US drug control agency will move to reclassify marijuana

Ah yes, because communism had such a great environmental record.

Fact is, it’s humans that like to destroy the biosphere: the economic trappings don’t really matter much.

It's not as pacifying as alcohol -- in fact it tends to make one curious about the world.

Socialists really hate freedom, don't they? Somehow, it's always "capitalism" in question when it is, in fact, freedom. It's none of the government's business what somebody takes into their body. All drugs should be decriminalized anyway.

Smoking and alcohol take millions of lives every year, yet we say "people have the right" to drink or smoke. Why is marijuana different, which is way less dangerous than alcohol, which is pure poison?

I don't advocate communism. Even communism supported technological development, which I do not. And humans don't like to destroy the biosphere at all; it is just a byproduct of our basal instincts in large social groups, and we should learn to get past that.

There's always someone who wants to blame capitalism. It's an inbuilt survival instinct to collect as many resources as possible. It's just only humans that have the technology to destroy while doing it.

I see you have studied the human as well! Now do religion ;)

I don't get this line of thinking. Should suicide be allowed too? That would make this argument congruent, otherwise I can understand it.

I am actually not against marijuana, nor am I a socialist. I am just pointing out its role in this case. Incidentally, I am against alcohol very much as well.

I do not believe the government should regulate what goes in our bodies. I am just pointing out the way the government is using it as a tool.

Frankly, I really don't care whether the government criminalizes drugs or not.

You're on an unusual website for someone who does not support any technological development. You're not in favour of caveman technology even? Clubs and fire? Going to be a cold winter.

I agree with that. That is why I think we should be much more cautious about technology, like the Amish.

Well, there are some interesting discussions here (sometimes). I don't believe in echo chambers but about talking with people about ideas.

I don't advocate for a complete shunning of technology, but rather a cautious approach towards it, somewhat like the Amish but with Christianity replaced with a reverence for nature.

We will never stop using basic tools and fire but there has got to be a better optimum somewhere that uses less than all the wasteful stuff we're doing now.

Can’t wait to hear what you think of the UK’s “smoke free generation” laws…

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/prime-minister-to-create-...

When you ask your government to look after your health, don’t be surprised when then start banning stuff that’s bad for your health.

Are there places where suicide is criminalized?

If it is voluntary, repeated, and the person of sound mind, I can't see why the government should prevent a terminal patient who is in constant pain from dying with dignity on their own terms.

Eagle screeching in the background.

"We will never stop using basic tools and fire but there has got to be a better optimum somewhere that uses less than all the wasteful stuff we're doing now."

Yeah, better technology.

Interesting outlook. I don't say you're 100% wrong, but getting enough people to make a difference to support you might be difficult. I think 99% of people never stop to question whether they should do anything, just rush headlong into the new consumable/widget.

Suicide is illegal in many places https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_legislation

"Should suicide be allowed too? "

If we say that people own their body and their life - then yes, they can decide.

And what's the recidivism rate?

Personally, I love birds and animals and natural ecosystems, which is why I can never love technology: the two are at odds and technology has been more destructive to them than anything else.

Yes, but I love wild animals. When I hear about birds and insects and spiders going extinct, I feel a terrible sadness and for that reason at least I am trying to figure out a better path and convince people of it. It might never work given the momentum of 8 billion, but most people are equally convinced they can never win the lottery and yet someone always does.

I care about animals as much as I care about humans which is why I do not support technological growth, which just exports suffering into the animal world for our comfort.

Illegal != Criminal. Most drugs are illegal in Portugal, but all are decriminalized.

Cigarettes are not criminalized. Criminalization != Legalization.

If it is not the result of mental illness, then yes. In Switzerland, you can go and legally end your life.

Look, I don't drink; I don't smoke; I don't do drugs. I did it all at one point. I'm not advocating for any of the stuff; on contrary. I advocate against using it. But people should have choice. Also, I'm advocating for not putting people in prison for possessing a plant and destroying their lives. How many young people have been destroyed who had a chance for a decent life, but everything was destroyed because of maybe one mistake they had made?

"Personally, I love birds and animals and natural ecosystems"

Me too, but I also love technology and see no fundamental problem between the two.

So no, I do not love pesticides or the toxic waste of conventional mining. But I would love a smart robot working the fields with no need for toxic chemicals. And mining can also be done in a non toxic way. It is just more expensive with current tech.

So far, there is no evidence that mining could ever be done in a sustainable way, nor have we any evidence that advanced technology could be sustainable. Since the industrial revolution, it has not been and we have made no significant steps to change it.