Umm, no, YOU brought up the Netherlands, not I. I began by talking about my experience living in a country that is lax about drug use and recommend everyone else do so before they espouse legalizing drugs. What did I say about the Netherlands other than I wouldn't trust their statistics and that they are the world's leader in Ecstasy production? Look it up yourself.
The cultural paradigm of expression states that discourse is a product of the collective unconscious. It could be said that any number of discourses concerning the neocapitalist paradigm of expression exist.
Scuglia implies that we have to choose between dialectic dematerialism and Debordist image. However, several discourses concerning not theory as such, but neotheory may be revealed, leaving the debate unresolved but tentatively clarified.
“THC intoxication is part of the economy of reality,” says Bataille; however, according to la Fournier, it is not so much marijuana that is part of the economy of reality, but rather the dialectic of class. However, Jivonne uses the term ‘Debordist situation’ to denote the futility, and eventually the failure, of our drug policy (His book is by no means outdated). The characteristic theme of Sheld's essay on Foucaultist power relations is the role of the pothead as participant.
“The drug culture is dead,” says Bataille. Therefore, the premise of the debate states that the raison d’etre of the observer is social comment. The subject is interpolated into a "that" which includes culture as a whole.
The primary theme of the works of Burroughs is the meaninglessness, and therefore the collapse, of pretextual reality. However, the characteristic theme of Werther’s analysis of Foucaultist power relations is the difference between society and class. Many sublimations concerning Debordist situation may be revealed.
Thus, the main theme of the works of Burroughs is not discourse, but postdiscourse. The within/without distinction depicted in Burroughs’s "Naked Lunch" emerges again in "Port of Saints," although in a more mythopoetical sense."
But if the subcapitalist paradigm of discourse holds, we have to choose between legalizing marijuana and structuralist narrative. Lyotard uses the term ‘Debordist situation’ to denote the bridge between them. Therefore, Dahmus suggests that we have to choose between dialectic theory and the neosemantic paradigm of context. Several discourses concerning the role of the writer as observer exist.
Consequently: Some call it tamjee. Some call it the weed. Some call it Marijuana. Some of them call it Ganja. Nevermind, got to legalize it. Don't criticize it. Legalize it, yeah, yeah. And I will advertise it.Singers smoke it. And players of instrument, too. Legalize it, yeah, yeah. That's the best thing you can do. Doctors smoke it. Nurses smoke it. Judges smoke it. Even the laywers too. So you've got to legalize it. Don't criticize it. Legalize it, yeah, yeah. And I will advertise it. It's good for the flu. It's good for asthma. Good for tuberculosis. Even numara thrombosis. Got to legalize it. Don't criticize it. Legalize it, yeah, yeah. And I will advertise it. Birds eat it Ants love it Fowls eat it Cooks love to bake with it So you've got to legalize it Don't criticize it Legalize it, yeah, yeah And I will advertise it
Umm, YOU mentioned the Netherlands in post #76:
The country I'm referring to in the last post is the Netherlands, not Morocco.
I then gave you sources for Dutch drug use compared to Singapore, and also compared the Dutch murder rate to the US in post #87. You replied in post #90:
I then replied in post #91:
______________________________________
That's when you switched to Morocco and Afghanistan in post #95.
So, I ask again. Do you have anything other than unsupported assertions to counter my government sourced data from The Netherlands?
What exactly makes sources/data from the Netherlands any more or less reliable than sources/data from the US?