A Leftist Stereotype?
At Blog Reload, there's a discussion of why marijuana makes people leftist. It's an example of left-wing ideology, not because it's pro-drug, but because of the assumption that there's a trade-off between greed and happiness:
The liberal-conservative divide in America, when it comes to economics at least, greatly involves our work-life balance. Liberals argue for more mandatory vacation time, better labor conditions, and higher minimum wages. Conservatives argue for less government regulation, lower taxes on the wealthy to spur growth, and against labor union influence. Within the macro-economic world, the liberal-conservative left-right divide is one between which to value more, overall wealth or individual happiness.One of the basic principles of leftists is that they know more about what people really want than the people do. For example, conservative economic policy increases the ability to make individual choices. On the other hand, it is assumed above that the people aren't making the choices that make them happier. (In LeftWorld, nobody actually likes having a job or spending money.) Meanwhile, back in reality there's evidence that conservative economic policies increase life satisfaction.
My theory (based on no direct personal experience) is that marijuana is a conformist drug. I have noticed that it is defended as reinforcing the approved habits in the social group of the user. In Victorian times it was supposed to suppress the sex drive. Recently it was supposed to do the opposite. When it was used by peace protestors it was a “peace drug.” When it was used by soldiers it induced foolhardy bravery. When it was used in areas with high crime rates it was a “killer weed.” If we put that together we can see that marijuana induces conformity. (That might explain the thoroughness of the collapse of trendy drug use in the '80s. Once its use declined, the remaining users would start conforming to the new trend and stop.)
3 Comments:
One of the basic principles of leftists is that they know more about what people really want than the people do. For example, conservative economic policy increases the ability to make individual choices.
It does? In what sense? For people who work in manual labor jobs, people who are salaried employees, and people who live in countries with government agencies that compete with private industry, liberal economic policies also increase their ability to make individual choices. For example, increased vacation time allows for greater choice in what to do with your time. In addition, a minimum wage allows for greater choice and freedom for those who work basic manual labor jobs. And the presence of labor unions gives an individual greater choice over whether or not to join one (and there are always good reasons not to). Unions are certainly not perfect, but their existence consistutes greater 'choice' than their absense.
Now you've assumed that I'm a leftist economically. I'm not surprised you made that assumption, but you were wrong. When it comes to fiscal concerns, I am a staunch moderate. I believe that you maximize 'choice' (which is a nebulous term in the first place for this, but I hope I'm using it in the way you intended) when you have a balance between free markets and a government that advocates for the average person. I've lived in Europe (Finland, specifically), and I've seen how they've struck the balance fairly well, and I've seen where they could use some improvement.
The important thing to understand is that you minimize 'choice' in life when you go too far away from the center and allow either government of free enterprise to concentrate too much power in too few hands. What is happening in America right now with de-regulation and tax breaks for the wealthiest citizens is almost identical to what happened in the Soviet Union. We're concentrating too much power into the hands of too few people. This will, as it did in the Soviet Union, limit everyone's "choices".
Consider Ticketmaster. There hasn't been a greater example of a lack of 'choice' in recent history than the fact that consumers have been stuck paying exhorbitant fees for purchasing tickets. This most certainly refutes your notion that "conservative economic policy increases the ability to make individual choices."
The link you included there was interesting, although, unfortunately it really doesn't say anything. No one is arguing against free markets, and those two people might want to actually talk to people who've lived on both continents before trying to make silly comparisons. From my experience, people in Europe are significantly less stressed out than Americans, and are considerably more content with life.
Don't get me wrong, people in America are also happy, but we've also been very good about striking the balance between free market and the government safety net for many years. However, the amount of violence in America in the past decade should be a clue that something is changing, and it's not a good change.
My theory (based on no direct personal experience) is that marijuana is a conformist drug. I have noticed that it is defended as reinforcing the approved habits in the social group of the user.
I'm really fascinated by this take. The second half of what you said here is almost true, but you're actually confusing cause and effect.
Marijuana (and as you may have guessed from my silly picture, I have personal experience with) is a drug that accentuates your personality, but does not make you a conformist in any way. If you like classical music, marijuana will not all of a sudden make you like something else because of the crowd you hang out with. It will instead make you like classical music even more.
People with common interests certainly hang out with each other, so the fact that many marijuana users become passionate for the things that they like is what leads to almost a cult-like clique behavior. Although, I personally (and I may be an exception among marijuana users) hang out with many more people who have much different interests than my own.
Unfortunately though, the biggest problem with marijuana is that for people who are lazy, they become REALLY lazy when they find pot. Although, contrary to perception, they are a minority, and most people who use marijuana are just as productive members of society as everyone else. In fact, I've known several people who've started successful corporations who smoke pot every day. I, myself, have had a very successful career in a competitive industry for 10 years.
Much of you "evidence" in attributing pot to being a conformist drug is propaganda, such as it being a "killer weed". In fact, of all the personally traits that pot accentuates, from a enjoyment music, movies, etc, the one thing it doesn't accentuate much is a violent personality. It has a calming affect, a way of achieving peace of mind. My main question in my post was whether or not the drug's ability to allow its user to achieve peace of mind causes conservatives to not allow for us to "choose" it.
That's really quite odd..
To me 'leftists' seem to be people who will not lump other's into sweeping generalities that have no basis in reality.
In my experience, if your wrong you should be wrong as an individual and not as a group.
So, to me, as a leftist, I do not believe in calling claiming that people are from the left or from the right. There are positions that are correct and positions that are not correct.
Have the courage to responsibly stand up for your own opinions... as an individual, please.
Post a Comment
<< Home