Someone once said: I don’t care what you believe, but you’ve got to admit: Beliefs are odd.
I used to have this theory. It didn’t make much sense, but you need some guidelines to live by and change as you go along. That’s actually a pretty good description of any theory. Anyway, it went like this. Suppose there’s a fixed amount of heartbeats. Your heart isn’t your brain, but it does reflect your state of mind somewhat. The more you worry or have adrenaline pumping through your veins for whatever reason, the sooner your heart will run out of beats. Now, some people die before they run out of this set of heartbeats. How would you explain this? Well, easy. Replace the theory with a belief. First you need something more vague. Like pain. Buddha says life is suffering. We all know it to be true. Most of us try to laugh it off. Most jokes are about death or pain in some way. That’s why when we’re surprised by the sudden twist, we still care enough to react. With disgust if you’re a woman and it was a joke about violence. With men, it’s generally funny when somebody gets hurt. Either way, we have our pseudo-soul. Let the metaphysics begin. Suppose that there’s always more pain ahead of us than we could imagine. For the sake of arguement, suppose we can only imagine what we’ve experienced. So there’s more pain in the moments to come than there has been so far during your life. Just before you die, that’s the part where you’re dying, is when all the pain you’ve ever had is compounded and added with death itself. The longer you live, the more the pain is spread out. The shorter your lifespan, the more the pain is concentrated over a shorter period of time. It’s more intense and you run out of existence sooner. How’s that for a belief? Granted, it’s a little odd. But aren’t they all? I believe I prefaced it with that.

Hay fever makes me realize that eating vegetarian just makes plants even more pissed at me. Well, I don’t eat vegetarian all the time. More like flexitarian. Eating healthy. Meat if it’s served anyway (by someone else in a social setting) and flesh from animals that live in water is also okay with me. Or anything that lives near water. Ducks, cows, whatever really. Bill Bailey food as it were. No wait, plants started the war! I’m just fighting back! Yeah, that’s it. I’ll eat you all. I just can’t be around when I cut them or they’ll make me sick. Anti-sick actually. My immune system is going in overdrive. I should get superhealthy. That would be fair. Okay, okay, fine. I can’t go outside. So I stay inside. Here comes my other allergy. Also very common. To dust mites. Well, technically that’s no right either. It’s the secretion from dust mites. But not’s not very palatable. Yeah, you read that right. Their shit is stronger than I am. Life is horrible. I only have unlimited food, broadband access and opportunities to comfort me. Then again,that way I know what I’m missing. If only I was born in the Sudan. I’d be dead right now. But hey, can’t have it all.

I almost feel guilty trying to eat mostly vegetarian. Hans Teeuwen points out that hindus are retarded for not eating cows while starving (because most of them live in India and a lot of people there are dying from hunger). Of course, breeding mammals for food increases methane. Agro industry increases old fashioned CO2 emissions by using fossil fuels pretty much every step of the way (and replacing it with sugar based crops in the future, instead of feeding us with those deliciously addictive refined sugars). So what’s the answer? Well, instead of complaining about the bugs on our food; we coud eat them. All the protein, none of the bad side effects on health or environment. There’s plenty of insects. We’re not running out of those. Well, we are. But c’mon, they’re too small to even know most of the existing species yet. Well, most being the bigger part of all animals (excluding lifeforms such as bacteria, we know more about bigger, more easily spottable animals). There are only cultural barrieres for this. One is that in western societies, you need to partake in the economy to consume (food). You can’t just grow your own. That would be…cheap. Or worse, free. That would ruin the economy. On a moral level, there are less barrierers. We would eat vegan if we thought we could live this way. Most don’t consider it healthy, if only because you need to enjoy your food. One step up the food chain is vegetarian. One more is omnivore. Going on is carnivore. Eating (certain) mammals is ussually not-done, because they’re too cute. And if you really love things that resemble us, you’ll be a cannibal. Most tribes ate the hearts of the other warrior out of respect. In psychological, instead of sociological terms, you would eat your loved one. Eating yourself is a bit tricky, but can also be done. This is called self-cannabalism. If there weren’t an overpopulatoin problem and we couldn’t solve it with soylent green, this would be a good solution. When animals eat their childeren, we all hope it’s because they’re starving. Either that or they’re more fucked up than we are (or want to mate, and there’s no incentive to if you already have a kid). Like so:Yeah, it’s pretty sick.

I was looking for this quote, but it turns out it was on Wikipedia. So you can disregard the interview below. But not the quote!

If you had asked my grandmother whether she is oppressed, she probably wouldn’t have understood what you are talking about; that’s life. If you’d asked my mother, you’d have found that she resented it, but accepted it, as life. If you’d ask my daughters, they’d tell you to get lost. That reflects hard-won victories for freedom.

* ZNet forum reply, December 26, 2004 [163]

from an interview in 2004
We understand the crimes of others but canʼt understand our
own. Take that picture over there on the wall. What it is is the Angel
of Death, obviously. Off on the right is Archbishop Romero, who
was assassinated in 1980. The figures below are the six leading
Jesuit intellectuals who had their brains blown out in 1989, and their
housekeeper and her daughter, who were also murdered. Now, they
were murdered by an elite battalion armed, trained, and directed
by the United States. The Archbishop was murdered pretty much
by the same hands. Well, a couple of weeks ago there was a court
case in California where some members of the family of Romero
brought some kind of a civil suit against one of the likely killers and
actually won their case. Well, thatʼs a pretty important precedent,
but it was barely reported in the United States. Nobody wants to
listen. You know, Czeslaw Milosz was a courageous, good person.
And when he died there were huge stories. But he and his associates
faced nothing in Eastern Europe like what intellectuals faced in our
domains. I mean, Havel was put in jail. He didnʼt have his brains
blown out by elite battalions trained by the Russians. In Rwanda,
for about a hundred days they were killing about eight thousand
people a day. And we just went through the tenth anniversary. There
was a lot of lamentation about how we didnʼt do anything about it,
and how awful, and we ought to do something about other peopleʼs
crimes, and so on. Thatʼs an easy one—to do something about other
FinalEdition20041018.indd 15 10/19/04 12:46:44 PMWallace Shawn
16
peopleʼs crimes. But you know, every single day, about the same
number of people—children—are dying in Southern Africa from
easily treatable diseases. Are we doing anything about it? I mean,
thatʼs Rwanda-level killing, just children, just Southern Africa,
every day—not a hundred days but all the time. It doesnʼt take
military intervention. We donʼt need to worry about whoʼs going to
protect our forces. What it takes is bribing totalitarian institutions to
produce drugs. It costs pennies. Do we think about it? Do we do it?
Do we ask what kind of a civilization is it where we have to bribe
totalitarian institutions in order to get them to produce drugs to stop
Rwanda-level killing every day? Itʼs just easier not to think about it.
WS: Totalitarian institutions—you mean the drug companies?
NC: Yes. What are they? The drug companies are just totalitarian
institutions which are subsidized: most of the basic research is
funded by the public, there are huge profits, and of course from
a business point of view it not only makes sense, but itʼs legally
required for them to produce lifestyle drugs for rich Westerners to
get rid of wrinkles, instead of malaria treatments for dying children
in Africa. Itʼs required. Itʼs legally required.
WS: How do we get out from under that?
NC:Well, the first thing we have to do is face it. Until you face
it, you canʼt get out from under it. Take fairly recent things like
the feminist movement—womenʼs rights. I mean, if you had asked
my grandmother if she was oppressed she would have said no. She
wouldnʼt have known what you were talking about. Of course she
was stuck in the kitchen all day, and she followed orders. And the idea
that her husband would do anything around the house . . . I mean,
my mother would not allow my father, or me, for that matter, into
the kitchen. Literally. Because we were supposed to be studying the
Talmud or something. But did they think they were oppressed? Well,
actually, my mother already felt that she was. But my grandmother
didnʼt. And to get that awareness—you know, itʼs not easy.
India is interesting in this respect. There have been some very
careful studies, and one of the best was about the province of Uttar
Pradesh. It has one of the lowest female to male ratios in the world,
not because of female infanticide, but because of the shitty way
women are treated. And I mean, I was shocked to discover that in
the town where I live, Lexington, which is a professional, upper
middle class community—you know, doctors, lawyers, academics,
stockbrokers, mostly that sort of thing—the police have a special unit
for domestic abuse which has two or three 911 calls a week. Now,
you know, thatʼs important. Because thirty years ago, they didnʼt
have that, because domestic abuse was not considered a problem.
Now at least itʼs considered a problem, and police forces deal with
it, and the courts deal with it in some fashion. Well, you know, that
takes work—it takes work to recognize that oppression is going on.
This was very striking to me in the student movement in the ʼ60s.
I mean, I was pretty close to it, and those kids were involved in
something very serious. You know, they were very upset, and they
hated the war, and they hated racism, and their choices werenʼt
always the right ones by any means, but they were very emotional
about it, for very good reasons. . . .
I was involved particularly with the resisters, who were
refusing to serve in the army. Theyʼre now called “draft evaders”
and so on, but thatʼs bullshit. I mean, almost all of them could
have gotten out of the draft easily. A lot of them were theology
students, and others—youʼd go to your doctor, and heʼd say you
were a homosexual or something. It was nothing for a privileged
kid to get out of the army if he wanted to. They were choosing
to resist. And facing serious penalties. For an eighteen-year-old
kid to go to jail for years or live their life in exile was not an
easy choice—especially when, of course, if you conformed, you
would just shoot up there and be part of the elite. But they chose
it, and it was a courageous decision, and they were denounced
for it and condemned for it and so on. . . . At some stage of the
game, the feminist movement began. In the early stages of the
resistance, the women were supposed to be supportive, you know,
to these resisters. And at some stage these young women began
to ask, Why are we doing the shit-work? I mean, why are we the
ones who are supposed to look up in awe at them, when weʼre
doing most of the work? And they began to regard themselves as
being oppressed. Now that caused a rather serious psychological
problem for the boys. Because they thought, and rightly, that they
were doing something courageous and noble, and here suddenly
they had to face up to the fact that they were oppressors, and
that was hard. I mean, I know people who committed suicide.
Literally. Because they couldnʼt face it.
So, just in our lifetime, itʼs different. The kinds of things that
were considered normal—not just normal, un-noticeable, you
didnʼt see them—thirty or forty years ago, would be unspeakable
now. The same with gay rights. There have been big changes in
consciousness, and theyʼre important, and they make it a better
world. But they do not affect class issues. Class is a dirty word in
the United States. You canʼt talk about it.
One of my daughters teaches in a state college in which the
aspirations of most of the students are to become a nurse or a
policeman. The first day of class (she teaches history) she usually
asks her students to identify their class background. And it turns
out there are two answers. Either theyʼre middle class, or theyʼre
underclass. If their father has a job, like as a janitor, theyʼre middle
class. If their father is in jail or transient, then itʼs underclass. Thatʼs
it. Nobodyʼs working class. Itʼs just not a concept that exists. Itʼs
not just here—itʼs true in England too. I was in England a couple of
months ago at the time of the Cannes Festival, when Michael Moore
won, and one of the papers had a long interview with him, and the
interviewer was suggesting that Michael Moore wasnʼt telling the
truth when he said he came from a working class background. He
said he came from a working class background, but his father had a
car and owned a house, so, you know, whatʼs this crap about coming
from a working class background? Well, his father was an auto
worker! I mean, the whole concept of class in any meaningful sense
has just been driven out of peopleʼs heads. The fact that there are
some people who give the orders and others who follow them—that
is gone. And the only question is, how many goods do you have?—
as if, if you have goods, you have to be middle class, even if youʼre
just following the orders.
WS: What you possess determines how people see you and
how you see yourself. That defines you—your role in the social
structure does not.
NC: People are trained—and massive efforts go into this—people
are trained to perceive their identity and their aspirations and their
value as people in terms of the things they amass. Nothing else. And
in terms of yourself, not anyone else . . . Itʼs kind of interesting to
watch this campaign against Social Security going on, and to see the
attitudes. I see it even among students. And the reason certain people
hate Social Security so much is not just that if you privatize it, itʼs a
bonanza for Wall Street. Iʼm sure thatʼs part of it, but the main reason
for the real visceral hatred of Social Security is that itʼs based on a
principle that they want to drive out of peopleʼs heads—namely, that
you care about somebody else. You know, Social Security is based
on the idea that you care whether the disabled widow on the other
side of town has enough food to eat. And youʼre not supposed to
think that. Thatʼs a dangerous sentiment. Youʼre supposed to just
be out for yourself. And I get this from young people now. They
say, Look, I donʼt see why I should be responsible for her. Iʼm not
responsible for her. I didnʼt do anything to her. I mean, if she didnʼt
invest properly or, you know, something like that, thatʼs not my
business. Why do I have to pay my taxes to keep her alive? And
why do I care if the kid down the street canʼt go to school? I mean,
I didnʼt keep him from going to school.

Seth Abrahams is played by the same actor who played Eric Forman on that 70’s show, Topher Grace. Talk about typecasting. Unless you think vague cannabis references are different from using white chemicals that often include baking soda; sugars, such as lactose, dextrose, inositol, and mannitol; and local anesthetics, such as lidocaine or benzocaine, which mimic or add to cocaine’s numbing effect on mucous membranes. And almost always includes ether, ammonia, acetone and kerosine in transforming the coca paste.
Robert Wakefield is played by Michael Douglas. They couldn’t get Nicolos the Second for the part. Either way, the war is on. After all, drugs can ruin your life. And that’s the government’s job.
Source:
Seth Abrahams: [high on coke] We act like we have all the answers and we’re totally invincible, like our parents seem and their parents before them, and I’m sorry, that I have to be the one to say this, but it’s fucking bullshit. For instance I know that you jack-off to Caroline every night instead of Vanessa, who you’re supposed to be in love with. Whatever that… don’t even get me started on that convention, I mean, think about it. What is that convention? We’re this random collection of self-interest all of a sudden , and we just decide that we’re just gonna, we’re just gonna walk two by two down the fucking aisle to you know, Noah’s ark?

If we fight fire, we reserve something for it to feast on later on. I do not suggest we let it burn, while building new societies. But there´s something do be said for prevention and leisure.

This is something out of the ordinary in my blog, but I think something people would like the answer to nonetheless.
When playing Sega’s latest game, you may encounter a series of crashes (in vista: the game has stopped working). Here’s some workarounds and tips.
If you play multiplayer, try both having a different legal version. This has been a burden the entire series. If you’re playing alone, try going into offline mode in steam (I’ve read this elsewhere and well may decrease the number of crashes). Then there’s the people who advise you to reinstall windows untill you get it working and than not touch anything anymore and be happy. If this feels a bit too much, try my approach. This is what happened to me and how I fixed it.
First, I couldn’t finish chapter two in the road to independance. There was bug which blocked the rest of the map off. I started playing grand campaign instead. After beginning my second grand campaign, I encountered far too many crashes causing me to save more, which in turn turned out to be corrupt a lot of the time (entire batches), causing me to save even more. After finishing this campaign, I decided to reinstall. Again, as with the original installation, the cd’s were read way too fast -even for my computer- and I assume the entire game was downloaded through steam. It didn’t seem to crash anymore though!
I started the road to independance again, hoping to get better results. Again, the same thing happened, but in between it was obvious there was more than the black shrouds of mist. So I restarted the mission in chapter II. I restarted and restarted again untill I followed the instructions more carefully, this couldn’t have taken over a couple of hours of playing (there aren’t many choices, so you just click and press enter). I have now finishe that chapter and moved on to United States (if you win the rts battle you’ll get a “Following” if not, “Despite” as the first word of your advisers’ info after the cutscene).
In short, don’t reinstall if you need bandwith. Save and restart games if they crash or are bugged. Entire batches could be corrupt though.
I hope this helps.

Departing from Freudian analysis, I shall mainly take a more bioneural approach to the brain. Not disregarding concepts of the mind, as stablished by C.G. Jung and partners; this will be my main focus.

Sigmeund Freud has to be placed in historical context. In a time when fictional characters such as Sherlock Holmes were hailing the use of cocaine, it did not take long for Freud to look at it as a “wonderous medicine”. He, of course, explains his increased libido as a central enforced personal trait. In patients, he sees it makes them “more normal” and administers it if they feel depressed. After some research is done on this chemically refined use of coca leaves, he is devasted by the scientific consensus: It’s highly addictive and worse than a cup of coffee (which were the effects when chewed as done by native americans for millenia). He goes on to work with C. G. Jung, who places emphasis on the collective consciousness. We have evidence from 5000B.C. that mushrooms were used in Central and South America were reverence. The molecular biology of
and deserves attention at this point.

These subjects are controversial because they were outlawed (but recreational users and medicinal research) during times of racism. A class of people was seen as not being able to control themselves. ‘Crazed negro’ with a ‘bullet to the heart…in self-defense’ would not stop a cocaine pumped agent of that class. This would leave a scar on our social consciousness and psychological freedom restricted to an irrational degree. After alcohol and opium, cocaine was pronounced as the third scourge of mankind. Pemberton treated his morphine addiction with a cocaine drink to provide an alternative to an alcoholic beverage (outlawed during the latest dry era). However in 1970 through the controlled substances act, research on psychedelics and cannabis (still described as marihuana to link it with mexicans rather than the industrial crop hemp) is prohibited. However, psychedelics are by definition:
From Greek psykhe- “mind” (see psyche) + deloun “make visible, reveal,” from delos “visible, clear.” Psychedelia is from 1967. Earliest in 1956, of drugs, suggested by H. Osmond in a letter to Aldous Huxley and used by Osmond in a scientific paper published the next year.
Fitting into a larger criminal market for over 300 billion dollars and over 200 billion euros a year, it remains outcast to the darkest corners of society.
Unlike coffee, alcohol in most countries and tabacco; these products are doomed to make profits near the size of oil revenus of users and addicts, none of whom receive any honest help from their government of social milieu. Most is based on myth and tradition, being biased one way or the other, without relevant data or educational information explaining levels of dependency, mortality rate and so forth.
This is part of the grander setting in which the Self must seated. The set, the internal framework of those who would use a substance to alter their state of mind and thereby enhance the effects of psychoanalysis and/or therapy. The id, ego and superego would in a freudian framework be connected to the set. The ego would be unable to reconcile with the superego on the basis that reality is slanted and only Id could possibly arise from such an irrational disaster.
In other words, the experience becomes tainted. Tryptamines are associated with trips, which are in turn associated with the possibility of a bad trip. In the free associations game that goes on during synaptic free firing neurons, such a view of reality is skewed and causes baseless conceptions of the world to enter what is essentially, a very delicate moment. In other, more ancient, cultures, traditions and rituals would do the same by declaring these as sacred. To view perceptions as real, say gods or aliens; would be to miss the point. Psychotherapy and sjaminism deserve no greater place on the cast system of society than mechanics and mathmeticians.
A lot of energy must first be invested in fixing such a society, which must divide and structure so competitivly.
No one occupation, status, class or use of leisure time should define a person in its entirety. I say it, because it’s a conceptual structure. This abstract person extends to all categorical aspects of life (social, political, economical, territorial, structural). The biological perspective has a lot of evolutionary twists and turns, so for now I’ll leave this page as it is. All of this should be part of the educational system. We ought to learn the basics of food. Nutrition and toxins for the body and mind.

Nationalists in the northern part have decided to seccede. Greens in the south have been steadily growing. Investing in isolation and durable enery have made the region more independant than it seemed. Abandoning the former state structure, social security fails horribly and pensions are lost. Flanders has enough cash to fix the problem short term, but continious investment in outdated infrastructure looms ahead.
In the southern part, grand projects lasting over 20 years, an entire novel and self-sustaining economy (and pretty close to ecology) has been created. Filled with young, healthy and rather happy (no work pressure) people rush the labor market. Demographics were rather unkind in the northern part. Investment in the docks could no longer be distributed over the federal region and the wage rate of return from Brussels decreased sharply after negotations went bad. Continious investment in both maritime and railways, without discouraging heavy traffic on the main roads, had little advantages for society as a whole. Unable to travel through the Dutch Ruhr-area and blocked through the south by massive taxation, the logistical status declines steadily. Floods annoy business, who can no longer dip into the disasterfund (having run out since the first big unpredicatble weatherphenomena). Internal divisions and economic distributions have cause East-West polorization within Flanders. The irony being that East is the poorest, West slightly poorer and the centre is the economic axis around all rotated. However, since the Brussels-Debacle even these relations have deteriated.
Elections still take place, the relations between governments (local and transnational) are still de facto the same, though the name has changed and more room has been given to ignore each other.
The illusion of independence has been replaced by the illusion that we will learn from our mistakes.

Edmond Burke once said: All evil needs to triumph, is for good men to do nothing. Even though we consider ourselves to be good people, war still is fought (in the name of god or people). Hardly ever dare we say it is a good war or that any war could in fact be good. There are two simple things we could all do to end ‘war’.
To explain why you’d need to do these things, I’m going to tell a story, see if you recognize yourself.
I know I’m a good person, because I live in a western democracy, have access to the internet and know just how bad the world is. I’m rich enough to give to charity and it’s tax deductible so I do it. I lean towards buddhist philosophy so I’m willing to look at people as sentient beings, willing and able to do good deeds (and therefor be described as ‘good’). All that needs to be done is for the veil of ignorance to be lifted and compassion to take its place. The buddha nature of mankind has no choice to to manifest itself in such an environment.
Now how does one actually go about this? Random acts of kindness are no enough. We must wage war on war. Tactics and skill are required to combat this illness. The intellectual gravitas of striking metaphorical swords is often delegated to chess players and philosophers. To remain limited to these dimensions is to allow mankind to perish by its own sword, now a fully automatic rifle and smart bombs. To declare war on an idea is the nature of a warriorlike society, such as the United States of America. They’ve had wars on poverty, drugs and even terror. Because when terror takes on the grandeur of war, I’ve decided to nuance and engage myself.
Large scale terror and war are a disease to humankind. Strategic planning is needed for our habitat and our species to survive. This rate of expansion and encrouchement on each others space (Homo Sapiens amongst each other and at the expense of the ecological system sustaining them) is destructive, indeed, self-destructive. Some guidelines on how to prevent this follow.
First, hug strangers. This is perhaps the most nervewrecking and horrible experience that I’m saving for last. This interpersonal contact seriously alters once consciousness and that of others. The ’self’, your personal space included, is violated and contact is made, up to an organ that covers our body, the skin. Touching has actual biological ramifications in the sphere of health. But that’s not the point, the point is it has consequences on well being. Empathy is mentally reinforced and neurons associated with laughing/smiling (because or by lack of embarressment) are burned even more deeply into memory and thought pathways. Not only is the almost inevitable effect that you’ll be a happier, friendlier human being; in the act of hugging, reciprocality often occurs. It becomes a two way street of equals, sharing this odd and pleasant experience. Suddenly, the streets are filled with persons for two people! Potential hug autonoma come more into focus. Cars and consumption goods are dimmed in light of this potentialities. Aggression and dominance are tendencies of any biological system, but in we can address these issues neutrally. We can observe the effects of actions, by experimentation they can be proven or refuted by scientific means. This action related to culture. There are many other systems that define our behavior. Less related to the ’software of the mind’ as Hofstede tends to call it, is the hardware.
Mckenna called this the ‘operation system’ of the mind, and perhaps he’s more accurate on a deep level. Discounting Paul Stamets idea that fungi are sentient and John M. Allegro’s thoughts on Jesus being an allegory for one, I’m inclined to think of fungi and plantea as inferior to animalea. In the tree of life this makes no sense, because Darwin would be surprised at any attempt to make a taxonomical distinction into a hierarchical one. Nevertheless, I’m an egalitarian for animals only. Bacteria have to die of natural causes (my immune system) and even (animalea!) insects that will bite or suck my blood are subject to extermination when they invade my sleeping area. Granted there are preferences even within this system of life. I prefer people feed and lavish people first with water, then other (descendents of) primates. After these conditions have been met, perhaps we could eat some animals, such as the ones with exoskeletons (protein). In the meanwhile, there’s nothing in my moral perception of life that could stop us from eating seeds, flowers(fruits), leaves(vegetables) and roots of plants. Even fungi aren’t safe. Perhaps this explains why India (and ancient persian cultures) venerates cows. Their dung is the easiest place for spores to grow. Visual accuity is increased by low consumption, higher doses enable higher rates of procreation. The evolutionary effects are explained by McKenna is what is vulgarised into the ’stoned ape theory’. Early (pre) religions and burial of the dead (belief of something beyond this) occurs around this time. Currently we’re still experiencing the mead (honey based alcohol) evolutionary path of neurochemistry (though by the use of cybergenitics this could easilty be altered in the future). This wasn’t always so. Since the ‘new’ stone age, the most recent one, when most tools were being made that bonobos or chimps can’t seem to make, we also grew hemp and it’s psychoactive sister. Having learned fire, dried weed(s) were often used to (dried leaves and even flowers burning faster than wood) keep it going. The effects were similar to what in popular culture is called passing the peace pipe (native americans who used tabacco). Having moved out of africa into the asians plateaus, cannabis (the plant containing 60 cannabiniods) is found to be flourishing everywhere. The endocannabiniod system is over 600 millions years and has several receptors in the mammalian brain, especially homo sapiens sapiens having at least two (conservative well studied ones) CB-receptors. This co-evolution could be between rather aware lifeforms (plants are older in the evolutionary branches of life, but they wanted to spread faster so they grew more complex and faster lifeforms) but assume that there’s no ‘knowledge’ on either side.
Imagine early hunter gatherer not knowing what he was consuming or putting on fires before he started domesticating the animals that produced these specific plants and fungi and fungi not knowing where you just stepped and instantly growing towards that spot -as it does for some reason, like tropisme in photosyntetic plants. In this instance (which could be said to hold true for most of modern day human society), what goes in, still must come out. If we eat less red meat and consume less alcohol, there will be an observable effect on both body and mind. But this is not enough given what we know (and more importantly we don’t know and have not tested as possible) about our evolution. Most of nature has been around for a long time (before homo sapiens first appeared, the rate of extinction was 100-100x slower as it is today -depending on which species you count-). Some of it only became taboo or even illegal recently (hemp replaced by wine 2000 years ago, made into an actual crime 200 years ago). Though generations this has an effect, but nothing that we couldn’t genetically engineer in the near future. Not that we need to do this. It still has a within generation effect, it is indeed culture. Neuropathways are blown apart and reconfiguring at increasing rates. Suddenly the effects seem to have worn off, but reality is never perceived the same (of course it never is, we constantly travel through time and space, negating the possibility of having an actual deja vu). THC and CBD grow a social conscioussness, psilocybe is deeply introspective (re-evaluating beliefs, assumptions and shared values). Therefor, the second step must be guerilla growfare. Have flamethrower equipped police be a requirement for this insane policy to be inforced. Just make sure you’re near the smoke when they torch it all. Free spores and seeds! Throw them everywhere!