Skip to main content

Feedback: Do You Read Drug War Chronicle?

Submitted by David Borden on (Issue #569)

Do you read Drug War Chronicle? If so, we'd like to hear from you. DRCNet needs two things:

  1. We are in between newsletter grants, and that makes our need for donations more pressing. Drug War Chronicle is free to read but not to produce! Click here to make a donation by credit card or PayPal, or to print out a form to send in by mail.

  2. Please send quotes and reports on how you put our flow of information to work, for use in upcoming grant proposals and letters to funders or potential funders. Do you use DRCNet as a source for public speaking? For letters to the editor? Helping you talk to friends or associates about the issue? Research? For your own edification? Have you changed your mind about any aspects of drug policy since subscribing, or inspired you to get involved in the cause? Do you reprint or repost portions of our bulletins on other lists or in other newsletters? Do you have any criticisms or complaints, or suggestions? We want to hear those too. Please send your response -- one or two sentences would be fine; more is great, too -- email [email protected] or reply to a Chronicle email or use our online comment form. Please let us know if we may reprint your comments, and if so, if we may include your name or if you wish to remain anonymous. IMPORTANT: Even if you have given us this kind of feedback before, we could use your updated feedback now too -- we need to hear from you!

Again, please help us keep Drug War Chronicle alive at this important time! Click here to make a donation online, or send your check or money order to: DRCNet, P.O. Box 18402, Washington, DC 20036. Make your check payable to DRCNet Foundation to make a tax-deductible donation for Drug War Chronicle -- remember if you select one of our member premium gifts that will reduce the portion of your donation that is tax-deductible -- or make a non-deductible donation for our lobbying work -- online or check payable to Drug Reform Coordination Network, same address. We can also accept contributions of stock -- email [email protected] for the necessary info.

Permission to Reprint: This content is licensed under a modified Creative Commons Attribution license. Content of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.


Anonymous (not verified)

Dear DWC - DRCNet,

On yr request for feedback, my answers are YES to all but the last to questions, - and lack of 'yes' to the last Q is only due to lack of time p.t. (& pls forgive). I occasionally fw bits of DWC, but most often I trust the interested people to inform themselves on your specifics.

Living in Norway, where the hypocrisy on 'illegal drug'-issues is even stronger than in the US, we look to the trend-setting (and law-setting, cf. UN-conventions) USA for hope of improvements. On drug-issues Norway is such a staunch ally of the USA that we tend to out-perform this 'big brother' of ours. All public discussions tend to end in prohibition-supporters (e.g. 'Ministry of Health and Care'-rep's.) referring to what now is described as the "Norwegian restrictive tradition" (not quite true, but widening the issue to defy rational counter-argument) or - ultimately - "our obligations to UN conventions". "Conventions" always mentioned in plural, making criticism of the US-created "Single Convention" (1961) or the "Convention on Psychotropics" (1971) difficult, in a bait and switch-game. Pressing these specifics soon becomes regarded as impolite and quarrelsome - implying "can't have that, bad form - not to be given media-voice". This is the state of our stone-walls.

This struggle is also strongly hampered by the fact that in urban areas cannabis is more readily available than even alcohol (for which restrictions e.g. in age and sales-times apply), and in practice anyone (34 % adult life-time prevalence) smokes as much as they/we wish - only taking care to self-censorize and keep mum.

Here our main worry now, as 'normalization' of attitudes to cannabis slowly spreads - after now a 44-year ban, since Jan. 06, 1965 - is that the harassment-factor against cannabis-users and all associated wider thinking will remain in place even as the punishment-practices soften. Thus the ideological struggle of material vs. spiritual, profit-seeking vs. ecological harmony, maximalization vs. optimalization, etc, which cannabis came to symbolize, may still lose out while cannabis becomes grudgingly accepted by the powers that be.

In my view the cannabis-ban is primarily a thought-ban, channelled at cannabis as a material expression of democratic, independent, ecological, socially just thinking. Cannabis-use itself (as psycho-activator, as different from industrial hemp) isn't truly interesting enough to merit the huge societal attention it garners, either from the pro- or anti-groups. This reveals how the topic conceals bigger issues, broadly put the peacefully revolutionary endeavours of 1960'ies radicalism.

This said, I'd like to add that I stand in awe of the work of reasonable thinking on DW-issues the DRCNet supplies. I'd be much more worried without it.

Any reply you'd like to make will be most welcome at my email which you have. We (NORMAL, Norway) need feedback too.

In support and great respect
Ole Ullern,
Oslo, Norway

Fri, 01/23/2009 - 3:38pm Permalink
Anonymous (not verified)

It only makes common sense to legalize all drugs, however I am smart enought to know we must sneak up on them one bit at a time.
We see so much harm caused by MJ arrests yet alcohol makes often makes people mean, leads to domestic violence, child abuse and animal abuse. I have never heard of domestic violence being commited by one under the influence of MJ.
Lets all keep on fighting, we may win in 50 more years. I do talked and presentations on the issue to anyone who will listen. Often people agree but will not help us out.

Mon, 01/26/2009 - 12:47pm Permalink

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.