growing support, a certain high profile > > individual is repeatedly followed, arrested for the simple act of > > using drugs, and hailed before the media and the rest of the world > as > > a victory for the " treatment not prison " battle. Downey, Jr - > > > Poster Boy for Proposition 36. Coincidence???? Hmmm. Yep, even God > > and the 12 steps have to advertise. > > > > > Joan > > > If we had hemp farmers, know how much money just the drug company's > would lose? Yeah - it's a conspiracy--I call it Greed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2001 Report Share Posted June 13, 2001 > > If we had hemp farmers, know how much money just the drug > company's > > would lose? Yeah - it's a conspiracy--I call it Greed! > > If it were legal, and we did, who would control them, though? I'm > sure someone would try - probably some drug company. > > This is where I don't understand Szasz, and I've brought this up > before. He seems to be against prohibition, but also against > regulation. This seems like a wonderful but possibly > impractical/unrealistic idea. If people started farming hemp, someone > somewhere would insist on regulating it, would they not? Enter > government (big business not far behind). I'm against " regulation " too. In this and in just about anything else you can name, including prostitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2001 Report Share Posted June 13, 2001 > > > If we had hemp farmers, know how much money just the drug > > company's > > > would lose? Yeah - it's a conspiracy--I call it Greed! > > > > If it were legal, and we did, who would control them, though? I'm > > sure someone would try - probably some drug company. > > > > This is where I don't understand Szasz, and I've brought this up > > before. He seems to be against prohibition, but also against > > regulation. This seems like a wonderful but possibly > > impractical/unrealistic idea. If people started farming hemp, > someone > > somewhere would insist on regulating it, would they not? Enter > > government (big business not far behind). > > I'm against " regulation " too. In this and in just about anything else > you can name, including prostitution. > > I have to qualify this. I mainly meant in the areas of the " crimes against society, " i.e. " victimless crimes. " I'm withholding judgement in other areas at this point. Farming hemp should come under the same regulations as farming cotton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2001 Report Share Posted June 13, 2001 > > > > If we had hemp farmers, know how much money just the drug > > > company's > > > > would lose? Actually, now I'm confused. Hemp has absolutely no THC in it...or about the same as N/A beer has alcohol. Not enough to do a goddamned thing! Why would the drug companies have a stake in it at all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2001 Report Share Posted June 14, 2001 > In a message dated 6/13/01 10:17:30 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > ahicks@s... writes: > > > > I'm against " regulation " too. In this and in just about anything else > > you can name, including prostitution. > > > > I am too, altho I'd be willing to compromise in exchange for decriminalizing > prostitution. But ideally, let them have a VOLUNTARY Good Housekeeping Seal > of Approval from the docs, declaring them scabbie-free. > > --Mona-- Hm, as far as I understood it, decriminalizing is the ultimate. If you " legalize " you regulate. But, you're the lawyer...how do these terms work? Prostitutes use safer sex than the general public. They know, *in general* what the occupational hazards are. Prostitution used to be legal in the US. This went criminal at about the same time as the rest of it did. on Narcotics Act, Marijuana Stamp Act. Gotta crack down! Let's all follow the straight and *narrow*. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2001 Report Share Posted June 14, 2001 But surely Downey, Jr. is a poster child for the failure of the treatment system. > > > > Is this the whole story, though? There are no huge marketing > > > > campaigns advocating the use of illegal drugs, and look how > > popular > > > > they are? > > > > > > It's called the D.A.R.E. program Joan. > > > > > > Seriously, it is possible that hysteria about drugs might > actually > > > exacerbate the problem. > > > > I think you're probably right. I'm around young people everyday, > > mostly 18-19 year olds. There seems to be a general consensus among > > many of them (and I'm not so ancient that I've forgotten what it > was > > like to feel the same way- still do in many ways) that such > programs > > might as well be called G.E.E.K. (I'll have to come up with > something > > clever for that to stand for). Most of them are smart enough to see > > the scare tactics and are turned off by what they see as a " goody- > > goody " attitude. They have heard so much about their baby boomer > > parents doing drugs (at least, the media has portrayed this to > them), > > they often feel as if these programs aren't being straight with > them > > (which is right). Sometimes that probably contributes to drugs > > seeming all that much more cool or intriguing. > > > > If I were a conspiracy theorist, I could come up with all sorts of > > notions about who else in government might have realized this as > well > > and what the real intent of the ads is, but I'll leave that to > > > > > I do have one conspiracy theory of my own. I find it very > interesting > > that, right around the time California's Proposition 36 is gaining > > national attention and growing support, a certain high profile > > individual is repeatedly followed, arrested for the simple act of > > using drugs, and hailed before the media and the rest of the world > as > > a victory for the " treatment not prison " battle. Downey, Jr - > > > Poster Boy for Proposition 36. Coincidence???? Hmmm. Yep, even God > > and the 12 steps have to advertise. > > By the way, I'm not suggesting that he or anyone else should go to > prison for drug use. Peele just wrote an article that I liked a lot > about how the treatment option is not much of an improvement, though, > and I certainly agree with that. > > > > Joan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2001 Report Share Posted June 14, 2001 > > Alcoholism/addiction are the only diseases that failure of treatment is > evidence for the need for that treatment. > > Ken Exactly. How sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2001 Report Share Posted June 14, 2001 > > > But surely Downey, Jr. is a poster child for the failure of the > > treatment system. > > > > Kayleigh, > > But so was McGovern's daughter, in treatment over 60 times, who froze > to death as a result of treatment advice. Doesn't stop from promoting > treatment. > > Alcoholism/addiction are the only diseases that failure of treatment is > evidence for the need for that treatment. > > Ken It absolutely astonishes me that no one sees the fallacy in this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2001 Report Share Posted June 14, 2001 kayleighs@... wrote: > But surely Downey, Jr. is a poster child for the failure of the > treatment system. > Kayleigh, But so was McGovern's daughter, in treatment over 60 times, who froze to death as a result of treatment advice. Doesn't stop from promoting treatment. Alcoholism/addiction are the only diseases that failure of treatment is evidence for the need for that treatment. Ken > > > > > > > Is this the whole story, though? There are no huge marketing > > > > > campaigns advocating the use of illegal drugs, and look how > > > popular > > > > > they are? > > > > > > > > It's called the D.A.R.E. program Joan. > > > > > > > > Seriously, it is possible that hysteria about drugs might > > actually > > > > exacerbate the problem. > > > > > > I think you're probably right. I'm around young people everyday, > > > mostly 18-19 year olds. There seems to be a general consensus > among > > > many of them (and I'm not so ancient that I've forgotten what it > > was > > > like to feel the same way- still do in many ways) that such > > programs > > > might as well be called G.E.E.K. (I'll have to come up with > > something > > > clever for that to stand for). Most of them are smart enough to > see > > > the scare tactics and are turned off by what they see as a " goody- > > > goody " attitude. They have heard so much about their baby boomer > > > parents doing drugs (at least, the media has portrayed this to > > them), > > > they often feel as if these programs aren't being straight with > > them > > > (which is right). Sometimes that probably contributes to drugs > > > seeming all that much more cool or intriguing. > > > > > > If I were a conspiracy theorist, I could come up with all sorts of > > > notions about who else in government might have realized this as > > well > > > and what the real intent of the ads is, but I'll leave that to > > > > > > > > I do have one conspiracy theory of my own. I find it very > > interesting > > > that, right around the time California's Proposition 36 is gaining > > > national attention and growing support, a certain high profile > > > individual is repeatedly followed, arrested for the simple act of > > > using drugs, and hailed before the media and the rest of the world > > as > > > a victory for the " treatment not prison " battle. Downey, Jr > - > > > > > Poster Boy for Proposition 36. Coincidence???? Hmmm. Yep, even God > > > and the 12 steps have to advertise. > > > > By the way, I'm not suggesting that he or anyone else should go to > > prison for drug use. Peele just wrote an article that I liked a lot > > about how the treatment option is not much of an improvement, > though, > > and I certainly agree with that. > > > > > > Joan > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2001 Report Share Posted June 14, 2001 > > > > > Is this the whole story, though? There are no huge marketing > > > > > campaigns advocating the use of illegal drugs, and look how > > > popular > > > > > they are? > > > > > > > > It's called the D.A.R.E. program Joan. > > > > > > > > Seriously, it is possible that hysteria about drugs might > > actually > > > > exacerbate the problem. > > > > > > I think you're probably right. I'm around young people everyday, > > > mostly 18-19 year olds. There seems to be a general consensus > among > > > many of them (and I'm not so ancient that I've forgotten what it > > was > > > like to feel the same way- still do in many ways) that such > > programs > > > might as well be called G.E.E.K. (I'll have to come up with > > something > > > clever for that to stand for). Most of them are smart enough to > see > > > the scare tactics and are turned off by what they see as a " goody- > > > goody " attitude. They have heard so much about their baby boomer > > > parents doing drugs (at least, the media has portrayed this to > > them), > > > they often feel as if these programs aren't being straight with > > them > > > (which is right). Sometimes that probably contributes to drugs > > > seeming all that much more cool or intriguing. > > > > > > If I were a conspiracy theorist, I could come up with all sorts of > > > notions about who else in government might have realized this as > > well > > > and what the real intent of the ads is, but I'll leave that to > > > > > > > > I do have one conspiracy theory of my own. I find it very > > interesting > > > that, right around the time California's Proposition 36 is gaining > > > national attention and growing support, a certain high profile > > > individual is repeatedly followed, arrested for the simple act of > > > using drugs, and hailed before the media and the rest of the world > > as > > > a victory for the " treatment not prison " battle. Downey, Jr > - > > > > > Poster Boy for Proposition 36. Coincidence???? Hmmm. Yep, even God > > > and the 12 steps have to advertise. > > > > By the way, I'm not suggesting that he or anyone else should go to > > prison for drug use. Peele just wrote an article that I liked a lot > > about how the treatment option is not much of an improvement, > though, > > and I certainly agree with that. > > > > > > Joan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2001 Report Share Posted June 14, 2001 --- kayleighs@... wrote: > > > > > > But surely Downey, Jr. is a poster child > for the failure of > the > > > treatment system. Or a poster child for the REJECTION of an inherently fallacious system. > > > > Alcoholism/addiction are the only diseases that > failure of treatment > is > > evidence for the need for that treatment. > > > > Ken > > It absolutely astonishes me that no one sees the > fallacy in this. Does this mean then that addiction is an untreatable disease or is the assumption of pathology an even greater fallacy? Always seems to come back to this question doesn't it? Ron > > __________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2001 Report Share Posted June 14, 2001 Since you are leaving it up to me... When interviewed on the Triangle reseach study on D.A.R.E., which showed the program had NO effect on later drug use, McCaffrey responded to a reporter that, while this might be true, it was still irrelevant. D.A.R.E., McCaffrey said, taught kids to respect authority, and this made it worthwhile, whether it prevented drug use or not. Take a look at the Rolling Stone article, 'Truth or D.A.R.E.', 1998, March 5. Researchers have been physically attacked, or fired from their jobs, for studying the ineffectiveness of D.A.R.E. Extreme right-wing groups say anyone who criticizes these classes is a 'drug pusher.' In one case, rocks were thrown through a university office window, and threats delivered; the critical research was dropped. More importantly, funding agencies yank money out of institutions that produce 'unhelpful' research. The Rolling Stones article has names and cases. A nice piece of work. Re: cigarettes > > > > > Is this the whole story, though? There are no huge marketing > > > campaigns advocating the use of illegal drugs, and look how > popular > > > they are? > > > > It's called the D.A.R.E. program Joan. > > > > Seriously, it is possible that hysteria about drugs might actually > > exacerbate the problem. > > I think you're probably right. I'm around young people everyday, > mostly 18-19 year olds. There seems to be a general consensus among > many of them (and I'm not so ancient that I've forgotten what it was > like to feel the same way- still do in many ways) that such programs > might as well be called G.E.E.K. (I'll have to come up with something > clever for that to stand for). Most of them are smart enough to see > the scare tactics and are turned off by what they see as a " goody- > goody " attitude. They have heard so much about their baby boomer > parents doing drugs (at least, the media has portrayed this to them), > they often feel as if these programs aren't being straight with them > (which is right). Sometimes that probably contributes to drugs > seeming all that much more cool or intriguing. > > If I were a conspiracy theorist, I could come up with all sorts of > notions about who else in government might have realized this as well > and what the real intent of the ads is, but I'll leave that to > > I do have one conspiracy theory of my own. I find it very interesting > that, right around the time California's Proposition 36 is gaining > national attention and growing support, a certain high profile > individual is repeatedly followed, arrested for the simple act of > using drugs, and hailed before the media and the rest of the world as > a victory for the " treatment not prison " battle. Downey, Jr - > Poster Boy for Proposition 36. Coincidence???? Hmmm. Yep, even God > and the 12 steps have to advertise. > > Joan > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2001 Report Share Posted June 14, 2001 > But so was McGovern's daughter, in treatment over 60 times, who froze > to death as a result of treatment advice. Huh? Do tell! P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2001 Report Share Posted June 14, 2001 One of the more interesting things is not her problems, but her father's rush to find a 'spiritual' answer. Goes to show you. Scratch a liberal, there is a conservative under the veneer. It was LBJ who invaded Vietnam, after all. We need something better than corporate liberalism. We need REAL democracy. Re: cigarettes > > > > But so was McGovern's daughter, in treatment over 60 times, > who froze > > to death as a result of treatment advice. > > Huh? Do tell! > > P. > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2001 Report Share Posted June 14, 2001 > But surely Downey, Jr. is a poster child for the failure of the > treatment system. Yes. And what is interesting to me (I have followed this quite a bit), and you almost have to read between the lines to get it, is that Downey Jr. has expressed some amount of disgust at this as well. He has made several comments that suggest his awareness that treatment as we know it (12 step) is part of the problem. He is a public figure and one who has (by his own admission) " no desire to be the poster boy for recovery " . He no doubt also realizes that if he wants to stay out of jail, he ought not raise too much of a stink about the 12 step thing. But there is clearly a question mark in his mind. I have yet to hear him utter one 12 step cliche in an interview, he has characterized the 12 step " tools " as inapplicable to people living " daily lives " , and he has sought info alternative treatment at least twice in the past few years. I feel bad for the guy. He's between a rock and a hard place. For him to " go public " with his views would be suicide, the whole thing being so high profile. The media would no doubt characterize it as " denial " . Incidentally, I know one of the alternative treatments he sought information about is some amino acid, nutritional approach which I know nothing about. Sounds like it could be hokey, but IMO, any move away from 12-steps is at least a good start. But, as of late, he has returned to the arms of his Walden House mentor Warren Boyd, who I assume is a 12 step holy roller (although I am not sure), so perhaps he has given in. I just think it is so unfortunate that we do not have a treatment system that is able or willing to openly present options to people like him who express a need/desire for something other than AA. The past 10 years of his life have been a casualty of this. My hope is that he will finally get really pissed off about it and do something. But, again, to do so would be putting himself at great risk. Joan Joan > > > > > Is this the whole story, though? There are no huge marketing > > > > > campaigns advocating the use of illegal drugs, and look how > > > popular > > > > > they are? > > > > > > > > It's called the D.A.R.E. program Joan. > > > > > > > > Seriously, it is possible that hysteria about drugs might > > actually > > > > exacerbate the problem. > > > > > > I think you're probably right. I'm around young people everyday, > > > mostly 18-19 year olds. There seems to be a general consensus > among > > > many of them (and I'm not so ancient that I've forgotten what it > > was > > > like to feel the same way- still do in many ways) that such > > programs > > > might as well be called G.E.E.K. (I'll have to come up with > > something > > > clever for that to stand for). Most of them are smart enough to > see > > > the scare tactics and are turned off by what they see as a " goody- > > > goody " attitude. They have heard so much about their baby boomer > > > parents doing drugs (at least, the media has portrayed this to > > them), > > > they often feel as if these programs aren't being straight with > > them > > > (which is right). Sometimes that probably contributes to drugs > > > seeming all that much more cool or intriguing. > > > > > > If I were a conspiracy theorist, I could come up with all sorts of > > > notions about who else in government might have realized this as > > well > > > and what the real intent of the ads is, but I'll leave that to > > > > > > > > I do have one conspiracy theory of my own. I find it very > > interesting > > > that, right around the time California's Proposition 36 is gaining > > > national attention and growing support, a certain high profile > > > individual is repeatedly followed, arrested for the simple act of > > > using drugs, and hailed before the media and the rest of the world > > as > > > a victory for the " treatment not prison " battle. Downey, Jr > - > > > > > Poster Boy for Proposition 36. Coincidence???? Hmmm. Yep, even God > > > and the 12 steps have to advertise. > > > > By the way, I'm not suggesting that he or anyone else should go to > > prison for drug use. Peele just wrote an article that I liked a lot > > about how the treatment option is not much of an improvement, > though, > > and I certainly agree with that. > > > > > > Joan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2001 Report Share Posted June 14, 2001 Actually, the weapons charge was a few years ago, and it wasn't what he went to prison for (he failed to pee in a cup in a timely manner). As far as I know, the people who owned the house he fell asleep in did not press charges, so the tresspassing is out. And by all accounts, he wasn't doing anything out of the ordinary (to suggest that he was under the influence) the last time he was arrested. I believe the cops just assumed he was because he was standing in an alley. And he never took his son on a drug buy. He is, in fact, being punished (or treated- same thing) for being a high profile drug user. Period. It is possible that he is a nihilistic narcissist as well, but that seems beside the point to me. Joan > > > > > > > Is this the whole story, though? There are no huge marketing > > > > > > > campaigns advocating the use of illegal drugs, and look how > > > > > popular > > > > > > > they are? > > > > > > > > > > > > It's called the D.A.R.E. program Joan. > > > > > > > > > > > > Seriously, it is possible that hysteria about drugs might > > > > actually > > > > > > exacerbate the problem. > > > > > > > > > > I think you're probably right. I'm around young people everyday, > > > > > mostly 18-19 year olds. There seems to be a general consensus > > > among > > > > > many of them (and I'm not so ancient that I've forgotten what it > > > > was > > > > > like to feel the same way- still do in many ways) that such > > > > programs > > > > > might as well be called G.E.E.K. (I'll have to come up with > > > > something > > > > > clever for that to stand for). Most of them are smart enough to > > > see > > > > > the scare tactics and are turned off by what they see as a " goody- > > > > > goody " attitude. They have heard so much about their baby boomer > > > > > parents doing drugs (at least, the media has portrayed this to > > > > them), > > > > > they often feel as if these programs aren't being straight with > > > > them > > > > > (which is right). Sometimes that probably contributes to drugs > > > > > seeming all that much more cool or intriguing. > > > > > > > > > > If I were a conspiracy theorist, I could come up with all sorts of > > > > > notions about who else in government might have realized this as > > > > well > > > > > and what the real intent of the ads is, but I'll leave that to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I do have one conspiracy theory of my own. I find it very > > > > interesting > > > > > that, right around the time California's Proposition 36 is gaining > > > > > national attention and growing support, a certain high profile > > > > > individual is repeatedly followed, arrested for the simple act of > > > > > using drugs, and hailed before the media and the rest of the world > > > > as > > > > > a victory for the " treatment not prison " battle. Downey, Jr > > > - > > > > > > > > > Poster Boy for Proposition 36. Coincidence???? Hmmm. Yep, even God > > > > > and the 12 steps have to advertise. > > > > > > > > By the way, I'm not suggesting that he or anyone else should go to > > > > prison for drug use. Peele just wrote an article that I liked a lot > > > > about how the treatment option is not much of an improvement, > > > though, > > > > and I certainly agree with that. > > > > > > > > > > Joan > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 15, 2001 Report Share Posted June 15, 2001 paul diener wrote: > One of the more interesting things is not her problems, but her father's > rush to find a 'spiritual' answer. > > Goes to show you. Scratch a liberal, there is a conservative under the > veneer. It was LBJ who invaded Vietnam, after all. > > We need something better than corporate liberalism. We need REAL democracy. , What makes you so sure her father rushed out to find a " spiritual " answer? What is normal, is for when a parent follows advice given virtually " unanimously " by all authority on the matter, whether psychologists, family physicians, psychiatrists, social workers and those who " have recovered " they send their child to " treatment. " Then it is the parents' turn to get treatment for their own disease. _That_ is probably how McGovern " got spiritual " -- his guilt and fear for his daughter was manipulated by people who have the advantage of decades of study and experimentation in " re-education. " Ken Ragge > > Re: cigarettes > > > > > > > > But so was McGovern's daughter, in treatment over 60 times, > > who froze > > > to death as a result of treatment advice. > > > > Huh? Do tell! > > > > P. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.