Psychology and Self Improvement
Categories: Philosophy | 4 Comments

Cognitive liberty is the concept that an individual has absolute sovereignty over their state of consciousness as long as it does not infringe on the rights of another. This includes the use of meditation, prayer, and psychoactive drugs, as well as the right to not be force-fed any psychoactive drug against one’s will.

Currently, cognitive liberty is not a very much respected philosophy in American politics. Most psychoactive drugs like cannabis, psilocybin mushrooms, LSD, and mescaline are considered illegal to possess and consume. Similarly, we see young children all throughout the nation being force-fed certain psychoactive drugs (the “good kinds”) in name of “normal thinking” and “normal behavior.”

null

As a libertarian, I feel cognitive liberty is a necessary component to any free society. I have written numerous times about my disdain for the War On Drugs and specifically the failure that is marijuana prohibition.

I am also against our tendency as a society to administer psychoactive drugs so carelessly and with so little respect for the free choice of young people and the mentally ill. It is an awful thing to offer a drug to any person without appropriately informing them on what the drug is supposed to do or how it might make them feel. We should also explain to children very clearly that they have a choice whether or not to continue taking the drug if they don’t like its effects. It often happens where a child’s personal interest is put secondary or even overlooked completely.

Let it be known that I do think there are cases where someone needs to be given a drug against their will (maybe if they are unconscious or completely delusional and incoherent). But these situations are limited, and I think it is safe to say that society and government has overstepped its boundaries on more than a couple fronts when it comes to this issue.

null

Who really has the authority to tell a conscious and thinking being what they can and cannot put into their body or how they should experience reality? I don’t consider it justified for any free society to draw such arbitrary distinctions between what is “good” or “bad” for an individual if that individual is exercising their own rational free choice. People have different values and interests in life – this is the same dimension of diversity that characterizes all of nature and what has made evolution possible.

The act of consuming drugs is a victimless crime, and it does not justify people getting locked up in prison or having a criminal record that inhibits them from ever getting a good job or building a bright future. Drugs have been present in every society known to man and it is time we respect their place in the structure of our humanity. It is one thing to advise others against the use of certain drugs, and it is another to try to banish their existence or ignore it entirely.

I am perfectly comfortable acknowledging the fact that some drugs have negative consequences while still promoting the freedom for others to use these same drugs. For one thing, negative consequences are a part of all decisions we make – it does not mean we sacrifice our freedom to make those decisions. To borrow from something I wrote in a recent article about government spending,

“Just because half of American marriages end in a divorce doesn’t mean we want the government to make decisions on who we should marry. Life is filled with mistakes; it is how we learn, and it is a part of freedom.”

null

If you really want to help those who are dependent on drugs – or if you really want to make a long lasting change in any individual’s behavior – then you need to appeal to that person’s reason. You can not rule a rationally thinking person by force. And yes, even a drug addict has his or her own mode of rational thought in accordance with their own values and interests.

When people value something strong enough, they find a way to go against government restrictions in order to satisfy that want. This is why prohibition always leads to a black market for goods that society finds valuable.

When will people recognize that others value these drugs? When will we learn to tolerate these differences? If we really want to make a positive change than we need to re-think freedom and re-think the way we influence others if we want to continue living in a free society. If we don’t accept the notion of cognitive liberty, if we sacrifice those fundamental principles of self-ownership and freedom of thought, then in what ways are we really free anymore?

To learn more please visit The Center For Cognitive Liberty & Ethics, which includes notable members like visionary artist Alex Grey, libertarian psychiatrist Thomas Szasz, and psychedelic researcher Ralph Metzner (who used to work with Timothy Leary).

“As soon as we surrender the principle that the state should not interfere in any questions touching on the individuals mode of life, we end by regulating and restricting the latter down to the smallest details.”

Ludwig Von Mises

Categories: Society | 6 Comments

Prohibition

For many of us who already understand the unintended consequences of the “War On Drugs” this video covers most of the main arguments; however, it puts it in a way that I think almost any rational thinking person could understand.

At the very least those who are still for the WODs must acknowledge that it hasn’t come without its fair share of consequences. In fact, it would be hard to prove that the WODs has been working at all. It certainly hasn’t succeeded in deterring others from experimenting with drugs and, if anything, it has only added more dangers to society by creating a black market and an environment susceptible to gangs, violence, and other criminal behavior.

One could of course make an argument for WOD reform, but it isn’t nearly as compelling as the argument to just get rid of prohibition entirely. America’s past history with alcohol prohibition is the best example anyone will ever need that drug prohibition simply doesn’t work: it doesn’t make people safer, and it doesn’t get people to make healthier decisions.

We are going to need to change our approach if we have any desire to build a better society.


Image Credit

Categories: Philosophy | Add a Comment

“What kind of man was Ludwig von Mises? As this unique film shows, Mises (1881-1973) was a man who never stopped fighting for freedom: not when the Nazis burned his books, not when the Left blackballed him at universities, not when it seemed as if statism had won. With courage and genius, he fought big government until the day he died … in 25 books, hundreds of articles, and more than 60 years of teaching.

Mises’s battles against Communists, Nazis, and other socialists, are featured in this film, as are his ideas of Liberty. There is also the old Vienna he loved, the Bolshevik prime minister he dissuaded from Communism, and a cast of villains from Lenin to Hitler, as well as such supporters and students as Murray Rothbard, Ron Paul, Bettina Greaves, M. Stanton Evans, Mary Peterson, Joseph Sobran, and Yuri Maltsev.

Among his many accomplishments, Mises showed that socialism had to fail, that central banking causes recessions and depressions, that the gold standard is honest money, and that only laissez-faire capitalism is fully compatible with Western civilization.

Mises was the twentieth century’s foremost economist, and one of its most important champions of Liberty. Here is a film that does justice to this extraordinary man, and to his equally extraordinary ideas.”



Categories: Philosophy | Add a Comment

G. Edward Griffin (born November 7, 1931) is an American film producer, author, and political lecturer. Starting as a child actor, he became a radio station manager before age 20. He then began a career of producing documentaries and books on often-debated topics like cancer, Noah’s ark, and the Federal Reserve, as well as on right-libertarian views of the U.S. Supreme Court, terrorism, subversion, and foreign policy. He has opposed the Federal Reserve since the 1960s, saying it constitutes a banking cartel and an instrument of war and totalitarianism.”

Categories: Society | 5 Comments



This is the third time within the last couple of weeks that Judge Napolitano’s show “Freedom Watch” has covered the War On Drugs, and its utter failure as a government motive to protect its citizens from substance abuse. Even though I already reported on one of these segments at Legalize It? Director of NORML on Marijuana Prohibition, because this is a topic I find very interesting, I decided to report on this latest update as well.

Jacob Hornberger, the founder and president of the Future of Freedom Foundation , a non-profit libertarian educational facility, says Nobel Prize economist Milton Friedman predicted the failure of the War On Drugs back in the 1970s, back when then-President Richard Nixon first defined the movement. Since then, Hornberger argues, the WOD has proved itself to be a failed war. He claims the best way to fix this mess is to do the same thing we did with alcohol prohibition – end it!

Napolitano agrees with Hornberger; he believes the War On Drugs is unconstitutional, a waste of time, and a waste of the American people’s money and resources. As a result of some of these laws, innocent people’s lives have been ruined by the hands of the state.

    NAPOLITANO: Is it controversial for people in the public eye to come out in favor of the legalization of the private use of recreational drugs?

    HORNBERGER: Well when I was bringing this up 20 years ago on radio talk shows I could light up the phone calls. People were just shocked at the possibility that drugs could be legalized. Twenty years later it is now a legitimate position…What do the drug warriors have left? All they have is their good intentions, and that is not enough. They have made the situation worse.

According to Hornberger it is not uncommon today to see police officers, federal judges, prosecutors, and lawyers against the War On Drugs.

    HORNBERGER: We have argued for 30 years now, Judge, that the free market would put these drug dealers and drug cartels out of business instantaneously. And the article to which you are referring, where the private sector is having these marijuana farms, is proving that. These cartels are having a difficult time competing against these legitimate marijuana farms. Which leads us to believe that if you legalize the whole market, [then] these drug gangs and cartels would go out of business overnight.

According to this CNN poll conducted earlier this year 95% were in favor of marijuana legalization.

Is it time politicians start listening to the American people? Can we ever return to a society that respects the individual’s freedom to choose his own pursuit of happiness, as long as it does not undermine the liberties of another? What is stopping legislators from legalizing drugs like marijuana and regulating it similarly to how we regulate alcohol? Over the last decade I have noticed a surge in people speaking up on this issue – hopefully we can come to our senses sooner rather than later. America, let your voice be heard!