*
+
Cannabis Culture Forums >
The Political Forum >
End Prohibition - NDP Against
the Drug War
Thread > Praise, flak for
NDP pot resolution
Topic > On
Breaking the Law
.
> On 21Nov06 puff tuff wrote:
Marijuana decriminalization
> endorsement at convention
won't affect policy: Quennell
> by James Wood of The StarPhoenix
.
> REGINA - The provincial
NDP's endorsement of a resolution backing
> decriminalization of marijuana
laws at last weekend's party
> convention in Saskatoon
drew both praise and scorn on Monday.
> But NDP Justice Minister
Frank Quennell says the resolution will
> have no effect on actions
by the provincial government. [snipsome]
> Quennell said he's not
sure what the resolution means, since drug
> laws and drug prosecutions
are both federal responsibilities.
.
textman say: In other
words, only the feds have the power to put
an end to this evil and ongoing
fascist oppression that dehumanizes
tokers, damages lives and
families, and serves only the fear and
ignorance of these sadistic
squareheads (who, alas, constitute the
majority of Canadians).
.
> [FQ say:] "Police officers,
prosecutors, judges, whether they're
> Crown prosecutors appointed
by the province or judges appointed
> by the province, they're
sworn to uphold the laws of Canada,
> whatever they might be.
.
*They* are, yes; because
it's part of their job to do so. But what about
the rest of us? What about
the doctors and teachers and celebrities and
football players and writers
and rock stars and so on and so forth? Do
they "uphold the laws of
Canada" because they must? NO! They uphold
the laws because they fear
what will happen to them if they speak out
against this evil thing that
resides all warm and cozy within the very
belly of western civilization.
.
> [FQ say:] "Saskatchewan
can't change a federal law by subversion,
> if that's what's intended
here. That we wouldn't enforce federal law,
> then I'm against that,"
he said in an interview on the weekend.
> "I believe the people who
are in a position to administer the law
> should administer the law.
.
Even when you know
damn well that these particular laws are evil and
unjust and a blight upon
the good name and good will of all Canadians?!
Well, perhaps Mr Quennell
is ignorant of his own history. You see,
several centuries ago a small
group of Quakers in England decided that
slavery was immoral and very
much against the will of their loving and
compassionate God. That in
itself means nothing, but then they decided
to actually do something
about it. And so they sent a few of their people
over to North America to
denounce slavery and work towards liberty.
.
And what did they get
for their efforts? Imprisonment, torture, abuse,
ridicule, hatred, and murder.
The squarehead fascists of those days were
only slightly less restrained
in their sadism than their offspring today. So
the Quakers sent some more
brave souls to fight the good fight. And they
kept on sending them until
slavery was finally abolished. The lesson here
for Mr Quennell (and all
the multitude who think like him) ought to be
obvious: I believe the people
who are in a position to administer the law
should administer the law
... UNLESS these laws are in direct violation of
the higher laws: the laws
of human dignity, freedom, and liberty!
.
> If you don't like the law,
you either as a legislator vote to change it or
> as a citizen you vote for
a party that undertakes to change the law."
.
In other words, you
just bend over and smile and say "thank you Mr
Harper" as that sadistic
hypocrite proceeds to sodomize you again
and again and again! . .
. BTW: Did you see him in his glorious self-
righteous fury blasting China's
leaders for their human-rights abuses?
Meanwhile, he righteously
tortures, imprisons, and dehumanizes
Canadian citizens with an
unrestrained and undisguised fury that
would make even the greatest
asshole Harry J. Anslinger proud!
.
> Benn Greer, the president
of eNDProhibition Saskatchewan, the
> provincial branch of the
"unofficial anti-prohibition wing" of the
> party, said in an interview
he agrees with Quennell about the
> need to enforce laws as
they exist.
.
In other words, politicians
don't give a damn about truth and justice.
.
> But he helped push forward
the resolution because he believes the
> provincial party can help
advocate to the federal Conservative
> government to decriminalize
marijuana.
.
Nonsense! The PCz are
a bunch of squarehead fascists who *enjoy*
beating the shit out of the
weak and powerless. They will never listen
to reason. They will never
willingly stop oppressing tokers. They will
have to be forced out of
their evil ways, and only the will of the people
can do that. As long as the
majority thinks that prohibition is "a good
thing" the evil will never
end! :(
.
> "It's a first step in a
long process, I think," said Greer [snipsome]
.
A step on the road
to nowhere ...
.
> Quennell said decriminalization
is clearly not on the Conservative
> radar in any case. He said
the provincial government has
> acknowledged in the past
there are issues around the punishment
> for marijuana possession.
[snipsome]
.
In other words, Mr
Quennell knows that the anti-pot laws are evil
and unjust and makes criminals
out of law-abiding citizens; and he
also knows that the fascist
government will do nothing to rectify
this unholy monstrosity.
.
> NDP provincial secretary
Doug Still said he didn't think it was likely
> the party would take much
of an advocacy role on marijuana
> decriminalization. [snip]
.
In other words, the
NDP lacks the courage of their convictions.
And if they ever do take
the reins of the federal government in hand,
they will not bother to pursue
legalization for fear of alienating the
masses. Such is the nature
of the political solution.
.
So let us be frank
about all this. The squarehead fascists place their
heroes in a position of power
wherein they can *ABUSE the SPIRIT
of the LAW* by enacting laws
that are nothing other than weapons
of terror and oppression
targeting a large minority of citizens who
have no political clout in
Ottawa.
.
Therefore, because
the Law itself no longer serves the welfare of the
larger society, it is up
to EVERYONE who loves freedom and liberty to
reject these laws, to break
these laws, to speak out against these bad
laws, to increase the level
of disgust with the Law, and disrespect for
the Law (and the politicians
who abuse it), so as to raise such a stink
that even the closed noses
of those in power must smell and obey!
.
- the one who dissiz the law - textman ;;>
.
P.S. Sooner or later, Canadians
are going to wake up to the fact
that the current Prime Minister
of Canada is a monster.
x
+
On Beating the System
.
>>
tx previously wrote: A step on the road to nowhere ...
.
> On
22Nov Dana Larsen replied: Your defeatist sniping from the
> sidelines
doesn't help at all.
.
tx
say: I strongly disagree. Firstly, I'm not a defeatist, I'm a realist.
And
if I ever thought that speaking the truth, and telling it like it is, did
absolutely
no good at all, then I surely wouldn't bother to waste my time
and
energies doing so. Ranting IS my contribution to the great and noble
fight
for legalization. What else can a philosopher do other than to try to
educate
the masses?
.
> Benn
is doing good work, and this resolution is real progress.
.
Well,
Dana, I certainly wouldn't want to discourage anyone from pursuing
the
political solution if they are so inclined. Obviously you have a lot more
faith
in the politicians than I do. I personally believe that politicians have
neither
the will nor the ability to effect any substantial changes. You say,
'oh,
but we have to work within the system to make any real progress'.
Maybe
so, but it is that very same system that creates and maintains
this
evil thing so mildly called pot-prohibition.
.
Perhaps
you see this problem as a relatively simple matter of changing
a few
bad laws into good ones. I see it as symptomatic of a much deeper
and
wider problem: the political problem of fascism vs individual liberty,
the
social problem of the majority vs the minority, and the religious
problem
of belief vs dissent. The evil of pot-prohibition cannot be over-
come
without addressing *all* of these difficult human realities.
.
Indeed,
it is the system itself that is corrupt and rotten to the core. It is
the
system itself that must change, such that the legislature is made into
something
less than gawd-almighty. There has to be laws made to protect
the
Law itself from the abuse heaped upon it by these arrogant and self-
righteous
fascist-politicians. But hey, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe real change
can't
come about except through the political solution. I fervently hope not,
as
that really would be a defeatist position.
.
> Instead
of whining about the injustice of it all, why not help out and
> do
something useful?
.
Well,
I sent a copy of the above post to Mr Quennell, and another to Ms
Steele.
Beyond that I'm not sure that there is much more I can do.
.
- the one who works outside the system -- textman ;>
.
P.S.
"This generation will have to repent, not so much for the evil deeds of
the
wicked people, but for the appalling silence of the good people!" ML King
x
+
On the True Nature of Government
.
>>
tx previously wrote: ... Ranting IS my contribution to the great and noble
>>
fight for legalization. What else can a philosopher do other than to try
to
>>
educate the masses?
.
> On
22Nov Dana Larsen replied: If you really believe in the importance
> of
this issue
.
tx
say: I believe it is easily the most important issue facing Canadians (and
even
Americans) today. Why? Because it goes straight to the fundamental
questions
and values within western civilization. 4X, does the majority have
the
right to oppress a minority with extreme prejudice simply because that
majority
"knows" that it is right (because, of course, God hates marijuana)?
What
does freedom mean in a fascist state? Does it mean you are at liberty
to
be a squarehead *or else*? What do pluralism and tolerance really mean
when
tokers are summarily excluded from consideration? And so on.
.
> then
there is PLENTY more you can do than simply "educate the masses"
> with
posts on the forums.
.
Maybe,
but is there anything more important than trying to open the eyes
of
the willfully blind?
.
> And
if you're only posting on the CC forums then you're really just
> preaching
to the converted.
.
That's
true, for the most part, but not everyone here will agree with
everything
I say, obviously, so there's still plenty of room for dialogue and
dissent.
Anyway, I figure it's as good a place to start as any. Besides, the
Christian
forums and newsgroups really don't care to listen to me. The
Catholics
especially are very good at censorship (ie. they've had a lot
more
practice at it than the other churches).
.
> 1)
Donate money to other activists.
.
I'm
very poor and unemployed, so I have no money to donate. In fact,
I'm
even scared to go to my dentist because I have no idea how I'll pay
his
outrageous bills.
.
> 2)
run as a candidate for the marijuana party
.
I
don't even know if there is such a thing here in PC country.
.
> 3)
join another political party and work within it
.
If
I thought it would do any good I might just consider it. But again I must
point
out that I live here in Alberta, the very heartland of Canadian fascism.
.
> 4)
open a headshop, seedshop or vapour lounge or other activist storefront
.
That
takes money, or at least capital; which I don't have. What, you don't
believe
me? Check this out: I drive a 1986 VW Golf. How many rich guys do
you
know who have been driving the same car for twenty years?
.
> 5)
Write a letter to a newspaper or other media every day.
.
I've
written letters to the Edmonton Journal before, and even had a couple
of
them published. But you know what? They like to "edit" them to fit their
"space";
which means they chop them apart before printing them. Grrrrrr
I just
hate that to pieces! : (
.
> 6)
volunteer time each week helping out an activist organization
.
What
activist organizations are active here in Edmonton?
.
> Compared
to the above, "ranting" is not really much of a contribution.
.
Sorry
to say, but it's the best I can do under the present circumstances.
.
> [snip]
I am working within the NDP to highlight their shared belief that
> marijuana
prohibition is a bad policy. It will take time for this new idea
> to
percolate throughout the party, but there will be an increasing trend
> towards
anti-prohibition NDP MPs and MLAs within governments across
> Canada.
.
I'd
love to see that happen, Dana, I really would; but the chances of the
NDP
coming to power (or even just having a significant voice) here in
Alberta
(within my lifetime) are vanishingly small.
.
>>
tx: [snip] Maybe so, but it is that very same system that creates and
>>
maintains this evil thing so mildly called pot-prohibition.
.
> DL:
So unless we have a total revolution of society we can't legalize
> marijuana?
.
Well,
maybe not a *total* revolution of society. Maybe a half of a total
revolution
of society would be enough. Either way, something very major
has
to occur; something that will make a lot of people rethink the way
things
are, and the way things get done.
.
> The
institutions of government which we enjoy in North America
> are
not perfect, and they could be vastly improved, but they have
> allowed
for a great deal of social and legal change to take place
> without
breaking down the whole system.
.
Right.
It's a flexible, relatively mild, and semi-rational system of
government
that allows for slow and gradual modification. But even so,
it
still serves the interests of the rich and powerful first and foremost,
and
therefore still contains an unacceptable amount of fascism at all
levels
of government.
.
> In
North America we have changed laws which supported slavery,
> sexism,
discrimination, and so on, liberating many people from
> persecution
through changing the laws of the land.
.
Yeah,
but none of these things came from the politicians themselves until
well
after some small groups of ordinary citizens complained about them
long
and loud; and not without a measure of violence and bloodshed either.
Yes,
even today you have to fight for every inch of liberty gained; for it is
the
nature and purpose of government to constantly chip away and chip
away
at our hard won rights and freedoms.
.
Why
so? Because the churches and the corporations don't want strong,
free-thinking
individuals running around loose throughout society. They
want
weak and docile sheep who'll not dare complain about any abuse
and
oppression that is heaped upon them. And if we let them, they (ie.
governments
and politicians) would keep chipping away at our freedoms
until
nothing remained. And that worthy goal is the paradise that the
churches,
corporations, and conservatives dream of and lust after.
.
> We
don't need to revolutionize our entire society to legalize pot and
> end
the drug war. Indeed, I see it the other way, that we need to
> legalize
pot first, as part of an ongoing revolution.
.
Do
I smell a small contradiction here? Oh never mind. I do agree with
the
idea that legalization will come "as part of an ongoing revolution".
Well
said, Dana. :)
.
>>
tx: Perhaps you see this problem as a relatively simple matter
>>
of changing a few bad laws into good ones. [snip]
.
> Nothing
is "simple" but I do believe that changing these laws is the
> main
goal of our movement. And "simply" changing these laws will
> make
a big difference. Simply changing the laws in regards to slavery,
> equal
rights, and so on, makes a big difference. So do simple changes in
> the
laws which restrict freedom and liberty make a negative difference.
.
Right.
Unfortunately, changing the laws which restrict freedom and liberty
are
so much easier than making laws which have the opposite effect. This
is
because freedom and liberty are fundamentally contrary to the nature
and
purpose of government. To effect these kind of changes in the Law
requires
a prior change or movement within society as a whole that
basically
forces the government to make these changes on society's
behalf.
Politicians will certainly never do such things of their own accord.
.
>>
Indeed, it is the system itself that is corrupt and rotten to the core.
It
>>
is the system itself that must change, such that the legislature is made
>>
into something less than gawd-almighty. There has to be laws made to
>>
protect the Law itself from the abuse heaped upon it by these arrogant
>>
and self-righteous fascist-politicians. [snip]
.
> So
what do you advocate? Violent rebellion and revolutionary acts?
> You
advise that we storm Parliament? Shoot cops?
.
No,
I don't think violence will accomplish anything except to encourage and
justify
the fascists in their stubborn and mean-spirited resistance. Clearly,
the
direct approach won't work here. Convincing the churches that God loves
marijuana
is only slightly less impossible. But it may be possible to convince
corporations
and businesses that legalizing pot won't damage their profit
margin.
4X, if tokers would refrain from getting high at work, that would go
a long
way towards bringing the business sector to a more sensible stance
regarding
dope. If the business sector would just stop being so anti-pot (in
both
attitude and action), that in itself would be a major victory for the cause
.
> Make
hundreds of posts on chat boards?
.
Thousands
of posts? Millions of posts? Absolutely! Get the word out, I
say.
The more people who are made aware that pot-prohibition is a social,
political,
and spiritual evil, the more likely it becomes that something will
change
for the better.
.
>>>
DL: Instead of whining about the injustice of it all, why not help
>>>
out and do something useful?
.
>>
tx: Well, I sent a copy of the above post to Mr Quennell, and another to
>>
Ms Steele. Beyond that I'm not sure that there is much more I can do.
.
> DL:
Sorry, but that's just not enough.
.
tx:
: (
.
> Everyone
has their limits, and we each choose what causes to support,
> how
to give our time. But if you think this is an important issue, then
> there's
much more work to be done. Get involved, join the ranks of the
> activists.
Even from the comfort of your home computer you can send
> letters
to newspapers, write to politicians, and make a difference.
.
Well,
I can always hope that my posts may inspire some readers to do those
things
that I can't do. Yes, we all have our limits, and we all have our roles
to
play.
I prefer doing what I do best. After all, every social movement, every
revolution,
and every noble cause needs its philosophers, just as much as it
needs
its front-line soldiers.
.
>>
- the one who works outside the system -- textman ;>
.
> The
"system" is impossible to work "outside" of. We are all interlinked, we
> are
all part of systems and things larger than ourselves. Unless you live by
> yourself,
grow your own food, and don't interact with the modern world,
> you
are part of the "system".
.
I
am a very very small part of Canadian society, and an even smaller part
of
global civilization, but I certainly don't consider myself to be any part
of
the fascist machine that goes out of its way to abuse and terrify and
oppress
me just because I refuse to be a squarehead asshole (eg. like the
Prime
Minotaur Stephen Harper (thx talisman)).
.
> I
think that the way to make social change is to interact with the system,
> to
manipulate the system and reshape it in better ways. Not to pretend
> that
it doesn't exist or doesn't matter. -- Dana Larsen
.
And
if we can't manipulate the system and reshape it in better ways then
we
have no alternative but to break those parts of the system that need
breaking,
and then put something better in their place. Whatever way
works
in the long run to get the job done is the right way to go.
.
- one who advocates revolution by peacefful enthusiasm - textman ;>
.
P.S.
"One man's revolution is another man's rebellion, and that man's
rebellion is another man's reformation." -- Anon.
x
textman
*