Certain drugs banned in an anarchist/communist society?

Speak for yourself. In any case, "old rules" are not going to stop any "hippy fucks" from thinking this or that. Wtf? And keeping old (i.e. capitalist or pre-capitalist) rules "enforced" will require something like a state, won't it? Not exactly libertarian.

Does having teenage children have to make people so reactionary and ... (I won't say, but I think some might be able to guess)?

Uh, no. Don't think I ever said or suggested that. Maybe you meant someone else.

So then I guess there are only two options open for us in our anarchist/communist society, right? Either it's 'do whatever you like' all the time, or it's generally follow a whole bunch of rules (which are enforced) most or all of the time? There couldn't possibly be any other options, right? No gray areas in between those two alternative possible futures?

In any case, I was referring to Allybaba's reference to enforcing "old rules", i.e. rules having their origin in capitalist society. I wasn't make a blanket statement against all rules.

Okay, I will grant you that. I was wrong to suggest that enforcing rules will require (something like a) state. I was thinking, though, of enforcing the "old rules" from capitalist society, which, as I see it, are largely blanket prohibitions involving misinformation and unwarranted 'scare tactics'.

Fucking christ, this thread is such a poor show. I'm not sure what's worse, the anti-drug brigade with their moralistic shite or the hippies with their 'everyone should be on shrooms' bs.

~J.

allybaba, could you define state for me?

(not meant to be sarcastic or contentious, but i think that debating whether or not the proposed constitutes statehood requires defining it first)

Well then, why don't you improve it by providing a thoughtful, nuanced post which is critical of both of those 'extremes'? It's still early (for this thread), you know. I don't think there is much of this 'everyone should be on shrooms' attitude, though. I haven't said that. I did predict that there would be an increase in usage of psychedelics in a post-cap. social formation, but I never said that I thought there should be such, not to mention that everyone should be using them. I definitely don't hold that attitude.

Yeah, that's right, the choices are:

a) prohibition of some or all recreational substances because they are bad for your health, which is paternalistic bs
b) everyone should take drugs all the time, which is fucking stupid
c) sitting on the fence between these two, which is idiotic

Because, as I've said, I think this discussion is meaningless in the here and now. Any answer that anyone gives is just wild speculation. Which is why this thread has turned into a vehicle for the grinding of personal moral axes.

~J.

Haha, these sort of idiotic hypothetical situations are beloved by neo-classical economists, usually within the context of trying to "prove" that commodities have no value, by referring to hypothetical situations that don't replicate society as it actually exists, i.e. "you are dying of thirst in the desert and encounter a glass of water, wouldn't the glass of water thus possess more 'value' than a diamond", etc.

This method of "argumentation" always pops up when some troll wants to take some issue or another with some perceived "problem" of communism.

I find this a tricky topic, yes acid and crystal meth are clearly dangerous and unhealthy but for some people cannabis is just as dangerous and can cause psychosis, I know this from personal experience and I'm tempted to say that all drugs should be prohibited and that drug dealers should be dealt with in a revolutionary society, wether thats actually democratic though I don't know but from my experience all drugs are extremely unhealthy and all the people who sell them care about is profit. I can't think of a single dealer I've met who was a decent person and I've met plenty of dealers.They are the worst type of capitalist and if you are going to let drugs be accepted in a society, seems to me you are gonna have to do business in some way with drug sellers. They are not people that can be trusted.

Drugs would not be a commodity in a communist society, so there would be no drug dealers (unless the shit was prohibited).

No surprise that drug dealers only care about profit, quite a few of them are capitalists. Working for a drug dealer is very similar to work in any other industry. A friend of mine from out West (Canada) who used to pack bags of weed related that there was much uproar when the head honcho bought a machine that would increase their productivity. A lot of people were 'laid off' as a result.

What right does anyone have to tell them what drugs they can and cannot take?

If this shit happened, who would enforce it? (didn't check the link).

I certainly misunderstood what communism means. I thought that is a kind of society that is by its very roots and historical arch, tends to be a community controlled society.
I thought, the communist society is not about reproduce the state control by all of its features and then name it as "anarchism". Therefore there won't be any separation between the consumption and production, the community organized life activity what we will share on. Now, I thought, that is a sort of changing of our lives, because that's what we want (right?) to the point where we are in control on our life.
There were couple of conclusion from these presumptions, like for example on the drug usage where the need of it will change as much as the production and the distribution. First, I wouldn't feel that we accomplished anything if my comrades/my surrounding Common is not based on solidarity and cooperation and therefore the "drug"-question would be around as a separate, external issue. Second, I would say, where the community establishes its own coherence, there is no need for self-destruction and escape paths. Consuming any kind of so-called drug would be a moment, a community act in order to enjoy ourselves in some extended aspect of our life. Not necessary means that will happen but I think it is very likely. It is very unfortunate to inherit the moral in general to the world that we build for ourselves.

An other issue about the distribution. The capitalism mobilizes everything, speeding up the trade and expand the markets it as fast as it is possible. Now, there is an industry that produce commodities what we referring as a "drug" and we should not forget about this is nothing different really compared to other industries: there is capital and capitalists who invest in this business, and there are workers, even though they illegal ones, who serve their function to provide profit for their bosses. The structure of the criminal activities certainly shows some sort of similarities of the feudal hierarchy and organisation, but it is already engaged in the production cycle and valorisation of the capital. As all capital, this one supposed to be abolished during the rising of the revolutionary movement. But our goal is to extend our circles, our revolutionary party to those proles who happened to be on a different side of legality. In fact, many of those workers who are living under the shadow state of mafias, who are involved in many ways criminal activities is a hard section of are class to reach in the revolutionary sense, since their very life is much more organized around their daily fears and routine against the "decent" citizens; we can be sure about for them the class war seems even more unreal than to the rest of the workers.

Strategically saying, this is the very first connection that we need to go for despite its troubled nature. Where we can organize ourselves isolated from the state control and constant terror, could be the same place what we need to inhabit in order to destroy criminal dependencies. It is ideal territory of communisation since it already grew in the dark therefore no police are there as an institute to defend it. The beautiful thing about the market control of the state that it must deploy blind spots against itself, those areas of economy where the a part of the private capital can hide against its own general control.

Casual drug usage is not abuse.