this is all so out of hand--i've been subscribing to
this list for over a year and i have been totally
silent, using it as a resource for 'listening in' on
conversation regarding foucault by folks who are
considerably more knowledgable than i. the postings
about 'pot' or 'cannabis'--whatever you want to call
it--have served mainly to show how out of touch with
the subject their authors are. i dislike 'pot', i
don't smoke it--but i have before and i have
acquintances who indulge. sure it's psychologically
addictive, sure some people smoke it with tobacco.
most people DONT smoke pot with tobacco. please, my
fellow scholars, go back to talking about foucault's
sense of state, the body politic or what have you, and
drop this irrelevant, uninforamtive ranting. leave it
for the anti-drug and pro-legalization binary
polarities to duke it out with their equally
ridiculous arguments and skewed statistics...
--- francisfarrell <frankfarrell@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> First of all, I think using the word 'pot' makes the
> postings seems very
> I don't know if smoking cannabis damages the brain.
> I know that most people
> smoke it mixed with tobacco, so lung damage could
> well be taking place. I
> suspect that although cannabis may not be addictive,
> people develop nicotine
> addiction as a by-product. I wonder how many people
> go through a phase of
> smoking cannabis, perhaps as youths, leave off but
> find they have developed
> a cigarette habit. The tobacco companies must relish
> every move that
> increases the number of people smoking cannabis.
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!