124 Comments

A population of fit, jacked, energetic, quick-witted beasts of prey is much harder to control than a herd of clinically depressed ungulates.

You nailed it. This is how we hurt them. A good rule of thumb is to do the exact opposite of what mainstream medicine advises.

Expand full comment
author

Bingo.

Expand full comment

At some point throughout the day, every day, I find myself saying “when did everyone turn into such lame-ass pussies?” Everything is so soft, equitable and goddamn it you hurt my feelings! I’m over it too. Go hiking, hit the gym, drink whisky, have a cigar, fight, yell at the moon, fuck, make some art. Live FFS!

Expand full comment
author

This. A million times this. It's all so soft and lame. Life is about living.

Expand full comment

The answer is the law punishes masculinity, so now you are getting a lack of men… It’s not complicated.

Expand full comment
Jun 5, 2023Liked by John Carter

Vancouver is where all the drugs are. It's also the anti- smoking capital of Canada. Coincidence? Possibly not.

Thank goodness for black markets! The tobacco one is a mere few blocks from the fentanyl one. Too weird. But I know which one I'd rather visit.

The puritanism around tobacco is indeed strange, especially considering how much more civilised we were when more people smoked. But civility isn't what they want anymore.

I think you may have nailed it, sir.

Expand full comment
author

Yes, Vancouver - really the entire left coast, California is no better - follows this obnoxious pattern of trying to eliminate tobacco while permitting all the most biologically and spiritually corrosive substances. I find the culture there to be quite repulsive, actually.

Expand full comment
Jun 5, 2023·edited Jun 5, 2023Liked by John Carter

Maybe the Tobacco cartel fell behind on its membership dues?

Worth noting the medical system won't allow coffee or cigarettes on locked psych wards while feeding them lots of sugar and junk foods and pumping them full of mind altering drugs that destroy the brain and autoimmune system. When asked, the folks who run the ward say they don't want the consumers too stimulated and hyper.

Expand full comment

Many locked down psych wards in the US have smoking sections -- for a reason.

Expand full comment
Jun 6, 2023Liked by John Carter

"nicotine transiently improves acoustic PPI in schizophrenia patients. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4241357/

PrePulse inhibition is weak in schizophrenics, nicotine normalizes them.

Expand full comment

Probably to prevent uprisings or having to hire more staff.

Expand full comment
author

Yep.

Expand full comment
Jun 5, 2023Liked by John Carter

Ah, another awesome article! Thanks! Especially relevant here, in South Africa, where our bloody minister of "cooperative governance" decided to ban booze and smokes (and flip-flops, amongst other) and locked us up for months. The moment lockdowns got extended I found myself a friendly blac market cigarette salesman. It was three times the price, but damn. How do you stay sane locked up with two toddlers without any vent? I've been occasional/social smoker since teens, and promise you - a smoke every now and then is way better than popping antidepressants, antienxiety etc. Not to mention the benefits of grabbing a smoke with colleagues and bitching about the boss.

Expand full comment
author

Man, the South African case is nuts. I'd read about their full ban during the lockdown. Meanwhile, infrastructure is falling apart, farmers are getting murdered, and the country is becoming a failed state. Priorities.

Expand full comment
Jun 5, 2023·edited Jun 5, 2023Liked by John Carter

To add... Unfortunately, no complete satisfaction of sticking it up to the man (or woman in this case), as her son or nephew or something had illegal cigarette empire, which, needless to say, flourished while legal tobacco was banned

Expand full comment
author

Typical.

Expand full comment
Jun 5, 2023·edited Jun 5, 2023Liked by John Carter

I do think that the dangers of smoking are not exaggerated but it's a silver bullet for not focusing on other issues. All my great-grandparents smoked or chewed tobacco and lived well into their 80-90s. But they were from a time and place where you walked everywhere, ate fresh food, lived in a joint-family, had no tv( one of my maternal great-grandfathers funnily enough thought that cinema was anti-Christian and demonic), and a tightknit religious community. So using modern day logic, smoking made them healthy since all their progeny is fat and unhealthy. But actually they were healthy in every other area of life that smoking though unhealthy didn't really do much damage or maybe it did( they could have lived maybe to 100 instead of 80). If you give cigarettes to healthy people the effects are bad but not as bad as bad as giving it to absolute sickly people. And I do think the cognitive effects of nicotine were the reason why it was chosen as a scapegoat. Instead of focusing on people living in urban environments filled with pollution, or shitty food, or this stupid rat race, we can change on thing that will make everyone healthy and keep our bottom line( as well as make everyone stupider).

Edit: I realized I kinda of repeated what you said lmao, but these were thoughts I've had for the longest time

Expand full comment
author

Yeah, that's the thing - they lived long lives because they did everything else right, which rather puts the lie to the notion that smoking is the single worst thing you can do. You're better off being a smoker who eats well and stays fit etc, than an obese nonsmoker.

Expand full comment

I think we need to get beyond the identification of "smoker" vs. "nonsmoker." It is, I think, a part of the problem. If someone smokes once in a while, say a few cigarettes a month, are they a smoker? In a way, yes, but also no. One could say instead that they use tobacco but that it doesn't define their identity. The modern need to turn every choice into an identity is so pernicious. Moving away from it being a form of identity would, I think, allow people more freedom to use it in more selective, and thus healthier, ways.

Expand full comment
Jun 5, 2023Liked by John Carter

I had a 40-a-day habit 25 years ago. Hand-rolled, no filter. I quit cold turkey over night because I liked being able to walk up stairs better. Paternal grandmother smoked until she died, 2 packs a day. When the doctor tried to wheedle her out of it by saying she could maybe live a year or two longer, she shot him down: "What? Live hooked up to machinery with all my insides removed piece by piece? No way. Nurse! Roll me out into the yard, I need a cigarette to calm down!"

Dad used to smoke, then switched to snus since you can't smoke when wearing ABC-masks in the field during combat.

Long as it's a choice, and you don't blow smoke in my face, I'm okay with it - I mean, I don't lean over and chew spruce-resin in your face, yes?

(Spruce-resin is a wonderful substitute for chewing gum - just make sure it's not from one of the poisonous kinds of spruce!)

I think gub'mints are so dead-set against smoking because by now, anyone working in them in any capacity has grown up during the age of "smoking equals Hitler", so it's so entrenched the only thing that they can do is amp it up, up, up no matter reality. Opioids can be semantically sorted under "medicines" as you note, and Fentanyl is relatively new as dope, and comes from the pharmaceutical industry too, so it gets the same free pass - you have made a very important discovery and distinction there, and I hope it manages to get spread around, that gub'mint actions against substance abuse and addiction has very little to with pragmatism or practicalities, but is instead all just policy, agendas and make believe.

Then again, having lost six friends to drugs, I'm quite biased. When I say lost, I mean they are dead. Started with pot, ended with horse. People importing, storing andselling heroin ought to be shot on the spot pretty much sums up my stance.

Expand full comment
author

Snus is a very interesting example actually. Banned in the EU and in Canada, because ??? Well the official reason is that the authorities don't want to give the impression that there's such a thing as a 'safe tobacco product'. Which is the same reason they're trying to eliminate organic tobacco from the market. The reasoning appears to be: tobacco is toxic, and if you don't believe us, we'll make sure it's as toxic as we can make it.

Undoubtedly you're correct about the unthinking cultural dynamics among the minion class. They do not, as a rule, think for themselves, and once an idea is established in their little heads it becomes indefinitely self-perpetuating. But I do wonder about those who do their thinking for, from whom such ideas come in the first place. The Kalergites, for example, have been setting the agenda for generations now.

I'm sorry to hear about your friends. Many such cases, sadly.

Expand full comment
Jun 6, 2023Liked by John Carter

The only health-impact of snus is the risk of cancer of the gums (which is virtually unheard of here in a nation where a significant percentage of men and women use it daily - this is my suspicious face, so to speak), that your gums will recede a bit from your teeth making tooth-problems more likely (unless you brush and floss, maybe gargle some 60% proof once in a while to kill the tooth-worms) and that you might develop a "pocket" in your favourite spot.

One friend can fit a whole regular-sized D20 up beside his nose - that's after forty years of 5-10 loads per day.

Main reason other nations banned snus is the same reason they initially banned pölsa, surströmming, and real salt (we use ammonium chloride to give it a little kick) black liqourice: protect domestic markets.

Mentioning the Kalergi-plan here gets you labelled as a worse looney-tune than someone who believes in space-lizards from the Vega system. Showing people the historical facts (such as the actual original text) only makes it worse.

I guess people who tried to warn others after reading 'Men Kampf' felt the same way?

Expand full comment
author

It's amazing that the EU can give out an award named after Kalergi while at the same time his plan is considered a conspiracy theory. The cogdis is exceptional on that subject.

Swedish black licorice is rather amazing, but surstromming was not a taste I was ever able to acquire.

Expand full comment
founding

Just when you think that they (the regime) cannot sink any lower they manage to do just that. Enabling school kids to access opioids beggars belief. It probably has some linkage to sexual predation because young junkies without trust funds would presumably end up selling themselves.

The dynamic of therapeutic ideology and iatrogenic malice mirrors the passive-aggressive nature of anarcho-tyranny itself.

It is worth noting that prisons are full of drugs and gaolers like it that way. Drugs make people controllable.

Years ago I read William Burroughs, who argued that drugs were an instrument of control, and I thought that he was over the top. Today I'd have to say that he was spot on. Back in the 90s there were a few suspicious souls who suggested that the appearance of MDMA ('ecstasy') was very convenient for Thatcher, given the persistence of mass unemployment. IMO it is reasonable to assume that the regime's escalating enthusiasm for drug use is linked to anxieties over populism.

Expand full comment
author

Spot on. They've already normalized marijuana to the point where a whole bunch of people are convinced it's a cure-all. They're working on normalizing opioids via 'harm reduction' strategies as we speak. The general thrust is to encourage drugs that make people passive.

MDMA is an interesting case. Rave culture certainly served as an escape for a lot of gen-Xers. I caught the tail end myself and quite enjoyed it. On the other hand, warehouse parties were a space outside of direct regime control. People were creating their own culture, and coming together in a spirit of drug-fueled harmony. Ultimately that couldn't be tolerated, so it got stepped on hard.

Expand full comment
founding

A friend who is a recently retired physician told me that his operative assumption in the last few years was that a patient under 40 would be a regular consumer of cannabis. This is astonishing but it explains a lot about the wider society. Personally I am appalled that cannabis, drug of choice of the sudras, should become normalised in any ostensibly modern and advanced society. It is depressing to consider...a metric of catastrophic social decay.

Warehouse parties definitely began to spread dangerous counter-cultural ideas like TAZ...Temporary Autonomous Zone, a space for freedom in an otherwise managed world. TAZ was a concept dreamed up by the influential but controversial anarchist philosopher Hakim Bey (Peter Lamborn Wilson). The late HB/Wilson was an unashamed paedophile (he may have been involved with NAMBLA) yet he was a very serious independent scholar and linguist who translated Persian and Arabic poetry and wrote some very interesting stuff on heresy within the Islamic world. Also wrote a lot about drugs, the history of piracy and pirate utopias. He was a significant figure in the very last vestiges of the counter-culture during the 90s vogue for transgressive art. His thinking on the use of aesthetics as a weapon to disrupt the system would have wide appeal/relevance to the dissident right.

The TAZ thing was out in practice in Seattle during the George Floyd inspired pogroms. IMHO the official toleration if zones of lawlessness served as an exceptionally sinister experiment. Would love to know what the Deep State really thought about it.

My understanding is that MDMA is neurotoxic, though I am not sure at what dose/frequency appreciable damage occurs.

You are right about the suppression of the rave culture. The spontaneous generation of cohesion is a threat to the regime. When did the crackdown occur? After the Seattle protests against the WTO?

Expand full comment
author

Man, I haven't heard Hakim Bey brought up in a while. Came across his writing in the early oughties, and found his thought to be highly compelling for exactly the reasons you describe. This was after I'd discovered rave culture but the moment I read about the TAZ I thought, ah yes, warehouse parties.

Hadn't realized he was a pedo though.

MDMA neurotoxicity, yes, I've heard that too, and can easily believe it. Although I've also heard that those studies switched meth for e, which wouldn't surprise me. But in general you never knew what was in the e anyhow, which was reason enough to avoid it.

In Canada the crackdown was around 2000/2001. Lots of police raids, dealers rounded up in stings, the usual stuff. At the time it felt very much like the culture was being dismantled not for law-breaking per se - it had been tolerated for years, and raves weren't hurting anyone - but out of pure spite.

During the lockdowns I found myself thinking, this would never have worked if rave culture was still operative.

Expand full comment
founding

Hakim Bey only died last year. I like to think (or just hope) that he was more of a harmless paedocel than a practicing predator of the kind who deserve execution but one can never know. No victims have ever come forward or been identified that I know of.

The authorities have any number of competing agendas with drugs ranging from collecting payoffs right through to micromanaging problem communities. It is pretty obvious that the illicit drug trade must play a role in the global financial system...the only way you can launder money on that scale is through the bond market and NOTHING makes you as respectable as owning a significant portion of any government's debt...a British peerage counts for nothing compared to being a player on the bond market. I suspect that one reason that the cartels are semi-tolerated is that they launder their money through the petrodollar.

At a local level drug enforcement is a phenomenally good way for the authorities to gather intelligence. Dealers snitch on everyone.

Expand full comment

"The TAZ thing was out in practice in Seattle during the George Floyd inspired pogroms. IMHO the official toleration if zones of lawlessness served as an exceptionally sinister experiment. Would love to know what the Deep State really thought about it."

I surmise they think it was a successful experiment, judging from policy that has subsequently rolled out in many major cities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWFlpCBMyIk

Expand full comment

Fucking excellent! The nanny-state overlords have as much credibility with "public health campaigns" as Bernie Madoff would have if he went around asking for money for a nonprofit to fight financial fraud. Or a convicted sex offender would have who wanted to lead workshops for children to train them how to avoid pedophiles like himself. And as for warning labels, I'm reminded of the Bill Hicks bit where he encourages people to smoke the cigarettes that have the warning about "low birth weight."

Expand full comment
author

♥️ Bill Hicks.

Expand full comment

The great Bill Hicks on cigarettes 🚬 and warning labels: https://youtu.be/RGdt9qoGdx4

Expand full comment

This was excellent. Inspirational, even! I feel positively rallied.

I remember reading a twitter thread a while back, posted I forget by whom, noting the regime's obsessive regulation of nicotine content, with multiple studies commissioned to emphasise the harms of the drug itself, rather than tar or the additional chemicals created and released by cigarettes ever-more adulterated, ironically to comply with said mandates, and that the flavourings and sweeteners thereby added changed the profile of cigarette smoke from something harsh, pure, masculine, and ascendant, into a more digestive, food-adjacent, feminine experience.

Expand full comment
author

Yes, that was @Tolma, I think on IM1776. Great article.

Expand full comment
Jun 5, 2023Liked by John Carter

I just searched that handle on twitter and its a soft porn site 🫣

Expand full comment
author

Hah.

Yeah on Twitter he goes by @_tolma

But I think it's just @Tolma here on Substack.

Expand full comment
Jun 5, 2023Liked by John Carter

Nice one.

I don't smoke, but I agree wholeheartedly. Well, I do like cigars, so I guess that counts.

Some interesting facts about tobacco and nicotine that I didn't know. I have always had the same suspicion as you that the health damage of cigarettes is wildly exaggerated. Wildly. Meanwhile, the health benefits of other things also wildly exaggerated; e.g. vegetables, vitamins, the weirdly both ignorant and egomaniac idea that food is just a breakdown of proteins, carbs, fats, and whatever else they put on those nutrition labels, so now you "understand" nutrition. I like how you diatilled down to their focus, the things they DO allow: anything that makes you weak, stupid, confused, angry, and/or afraid. Meanwhile, meat and cigarettes are going to kill you, especially if you switch from their processed sludge to real food. Even as you quickly see and feel yourself looking and feeling healthier, they suddenly are worried about your health, when they said nothing as you guzzled 2L of soda pop per day.

I keep telling everyone, fear is the real disease.

Expand full comment
author

Fear of death is the death of freedom. Ultimately it's fear they use to control us.

Expand full comment

Fear and greed.

Expand full comment
Jun 5, 2023Liked by John Carter

Yes!

Expand full comment

::Standing applause::

Expand full comment
Jun 6, 2023Liked by John Carter

Funny, the peak lung cancer death rate in 1990 was 30 years after the peak in atmospheric nuclear testing blasts. (death rates for the disease through 2020 have declined by 58% since 1990 in men : https://www.cancer.net/cancer-types/lung-cancer-non-small-cell/statistics) Some how, dusting tobacco with plutonium, cesium and strontium, setting it on fire, and inhaling he smoke appears to not be a great idea.

Expand full comment
author

Yes, I came across that hypothesis some time ago, that the lung cancer epidemic was entirely due to radioactive plumes from above ground nuclear tests spreading hot particles everywhere. It is a very compelling scenario, and one can see why the national security state would be very interested in finding a scapegoat.

Expand full comment
Jun 5, 2023Liked by John Carter

I swear up until about five minutes ago a meatless diet was called vegetarian and no one had ever heard of the term "plant-based". The artificiality of the term is quite obvious over here in German speaking lands since supermarkets etc. didn't bother to invent an equivalent new word in our language

Expand full comment

Everything that weakens and demoralizes us, they promote. So something that sharpens and strengthens us, they must of course deny us.

Time to pry the vampire squid off our face.

Expand full comment
author

I suspect this is also why steroids are so heavily controlled ;) and yet birth control pills, which are at least as bad for the endocrine system, are heavily promoted. Curious.

Expand full comment

there is also the evidence to suggest that tobacco makes people less susceptible to propaganda and other mind control techniques. I suspect this is the Uber reason why they have declared tobacco to be unacceptable.

Expand full comment
author

I can easily believe this, given that it makes people a bit smarter and calmer. Anecdotally, I've noticed smokers tend to be more cynical, too. Are there actually studies to this effect? I'd be interested to see these.

Expand full comment

other evidence suggests it reduces damage due to trauma.

Expand full comment