Re: Re: Drug Gaze

just a real quick tip, using "normal society" as a positive term on the foucault lists is generally a bad idea ;)

...more to come if not too lazy

-------Original Message-------
From: Lionel Boxer <lboxer@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 06/27/03 04:37 PM
To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Drug Gaze

> The intensity of this rebuke is the same as I recieve when I confront
someone who is involved in Landmark Forum / EST. Drug cult / drug gaze ..

it is all a dangerous thing that is counter productive to normal society.

Lionel Boxer - 0411267256 - lboxer@xxxxxxxxxxx
Attend MAAOE 03 --- Melbourne --- 20-22 Oct 03
In 1976 Michale Foucualt said: ... terrorism ... has a totally opposite
effect which is to make the bourgeois class even more closely attached to
its ideology ... (original in French) 'Le Savoir Comme Crime'

>From: Aris Mousoutzanis <emous01@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: Drug Gaze
>Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 11:17:29 +0100
>Hi there,
>I have been a member of this list quite some time now, although a silent
>one, and I have been reading some Foucault, although I'm very far from
>being anything like an expert. But I feel as if I must reply to this
>because this is when I get really angry....
>Dear Lionel,
>I am finishing my Ph.D. thesis in cultural studies, I have been studying,

>teaching, publishing, speaking at conferences for years, I do have a
>life, I'm a reasonable person (I think, ha ha) etc etc. And yes, I do
>pot. I have been smoking pot for years - not just months. Sometimes it
>has been a lot of pot. More often it has been more measured. And quite
>often I have been smoking a small spliff and then I have been reading a
>and writing a lot under the influence - makes me concentrate even more
>(and, believe me, A LOT of other people, including a lot of major
>novelists). Ask a few more people than just one housemate or a few
>friends...But, never mind, let me proceed with the response to your mail:
>>Perhaps the culture that places such a high value on aquiring, dealing
>>consuming pot et al is created by the gaze of the underground drug
>>traficing profession.
>'pot et al': you DO need to make a distinction here, and definitely not
>marijuana together with other drugs, especially chemicals. We're talking

>about a herb with euphoric qualities here - and not only these, it even
>therapeutic qualities, it has been used for medicine, printing, etc., and

>it has been used as part of certain rituals in certain religions - I
>my hands here, to be honest, I'm not an expert, but I have a friend who
>doing a Ph.D. in anthropology on the use of drugs in Native American
>cultures - I mean 'drugs', you know? The evil drugs that you so want to
>wage a war against (without really knowing what they are about, it seems
>>Having lived with a pot and herroin adict / dealer for several months I
>>have some first hand "data" to base my opinions.
>Not enough data it seems to me my friend, otherwise you would know that
>there is not such thing as a 'pot...addict'. Pot is not addictive,
>definitely not in a physical/pathological sense - the addiction is in the

>mind of those who just can't stop, there's nothing addictive in pot
>>The various rituals that the drug community engage in are as profound as

>>those found in Freemasonry.
>Meaning? Would you like to expand? Yes, it is a very ritualistic
>but then again, all/most subcultural processes/communities are, just as
>much in the case of pot 'unhealthy' communities as New Age healing
>'healthy' communities. The ritualistic element does not necessarily have

>to be connected to the fact that all this has to do with drugs, it has to

>do also - and maybe most importantly - that this is a marginalised
>community that acquries a more coherent sense of identity through ritual,

>it could just as well have been a subculture formed around a musical
>or an 'illicit' form of sexuality.
>>Drug rituals reinforce the culture that moves drugs from producers to
>So which 'culture' is this? Are you talking about mainstream culture or
>subordinate culture that is responsible for drug traffic? You'd be
>surprised how much the two overlap in this case, especially if you want
>follow Foucault's theory in this. From my experience, pot has been
>bad influence on people because it has been circulated through the black
>market, i.e. is not 'clean' but mixed with other stuff which can be
>harmful, if the pressure against cannabis was less strict from the
>culture, if people were able to have access to it through the mainstream
>culture, they could find it cheaper and clean, and I'm saying this in
>to make you see the extent to which the 'dominant' culture is largely
>responsible for any bad effects
>>As medical, juducial, racial and male gaze are worthy of research,
>>also drug gaze is worthy of research.
>So are drugs staring at us?
>>Overlay Foucault's thought on the drug culture and you may well see many

>>familar patterns.
>>I have no interest in pursuing this - perhaps a phd candidate might find

>>it a unique direction and truly add something to the body of knowledge.
>Then if you are not interested, why are you sending an e-mail with vast
>simplifications and overgeneralisations, that even ends up being even
>offensive to some people, as I say below to the response to your last
>words, which basically is also the reason for this mail of mine.
>>Based on the deteriorated minds of my friends who have been smoking pot
>>steadily for the past 30 years I believe that there is validity to be
>>waging a war against drugs.
>The war must be waged against those who don't know how to smoke pot - as
>would be against someone who doesn't know how to drink, have sex, or even

>eat chocolate properly, with measure. The very phrase 'war against
>is just as dangerous as the phrase 'war against terror' - it lumps things

>together, avoids making distinctions, oversimplifies, and, in its
>'supposed' simplicity, can be applied to anything that 'we' don't like
>because 'we' think it's dangerous, anything that doesn't serve 'our'
>interests, although 'we' don't know what we're talking about.
>>Perhaps those who are against any war against drugs are suffering from
>>induced brain damage or are so blinded by the rituals they are immersed
>>they cannot see for the drug gaze that they reinforce.
>What about those who suffer from brain damage without having smoked pot?
>And what about those who smoke pot without being part of any 'ritual'? By

>smoking pot, you don't necessarily enter a ritualistic community. Above,
>you equated the 'drug gaze' - whatever that means - with the 'male,
>juridicial, medical, etc. gaze', that is you bring together a 'gaze from
>the underground', from the margins with the gaze of dominant power
>structures, which is also very misleading. The war on drugs and the
>say no' policy has failed completely and anyone who is sensible, or has
>read Foucault for the itnerests of this list, may know why. My advice
>Go and have a spliff mate! It might restore the damage in the brain that

>the 'medical'/'juridicial' etc. gaze, that you seem to side with totally,

>has induced on you.
>>>From: NICHOLAS.FRENCH@xxxxxxxxxx
>>>Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>To: Andrew Culp <nesurvivor@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
>>>Subject: Re: Re: prisons
>>>Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 09:45:53 -0600 (MDT)
>>>I recall a similar lecture by Angela Davis at Stanford last year. She
>>>discussed how Cuba is "better" than the US -- quite disturbing if you
>>>In regards to prisons, I think the solution is simple. The majority of

>>>inmates is a result of the "war on drugs", which, mind you, is
>>>perpetuated solely by the government to instil fear on the people and
>>>maintain control.
>>>There would be no need to build new prisons if the war on drugs was
>>>ended. The gov't does not want to lose this control, but until this
>>>happens we will see new communities being built not to provide for new
>>>families, but for individuals who use natural plants for recreational
>>>Solution = stop this foolish "war on drugs" ... get gov't out of the
>>>business, the business of selling fear!
>>>--- StripMime Warning -- MIME attachments removed ---
>>>This message may have contained attachments which were removed.
>>>Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.
>>>--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
>>> text/plain (text body -- kept)
>>> message/rfc822
>>Hotmail is now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
>--- StripMime Warning -- MIME attachments removed --- This message may
>have contained attachments which were removed.
>Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.
>--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative
> text/plain (text body -- kept)
> text/html

Hot chart ringtones and polyphonics. Go to


Partial thread listing: