1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
    PLEASE HELP

How do you recognise drugwar propaganda?

  1. Alfa
    After Canada's announced to look into the decriminalisition options, wild stories are released in the media about how addictive it is, that cannabis has become far stronger than ever before. (The UN has released a report that shows this untrue). The same happened after the decriminalisation of cannabis in the UK; the media was loaded with nonsense as a desperate attempt to reverse the process. With the election race coming up the most ridiculous stories(almost hilarious in stupidity)are curerntly published about Kerry, in order to trash him. This clearly shows propaganda. Propaganda is big buisness nowadays. Billions are spent into advertising, tainted research, designing strategies, designing & promoting press releases, etc. All to influence you. How do you recognise propaganda?

Comments

  1. searcher
    I recognize propaganda by reading it and then thinking about what it says relative to what I know and my own experiences. In the US, I have never read a government publication saying illegal drugs are good. I think some of the "anti" drug propaganda is kind of rediculous the way it is presented but I guess if the message stops someone from using illegal drugs, which is their own decision, well that might not be so bad. After all, the government is only trying to keep people off of drugs which isn't really a bad thing. Using illegal drugs (or legal drugs) to get high is kind of irresponsible. I'm not saying it is bad or good, just like getting drunk or stoned, it is justirresponsible.
  2. Alfa
    I believe in freedom over my own psyche. I do think that it is a bad thing that governments restrict and try to influence in a negative way. If I choose to use substances to enhance my experience of life, what's wrong with that? I work my ass of every day, am a active member of society if you will. I use drugs only when my life allows it and not to often. I harm no one. I keep in shape. What right does anybody have to interfere with that. In my view it brings more harm to society that governments try to brainwash, the citizens that they are supposed to serve, with wrongfull information. Besides that it is easy to show that the more restrictive a society is the more drugusers. Just compare the druguse in the Netherlands with that of the US. In the Netherlands the policy is much more focussed on information. So at minimum you can say that propaganda does not work against druguse.


    I am getting off topic here. Anybody else has idea's on how to recognise propaganda?
  3. Woodman
    The drugwar makes no sense to me; hence, EVERYTHING that is in support of it appears to be tainted with some degree of propaganda.
  4. searcher
    <img border="0" src= "http://www.allposters.com/IMAGES/148/2905.jpg">
  5. searcher
    <img border="0" src= "http://members.aol.com/dagoi/graphics/reefermadness.jpg">
  6. Pinkavvy
    the general summary of the commonly accepted social contracts that most governments are built upon is that the people give up certain liberties and accept certain restrictions for the purpose of safety. for example, I give up the right to stomp on my neighbors foot, for the safety that he wont' stomp on my foot. (or if he did, he would be punished or taught to not do that.) So a good way to evaluate laws and policies is to ask, is this restriction in place to keep me from harming others (either physically, financially, or whatever.)


    So when these drugwar propoganda commercials come out, I examine it through the same criteria. and I can't find how me smoking weed in my own home for spiritual and medical reasons could harm somebody else, especially if it comes directly from a grower. hence, i recognize it as propoganda towards an agenda for a social contract that I will not be part of.


    Think about it ... especially here in the U.S., we are losing more and more rights that are not being taken away within the boundries of the social contract to provide safety, but rather for other agenda's.


    (another example, though kind of off topic) in the state I live in it is now a law that you MUST wear a safety belt while driving. not only can you get a ticket if they pull you over and you're not wearing your seat belt, but they also have the occasional check-point where you have to slowly drive through the circle of cops looking into your vehicle to make sure you're buckled in. and if they see you driving with it unbuttoned, they can pull you over for it and search you vehicle. (there, it somewhat relates to the war on drugs, lol) Anyway the point is, I am all for seatbelts. Never ride in a car or drive without wearing one, not even just around the block. However, I don't support the law requiring it, espeically to such a degree, and the reason for it is because it is not within the social contract. if i decide to not wear a seatbelt, i am not harming anybody am simply putting myself at a risk (just as if I were to decide to smoke or drink or go shoping for that matter) ... so it is a liberty lost not for the sake of safety, but for the sake of some other agenda .... and orwellian 1984 type agenda perhaps


    i'll stop ranting now.
  7. manda
    That's pretty obvious- anyone or thing that offers only negative opinions about drugs, spoken or written, audio or video, that to me is propoganda.
  8. Alfa
    I do agree onevaluating, but your example does not work for me: When you do not wear a seatbelt while driving. If you bump into another vehicle or vice versa, you will probably not be able to take control of the car anymore because your are pushed out of position by the impact. Thus you can actually do damage to someone else when not wearing safety belts. BTW I do not wear them all the time.


    Back on topic: not every propaganda message offers negative opinions or facts only. It may be mixed with objective facts.
  9. Woodman
    If progress in the drugwar were based on statistics of drug overall use (not isolated statistics) it would become clear that we are LOSING this war!



    It has been TWENTY YEARS!



    How much longer is this going to take?



    How many more people (in law enforcement) have to DIE; their families proclaim them a legacy to law & order while the truth is that they were sacrificed upon the alter of a failed political agenda.



    I say, Support Law Enforcement: LEGALIZE DRUGS, NOW!
  10. manda
    How the heck would the stores that sold them if legalized keep from getting robbed? Yeah, legalize 'em, and put 'em all in one place too!!! That's it..
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!