Saw an interesting comment the other day about the difference between the U.S. and other protesting populations
20 2013-07-03 by TheWiredWorld
The comment was refering to how the "foreign" populations that are actually protesting are are largely being quelled by the minority: those in media and often times, foreigners to that country.
The comment was roughly: "it's amazing what populations unsaturated with fluoride and other things will do" and it really got me thinking.
I subscribe to the belief that, not JUST fluoride, but many different things that saturate the Western diet are detrimental to our minds and a shackle to our will. In either case I thought it was a very insightful comment when comparing the realities of the actions of populations and, when you stop to think about it, America's own. Considering the provocateurs, etc., the people that DID do something in this country, Occupy, (and this is a gross generalization I know) somehow didn't strike me as a major crowd of fast food eating consumer whores.
In the end? Correlation does not imply causation? Absolutely. But an interesting observation nonetheless.
29 comments
11 PWR_OF_LOVE 2013-07-03
Yes. There are a lot of things we consume or do that is depriving us from having a free, energetic mind.
This is why things that slowly-but-steady kill you are legal and taxed. As you can still be a slave. But you won't be any wiser after consuming the cancer that is cigarettes and alcohol. Now don't get me wrong, I think everyone is entitled to be commander and chief of their own body. I consume alcohol, I used to smoke.
The illogicality of using emotion or pre-projected propaganda images to constrict someone's freedom grinds my gears. The prohibition did not work, the war on drugs is in a total hypocritical tax leeching state. I would even say forcing or banning can make it more attractive
TL:DR; This meme from the stone ages
6 fredman555 2013-07-03
i wonder how many conspiracy theorists have tripped in their life? im sure there is a correlation between the sheep and the ones who have not truly experienced psychedelics
2 [deleted] 2013-07-03
Everyone should try it once. If you don't like it don't do it again.
1 PWR_OF_LOVE 2013-07-03
Another thing which we here on /r/conspiracy know is that drugs is a pretty broad definition. A random grasp of common drugs: (please notice it also depends on the quality of the drugs and if it is mixed with other crap)
God tier (psychedelics)
moderation but OK tier
Shit should be removed from the universe tier
3 happiness_isawarmgun 2013-07-03
Psychobilin?? haha. I think you mean psilocybin
1 PWR_OF_LOVE 2013-07-03
Yes I do, thanks. Dyslexia op
2 star_particles 2013-07-03
Classic my drug is better than yours argument.
You cannot say some drugs should be okay or allowed but other shouldn't.
You can but its hypocritical
0 PWR_OF_LOVE 2013-07-03
First off, this is a ''tier'' list. I never claimed to have any scientific backing to the list. It's based on personal reasonings.
Not to be a jerk, but I just did. Not in a literal sense tho. You just assumed I made that conclusion. I think some drugs are bad because things like risk, price, addiction etc are things you have to take in mind. Which is one of the factors that created the tier list.
Well, not really. By this you imply all drugs are to be treated as equals. Which we do not do in the real world.
0 TheExtroll 2013-07-03
What about cannabis?
1 PWR_OF_LOVE 2013-07-03
Cannabis most threatening effect is that you will have no motivation to do anything. Because it makes you so contempt in situations, it kills motivation. Cannabis is like most medicine, and I really do see it as one. Not because I smoke green for that reason. I smoked it because it made me contempt. But on the other hand, it can help alcohol abusers with a better substitute. And don't get me wrong all medicine have some sort of side effects. Everything in life has a side effect. Some are bad, some are worse. And lucky for weed, it side effects are not (permanently)physically / mentally damaging as much - but a treat which makes it a long term danger; the danger of always being contempt, and not doing shit.
1 TheExtroll 2013-07-03
Odd because when I smoke, I want to do things, create, explore, etc, much to the dismay of my other friends who just want to "chill".
0 PWR_OF_LOVE 2013-07-03
Depends on how long you use it for, what kind of weed. Many other factors. I would say the longer you use it, every day especially - the less motivated you get.
0 kitchybitchy 2013-07-03
I have to disagree with this statement. Eventually if you use it every day, it barely gets you high anymore. It doesn't demotivate you, it just doesn't get you high so the mind dancing doesn't really happen... it's kind of disappointing, which is why I always try to take some time off when my tolerance builds up.
1 PWR_OF_LOVE 2013-07-03
Smoked weed for 5 years straight up. With breaks in between. And I don't know how you can say you disagree with me while your context kinda does. It might not have had the same effect on you, but that does not mean it is not so. Motivation and smoking weed has been linked in social and science studies a lot more then just once.
1 kitchybitchy 2013-07-03
Hmm, well, if studies prove it, then you must be right. All I know is some of the most motivated people I've ever heard of smoke(d) weed with some regularity. Carl sagan, bob Marley, Willie nelson, snoop dog, tommy chong.... I'll stop there cuz you get the idea, but you know I could go on and on - my context didn't agree with you at all. I don't think regular dope smokage makes you lazy or unwilling or bored or causes you to lack all motivation. That sounds like some D.A.R.E. bullshit to me. All that happens is your body builds up tolerance. The only demotivation I feel then is to not waste sixty bucks on a sack of primo. I take a week or two off, and then I get more and enjoy my high.
1 PWR_OF_LOVE 2013-07-03
Well there you have it, you didn't smoke so much everyday that you make less dopamine then normal. Which means that if you don't have to smoke so much everyday that you will need to smoke to go to ''normal dopamine levels''. And besides, exceptions of the rule are ALWAYS there.
There are always exceptions to everything, you are actively looking for arguments. And besides, most of these people had weed in their image and persona...
Again, you are not rebutting any of my arguments. You are just bringing in personal shit to ''defend'' your use of weed in one form or another. And I am not even trying to make pot look bad or attack people on their usage of it. Neither am I saying that you lack discipline. Just stating the most correct facts I know of, and if you think they are wrong - You have to come with arguments.
I look forward to your response.
1 kitchybitchy 2013-07-03
Lol, as I said, if studies prove it you must be right. And as for how often I smoke, it just depends. At the moment I haven't smoked in several months, but trust me when I say, weed and me are old and dear friends, and I will gladly defend her any day of the week. As far as using personal opinions over facts to rebut your position..... well duh. I never claimed my opinion was anything but personal. You sure showed me though, with all the studies you sited and everything.
1 PWR_OF_LOVE 2013-07-03
I linked a story earlier in the comments. Besides you can't use google my friend? Why would I take the effort to link and present it to you if you are unable to have a good discussion.
0___________0
1 kitchybitchy 2013-07-03
Lol, you take yourself far to seriously. Far, far to seriously.
1 PWR_OF_LOVE 2013-07-03
No.
1 kitchybitchy 2013-07-03
Lol, yeah.
1 PWR_OF_LOVE 2013-07-03
You are like the guy putting his hands on his ears screaming:
Please proceed to comment it's hilarious.
1 kitchybitchy 2013-07-03
Hahaha.. talk about the pot casting aspersions on the kettle.
3 Awhiteguy22 2013-07-03
That meme is spot on.
3 TheNewAmericanJedi 2013-07-03
America is an multi-dimensional economic prison. It seems anyone greatly successful is somehow tethered to the power structure. Anyone dissenting is labeled, fired from their work, or monitored and marginalized. Our masters have successfully given us only two decisions: comfortable and mad, or uncomfortable and mad.
Guess which one most people chose? Those who choose unwisely better be driving an old car if ya know what I mean.
At the same time, I have little faith much will change. The weak and meek have always been owned by their masters. This is a cruel perversion of human nature, and why we are inherently evil to begin with.
2 [deleted] 2013-07-03
I think there's a huge difference between a population that has lived under brutal tyranny and one that is relatively free. The Egyptians have been murdered and tortured in droves with a less democratic rule than the US population, that's clear. In comparison, a lot of people that live in the US are relatively comfortable and lead a decent life. Under such rule as the Egyptians, the amount of shit you are willing to put up with is diminished because of the behaviour and stories of friends or family being murdered by police or security forces.
I'm under no illusion that the US government isn't free from tyranny or corruption but compared to Mubarak who rounded up people and killed them, it's not quite the same. That's why people are willing to die protesting on the streets because they have seen and felt the consequences of an undemocratic government personally and feel effected as an individual. In the US, people have food on the table, a car, a house, a somewhat varying degree of income and stability and the media bombards them with an "it's bad but not that bad" message and people accept it.
So in the US, it's going to take a lot more than just open corruption to start off a revolution, people will need to be killed on the streets and it plastered all over the news before people start going ape shit and more importantly, people need to perceive hardship in a way that really hammers the point home they are being fucked. People already are being fucked in the arse, badly, but there is a selfish nature of "I'm ok so fuck everyone else."
2 PWR_OF_LOVE 2013-07-03
Exactly.
Human nature is ''comfort''. But revolutions can burst out from the most random events. It is all ''unpredictable'' human factors.
There will be mass protest in western countries when things like food prices or availability reach a critical point. source: IMF Or, this
Once our main things in life start slipping away...
0 thadoc 2013-07-03
Sure maybe we are docile due to fluoride regimens, whats more likely is not enough of the population is going hungry. We have much more tolerable gaps in our income/ability to feed ourselves and our children than the protesting nations. If enough people start going hungry in the USA that's when you will see millions upon millions in the streets.