Let us solve alcohol abuse with more repression and regulation: doesn’t that make perfect sense to all those who are intellectually bankrupt? And it fits the times — perfectly.

Let’s up the drinking age to 21, just like it is in the United States, the home infantilization. No doubt the social, personal and psychological problems that were there at 18 will be gone at the age of 21! Furthermore, and still no doubt, the youth will respect the LAW that FORBIDS drinking right up to the age of 20 years, 364 days and 23 hours because youngsters will be afraid of PUNISHMENT. Repression will keep the problem under control — and then we will "educate" them with some bullshit on the effects of alcohol on health. Prepare the scary pictures. That will work! (And if doesn’t, we still have the control of flexible statistical attributions, but don’t tell anybody).

The above is the linear mentality that reigns today everywhere about anything. It represents the belief of brains that have become so inarticulate that they can’t go beyond the sequence: problem perceived >> I forbid >> I eliminate the problem >> everybody is happy (because I think that I am everybody). And the victims of oppression? Ah, their opinion and feelings do not matter because they are wrong (since >I< am right — and I have the power). They will “get used to it” and take it as "normal". And what about the unfairness that someone who turns 18 is old enough to die in a war, but not old enough to have a drink? It does not matter: the holy fight against “vice” is not supposed to be a fair fight in the first place because it’s… holy!


The tremendous resentment against the prohibition of smoking and against the institutions that promote the antismoking fraud is a feeling that is very familiar to all smokers who have some dignity left. But it is no different than that of suppressed drinkers, motorists who fall victims of checkpoint gauntlets or fat people who are denied jobs or medicare because they are fat. Prohibition, which is the product of hatred, invariably fails to see that it creates hatred. The slow build up results in violence, which is often unfocussed. But, eventually, that hatred will destroy prohibition.

Invariably, alcohol is abused because there are strong, basic social problems concerning economy, freedom, happiness, self-esteem, and emotional security. Those problems are not solved by putting “drink out of reach”, but by reversing by 180 degrees the mad policies and philosophies of healthism, social control and suppression. But the intellectually disabled who promote those repressive approaches confuse cause and effect, just like they do for smoking.

No doubt chief constable Michael Craik would settle for the promotion of antidepressants in substitution for alcohol while putting “drink out of reach”. That is on the simple grounds that such swap would make HIS job easier at the expense of disposable freedom. Even poor Mr. Craik confuses the solution of his job problems with those of society because he thinks that HE and his job represent society!

And probably the politicians will listen to him because they are the most intellectually disabled of all, concerned only with behaviour CONTROL and totally incapable of perceiving that behaviour is always the resulting effect of the forces behind it.

By blowing the tip of the iceberg out of the water, the idiots reason, the rest of it will stay underwater and out of our sight, thus "health" and security will be maintained — or restored.

Wrong again.



Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder