Opinions - LSD for the masses?

[sandoz1943]

SWIM has found there are two schools of thought on LSD and it availability to the general public.

Aldous Huxley felt LSD should only be available to the intellectual elite.
Dr. Timothy Leary thought it should be available to anyone who wanted it.

SWIM remembers thinking LSD could cure most of society's ills when she first took it. She thought that it should be available to anyone in good mental health. She now is rethinking this. LSD is a powerful chemical and she sees to many people not showing it the proper respect it deserves. Too many go in unprepared and uninformed . She now thinks maybe it should be used more a a sacrament with some sort of ritual to prepare before dosing. SWIM would like to see what the general consensus is among the DFers

[Joe-(5-HTP)]

I would go with Aldous huxley on this one.

The general idea Timothy leary and his fellow acid enthusiasts had was that LSD could introduce people who were "stuck" in society to an entire new experience and new way of thinking and experiencing life which in turn would lead them to think about how their role in society stood in stark contrast to their potential as a human being.

If you had asked me this question 40 years ago- I would have said that LSD is indeed for the masses- and I would have been 100% behind Timothy Leary, Richard alpert, Alen ginsberg, Ken Kesey and all of the others who advocated the LSD inspired (and, importantly, LSD inspiring) free life and free mindset.

But to say that anything remotely like the psychedelic revolution could occur these days shows- in my opinion- an underestimation of the deeply rooted psychological control in which individuals, now more than ever, exist.

The modern obsession with consumption, with attractiveness and other general extroverted values is what characterises the typical person. It has been said a thousand times before: people don't care about being individuals, they only care about fitting in; looking like everyone else and behaving like everyone else, and about being liked by everyone else. Ultimately, if such a person was to be introduced to LSD and experienced even slight Ego death or other related insights then everything they secretly know but suppress, such as the fact that they are lonely and unhappy with their life and their brainless values, would come flooding to the surface. You may believe that this is opportunity for them to break away from such belief systems but unfortunately consumerism really is everything that modern people are and taking that away from them would simply destroy them (mrs Goldberg in requiem for a dream for example).

LSD doesn't provide people with amazing insights- it provides people with the opportunity to have amazing insights. The problem is that most people are incapable of having transcendental experiences and having "free minds" because, similarly to those who have been in prison or a mental hospital all their life- they are too accustomed to the practice of being unfree.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Good explanation of your postion. I agree, couldn't of said it better myself

[Master_Khan]

[QUOTE=Joe-(5-HTP)they are too accustomed to the practice of being unfree.[/QUOTE]

Really well said mate.

Swim took a journey once into the center of his mind which was a one night stand that lasted about 100 days. Dozens of blotters and windowpanes later, his deconstruction was complete. It took about a year & a half to put swim back together again, but it was the experience of a lifetime. Swim agrees that people who are looking to get intoxicated should steer clear, thus swim votes for the artists & intellectual elite. Use shoud be for journeys of self discovery, not for bored kids with too much time on their hands.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Interesting, but slightly unrelated point. This deserves its own thread, please start one.

[Jatelka]

Intellectual elite? Well there's a dangerous road to go down...

Who is responsible for determing who makes the grade?

The flamingo went for the good mental health option (how that is verifiable, opens up a whole new can of worms). The only contraindication to taking LSD she can think of is a prior, or strong family history of mental illness

Ideally, LSD should not be taken by the naive/unprepared/those looking to get "fucked up", as that way difficult experiences (and Newspaper headlines) are made.

But that's not to say that such users cannot have valuable experiences (although the flamingo thinks that almost always psychedelic experiences are more worthwhile when a little thought and planning)

Reputation Comments on this post:

Very well played. You bring up valid confrontations of nearly every point in the above post, including Huxley's dogma an...

[Desertfox]

I agree with the points made by 5-HTP, but also with Jatelka. Both make good points, SWIM does think that some people would be totally broken by LSD, but at the same time humanity really needs to change it it wants to continue as a species so those wanting to seek it should have it available to them. LSD will cause people to step-back and review their actions, lives and future. Some want to stay ignorant, so let them, others are ignorant but want to change, so let them. If they have a history of mental illness in the family, don't let them ( use alternative methods like a guided meditation with holotropic breathwork).

[Peace]

I certainly don't agree with everything Leary said but I think he was right on this one. I agree with Jatelkas point, that who gets to decide that someone shouldn't be able to take it? I think that ideally it should be available to all, up to the individual to decide whether to take it. Of course you would get many people taking it who are unprepared, and some may have bad trips and the like, but I think most people would have fun.

[Joe-(5-HTP)]

I suppose it depends on how exactly you define an artist or an intellectual elite. In my opinion, anyone calling themselves either has the right to be considered as such. From there, it is not people who evaluate them but themselves. They evaluate themselves when they take LSD and that will be the real test of whether they are mentally well enough to have free minds.

Many of swim's friends take LSD for the purpose of getting fucked up and so far they achieve that purpose; they have fun with the visual and dance around the place saying "woo I'm so high!" They have no overwhelming euphoric insights, nor do they have any overwhelming dysphoric insights. They take low doses and all they really expect from the trip is a lot of crazy fun and considering the effect expectation can have on an LSD trip, the nature of their trips does not surprise me. Of course, my friends are not the consumerist slaves I described before, nor are they naive in any way, and they are not what would traditionally be called an artist or an intellectual but I think that anyone who takes LSD and has the mental ability to utilize it for their individual purpose is should be counted as good as an artist or an intellectual elite because they have proved that they are, to a significant extent, in control of their own minds and "free".

Of course, what I said earlier about people evaluating themselves when it comes to their compatibility with LSD (and subsequently with themselves, you could argue) is problematic because if it turns out that they are not well suited to LSD use then it is a bit late to avoid the consequences- they might have already damaged themselves mentally. For this reason, constructing a universal method for evaluating who can and who can't use LSD is problematic whether you let others evaluate you, or whether you evaluate yourself.

You have to ask yourself which consequence you would rather society lives with:

-People who should really be allowed to experience LSD not being able to because the whatever system of evaluating them is in place will indubitably be flawed
- - - OR - - -
-Having to deal with the consequences of people who should never have got their hands on LSD. (this may also happen a bit with the first system- considering it will be flawed- although it will clearly be a larger problem without that system)

Reputation Comments on this post:

You always provide a good argument

[maninaboat]

The only reason LSD might break someones mind is because they are too represed, as joe said people are too caught up in fiting in and being "normal". If someone spends all their life living in a reality that other people created for them and sudenly see the reality inside their minds its bound to push their boundaries.... You are right Joe a rigid system to decide wether people are allowed to take it or not would never work, this is because everybody is different.

The sollution is having a good guide/therapist/guru or informed friend that can help prepare and inform you, also LSD as with most drugs should not be abused or used as a toy. LSD Is a powerfull psychoactive, everyone feels different after they take LSD and people should be fully aware of the consequences.

SWIM is very much looking forward to trying iboga, so Swim is making himself aware about this substance and is not going to take it before he thinks he is ready and his mind will cope with it sufficiently. I think people should do this with all drugs not just psychoactives.

As for which concequence i would rather live with (and i dont think either of them are strictly necessary), i would go for the latter. Because atleast people would not be preocupied about the orders given by the box!

“"Turn on, Tune in, Drop out."”

[sandoz1943]

I read a quote from Shulgin in PHIKAL "to many psychedelic drugs are simply another form of entertainment, nothing prefound is looked for, thus- usually - nothing profound is experienced."

LSD seems to tear down the front people put up to protect, insulate, or hide the fact they don'y fit in (none of us do) I believe alot of the problem is that once the facade it torn down many find there was nothing there of any real substance. Just smoke and mirrors. If you spent you whole life pretending to be someone else and that is taken away.. Who are you? A terrifying journey for some. I have been thinking some of the gurus from the sixties may have been correct in thier choice to use LSD as a sacrament in a quasi-religious manner. With some sort of structure and ritual to prepare the untrained mind and make the process easier. Sort of like cognative "training wheels"

I have always wished there some way to thank those that risk incarceration so that those who choose to free thier minds can do so. The Prometheus's of chemistry.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Some good insights and thoughts here.

[Third/Eye]

SWIM would say that it shouldn't be restricted to any specific type of person. One really can't know if it's for them unless they try it. As Jatelka said - Who determines who it's for?

But at the same token, you don't want people abusing it. Though SWIM would tip to the side of "Available to all"... it's still a difficult one to vote.

Apart from reading up about LSD and "familiarizing" ones-self with it... well, SWIM thinks that it's just near impossible to know what one is in for.
It's a different ride for everyone.

Nice thread Sandoz.

[bananaskin]

All substances must be respected for what they are and what they say.
Preperation is vital and that includes research, not just 'clearing a day and having some food'.
Self-examination is important as well in conjunction with the research into the substance.
People get fucked up through ignorance... lack of knowledge and often lack of respect, although there are issues that must be taken into account with many substances, including but not particular to, LSD.
Over-use is another issue... however veering back on-topic, if my friend was asked which school of thought she adhered to, she would answer neither, LSD is not suitable for anybody who 'wants' it, however it should not be considered an 'intellectually elite' (whatever that means ) substance.
One is not always in the same place... regardless of where one thinks one is.

[outtherebrother]

even in the 60s LSD was used for fun..don't think that it was not...

the idealism was there yes, but by a small group just like it is today...the masses have never understood it, and they never will.

LSD does nothing, it allows things to happen as Dr. Shulgin has said. I believe this is more true than we take into account. For some, it allows them to goof around and have fun by being accepted by those around them who are also high. I prefer trips by myself. I respect it, and it gives back what I put in. For those that let the mind do as it will. LSD and others are like a mirror, the trip isn't the drugs, the trip is the experience of the whole. Even when you are completely sober, feeling the pain and all the other electricity flowing through your being. That is the trip, this is also the realization that will never be grasped and understood by the masses.

[Jatelka]

I'd like some more explanations on why simians voted the way they did:

I note that there are 14 votes for "anyone who wants to do it", but no explanations about why this is a good idea

[SullyGuy]

LSD for only "the intellectual elite" is a scary thought, I think it would be better phrased "the emotionally, intellectually, and spiritually prepared" (but as said before, how to actually judge this is going to be though).

I think the vast majority of people arn't ready, they simply have not been prepared. Our culture is devoid of any ritualistic or spiritual drug use, and it is seen as nonsense because "modern medicine" is the light. Infact that very light as told everyone (or has tried to) that such experiences are simply not valid and schizoprenia enducing. If they go into the experiance fearing it, then they probably wont get anything out of it, or worse.

The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.

[aowe]

I can't see why people should have the right to obtain such a drug, although they can get "hard drugs" whenever they like the "Illegal way."

This drug is on 100% on the "Hard drugs list" because of it's simple fact that it is powerful in small doses, and is something a drug dealer wants in his hands, and i think this drug shall be left to "Should be limited to doctors and researchers only" because it is so amazing.

[sandoz1943]

SWIM wants to ask Awoe what he ment by every drug dealer wants in his hands?

SWIM doesn't know how it is these days but back when she was a different person with a different opinion of dealing. The doses were bought and sold at pretty low prices and the money was nothing compared to other drugs. The risks far outwayed any monetary gain. Dealing only covered cost of the drugs, gas, and a bit left over. Getting people turned on was the point. That is what made the risk worth while. Unfortunately most folks in the buisness today are morally corrupt and just out to make a buck. Maybe she is out of touch with how things are these days.

[Joe-(5-HTP)]

Originally Posted by aowe

I can't see why people should have the right to obtain such a drug, although they can get "hard drugs" whenever they like the "Illegal way."

This drug is on 100% on the "Hard drugs list" because of it's simple fact that it is powerful in small doses, and is something a drug dealer wants in his hands, and i think this drug shall be left to "Should be limited to doctors and researchers only" because it is so amazing.

I am confused by this post. Are you saying that a drug can be considered "hard" simply because it is active at relatively low doses? Why do you think that? Also, many people would consider a drug that is "amazing" as one which has great potential for artists/intellectuals. What did you mean by terming it "amazing" ?

[aowe]

Originally Posted by Joe-(5-HTP)

I am confused by this post. Are you saying that a drug can be considered "hard" simply because it is active at relatively low doses? Why do you think that? Also, many people would consider a drug that is "amazing" as one which has great potential for artists/intellectuals. What did you mean by terming it "amazing" ?

Sorry i should have said LSD is an "Amazing" psychedelic because of it's history in the 1960's such as it's cure for alcoholism, doctors started to treat patients for that matter. LSD in fact shall be left to the researchers.

LSD is considered a "Hard drug", Not just because it is very active at low doses, but it showed as psychotherapy tool, its subsequent popularity as a street drug, and the perception of it as a threat to public safety around the 1960's.

Ah, forget his name any way, the "Army Chemical Corps" i think i got that right, thought that psychoactive chemicals like "LSD will be a weapon in the future", such as contaminating water supplies, i believe this is why it is considered to be a "Hard drug, and also hard to get today.

[TheBadMan]

SWIM doesn't believe that LSD has much value for medicine or society in generally and thinks that psychedelic idealists and Leary valued the drug way too much. SWIM thinks the world would more or less be the same place even if a really sizeable (1/4 of the population lets say) used LSD occasionally. It doesn't have magic powers. It is just a drug (yes). SWIM thinks that the type of beliefs like "if everyone were slipped LSD, war would end" are incredibly naive, silly and dangerous.

But, SWIM believes that governments have no right preventing those competent enough to decide they want to take LSD from being able to possess it.

TheBadMan added 17 Minutes and 6 Seconds later...

Originally Posted by Joe-(5-HTP)

It has been said a thousand times before: people don't care about being individuals, they only care about fitting in . . .

It has, but that doesn't make it true. I say that the above is phoney baloney bullshit, so there. Neener neener.

Ultimately, if such a person was to be introduced to LSD and experienced even slight Ego death or other related insights then everything they secretly know but suppress, such as the fact that they are lonely and unhappy with their life and their brainless values, would come flooding to the surface.

I think that some of the assumptions you're working with are faulty. SWIM knows plenty of people who have been "enlightened" by psychedelic drugs, but have not completely rejected every aspect of modern culture. Everyone wants to belong to some extent. No matter what, you rely on other people (even if indirectly) for everything, so even if you just want to cheat and blend in, your individuality MUST be defined by comparison with everyone around you. To be an individual requires reacting to society, so your identity is defined by a constant interaction between you and everyone around you. No matter how much of a conformist consumerist capitalist slave you are or a free spirit, you are just as much an individual as anyone else.
Anyway, your assumption that it is a fact that "they are lonely and unhappy" comes of as flat out wrong to me. I don't think that everyone else, even if they are "brainwashed" and do conform to consumerism and assimilate materialist values, is unhappy.
I also don't think that LSD is incompatible with that type of society. I don't think that LSD has this magical power to suddenly bring you outside of society.
Many educated people are well aware of how media influences culture and spreads assumptions about how materialism leads to happiness and so forth. We're not all slaves to it. Even if we go along with it - that is, even if we conform to society, that does not necessarily mean that we are unhappy. I just don't see any reason to think that the mass effect of LSD on people today would be to make people say, "Wow, what bullshit consumerism and capitalism is. I never realized until I took LSD. I am so unhappy. I have to change." That, IMO, is pretentious nonsense and is just as much bullshit nonsense as assuming that accumulating wealth will make you happy.
LSD changes your perception. It does not necessarily make you reject society.
I seriously wonder why you don't think that some, or even most people, might react to LSD by embracing some aspects of modern culture and rejecting others. I also completely reject the notion that LSD would significantly alter the long-term happiness of the population, were its use very widespread.

but unfortunately consumerism really is everything that modern people

I don't think you're making much sense. Your generalization, is generally, kinda sorta true, but no. I just don't buy it.

are and taking that away from them would simply destroy them (mrs Goldberg in requiem for a dream for example).

That's a pretty strong prediction.
I think it is simply wrong.
Give everyone in the world LSD and two weeks later, the world would probably be back to normal.
LSD does not destroy most people. LSD simply is not that strong (and yes, SWIM has taken it many times at large doses - its acute effects are powerful but I seriously think you - and many others like Leary - completely overestimate the staying power and significance of LSD - even though many people will claim that it has changed them somehow, I think those claims are bullshit and based on a desire to believe in positive change).

I rambled a long time because I feel resentful towards these beliefs. I suppose after ten years of seeing the psychedelic idealist culture, I'm just as sickened by it as I am by celebrity worshipping materialists.

The problem is that most people are incapable of having transcendental experiences and having "free minds" because, similarly to those who have been in prison or a mental hospital all their life-.

I simply don't believe that you're right.

Reputation Comments on this post:

	I like where you stand man. Great argument.
	A well thought out and humourous post.

[Raz]

Originally Posted by TheBadMan

LSD does not destroy most people. LSD simply is not that strong (and yes, SWIM has taken it many times at large doses - its acute effects are powerful but I seriously think you - and many others like Leary - completely overestimate the staying power and significance of LSD - even though many people will claim that it has changed them somehow, I think those claims are bullshit and based on a desire to believe in positive change).

Ego death does change people although the question is, for how long.

[tyranny4u]

in many cultures, so called "primitive" from our point of view, the so called
"civilization", well in these cultures (indians, some african tribes, and i think
there are more in other places of the world) , it is a very important part of
the initiation ceremony of the boys when they get affiliated with the adult
men of their tribe, that they are consuming strong hallucinogenes during
these rituals.

this must be very impressive to them and maybe helps them finding
their place in the society they live in, begin to "uderstand" whatever those
people need to understand and believe in.
we have a similar thing: the first beer our dads offers us, maybe with a
cigarette to the beer. yes, that was a bit sarcastic.

but in opposite of "primitive people", where every individuum could count and
rely to the other members we grow up different. our world is full of impon-
derabilities. even our smallest social groups, the families, often split up. so
tt thinks we cant initiate teenagers with LSD after their 19th birthdays, it
won't make sense (to tt). on the other side he is convinced, that every
adult should have the right for tripping once a year or every two years.
the prescriptions then should not be given by every shrink, but tt imagines
an institution where special coached psychologists work and after checking
people hand out prescriptions or individual dosages.

tt also could imagine, that LSD could be helpful in resocializing young crimi-
nals, when instead a blotter is taken at parties pure LSD 25 is given in
the right dose and the right setting. and of course LSD should get back its
place in the legal range of substances that psychologists could use on
patients with traumata if it is obvious that a session on acid could help the patient.

[Joe-(5-HTP)]

Originally Posted by TheBadMan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe-(5-HTP)
It has been said a thousand times before: people don't care about being individuals, they only care about fitting in . . .

It has, but that doesn't make it true. I say that the above is phoney baloney bullshit, so there. Neener neener.

Indeed- I was not going for the majority is always right angle- I was trying to take some of the cliche out of my argument. You are right of course, it is 'merely' an assertion. But there isn't much room here for the 'proofs' required to back up social theories.

Originally Posted by TheBadMan

Quote:
Ultimately, if such a person was to be introduced to LSD and experienced even slight Ego death or other related insights then everything they secretly know but suppress, such as the fact that they are lonely and unhappy with their life and their brainless values, would come flooding to the surface.
I think that some of the assumptions you're working with are faulty. SWIM knows plenty of people who have been "enlightened" by psychedelic drugs, but have not completely rejected every aspect of modern culture. Everyone wants to belong to some extent. No matter what, you rely on other people (even if indirectly) for everything, so even if you just want to cheat and blend in, your individuality MUST be defined by comparison with everyone around you. To be an individual requires reacting to society, so your identity is defined by a constant interaction between you and everyone around you. No matter how much of a conformist consumerist capitalist slave you are or a free spirit, you are just as much an individual as anyone else.

I think the point here is that there is indubitably a scale and extent to which people are 'involved/dependant' on society, and that those who are at the extreem end of dependence are more likely to suffer consequences when forced to have an experience which pulls 'the self' into sharp focus or merely into sharp consideration.

Originally Posted by TheBadMan

Anyway, your assumption that it is a fact that "they are lonely and unhappy" comes of as flat out wrong to me. I don't think that everyone else, even if they are "brainwashed" and do conform to consumerism and assimilate materialist values, is unhappy.
I also don't think that LSD is incompatible with that type of society. I don't think that LSD has this magical power to suddenly bring you outside of society.
Many educated people are well aware of how media influences culture and spreads assumptions about how materialism leads to happiness and so forth. We're not all slaves to it. Even if we go along with it - that is, even if we conform to society, that does not necessarily mean that we are unhappy. I just don't see any reason to think that the mass effect of LSD on people today would be to make people say, "Wow, what bullshit consumerism and capitalism is. I never realized until I took LSD. I am so unhappy. I have to change." That, IMO, is pretentious nonsense and is just as much bullshit nonsense as assuming that accumulating wealth will make you happy.
LSD changes your perception. It does not necessarily make you reject society.
I seriously wonder why you don't think that some, or even most people, might react to LSD by embracing some aspects of modern culture and rejecting others. I also completely reject the notion that LSD would significantly alter the long-term happiness of the population, were its use very widespread.

I do not necessarily believe that they would be 'shocked out' of society as Leary and others believed, but I do think that they would be psychologically incapable of having a pleasant experience because they are so overly defined by external factors and unable to 'take' a powerful internal experience. I don't think they would suddenly become aware that they were slaves- I don't they would even understand the reasons why they might react so badly to LSD because basically they understand nothing, feel good and happy when they when they feel defined by what they have been taught to associate with good (consumption, etc) and bad when they feel what they have been taught to associate with bad. Granded it is an assertion or at best an educated guess, but I stand by my statement that because modern people are so extroverted in terms of their values and beliefs that if they take a drug like LSD which forces people to introspect then they will have an unpleasant experience, not necessarily because they see themselves as empty; more likely because they are simply so afraid of this experience which is totally outside their restricted and restricting understanding of life.

Originally Posted by TheBadMan

Quote:
but unfortunately consumerism really is everything that modern people
I don't think you're making much sense. Your generalization, is generally, kinda sorta true, but no. I just don't buy it.

It would indeed be a hard thing to prove and I suspect I would need a degree in social theory before I could even attempt to do so but nevertheless this is my 'educated guess', if you like.

Originally Posted by TheBadMan

Quote:
are and taking that away from them would simply destroy them (mrs Goldberg in requiem for a dream for example).
That's a pretty strong prediction.
I think it is simply wrong.
Give everyone in the world LSD and two weeks later, the world would probably be back to normal.
LSD does not destroy most people. LSD simply is not that strong (and yes, SWIM has taken it many times at large doses - its acute effects are powerful but I seriously think you - and many others like Leary - completely overestimate the staying power and significance of LSD - even though many people will claim that it has changed them somehow, I think those claims are bullshit and based on a desire to believe in positive change).

I rambled a long time because I feel resentful towards these beliefs. I suppose after ten years of seeing the psychedelic idealist culture, I'm just as sickened by it as I am by celebrity worshipping materialists.

Quote:
The problem is that most people are incapable of having transcendental experiences and having "free minds" because, similarly to those who have been in prison or a mental hospital all their life-.
I simply don't believe that you're right.

I don't know whether you intended to specifically imply me when you refered to the 'psychedelic idealist culture' but I can assure you I am decidedly not a member of it. Anyway I hope my new presentation of my ideas as opinions and 'educated guesses' will satisfy your criticisms. I must say slightly grudgingly but mainly with a wry smile and an appreciative yet slightly defiant glance in your direction that it is easy to pay the skeptic, and that you are perhaps transfering your analytical skills in empirical logic to social theory, and that perhaps social theory requires a different evaluative method? If this is not the case, consider that statement an affectionate intelectual jab in the ribs.

[VitaminK22]

Swim thinks LSD should be made available to anyone with a clean mental health report but they must be made knowledgeable about the effects, advantages and disadvantages of LSD first.
Swim thinks LSD can help society alot by showing people that we are all life forms and we should be working together rather than fighting each other. Also it will help people understand religion better.
Swim thinks the world would be a much better place if LSD was available to people who take it responsibly.

[Teefool]

Originally Posted by sandoz1943

SWIM has found there are two schools of thought on LSD and it availability to the general public.

Aldous Huxley felt LSD should only be available to the intellectual elite.
Dr. Timothy Leary thought it should be available to anyone who wanted it.

SWIM remembers thinking LSD could cure most of society's ills when she first took it. She thought that it should be available to anyone in good mental health. She now is rethinking this. LSD is a powerful chemical and she sees to many people not showing it the proper respect it deserves. Too many go in unprepared and uninformed . She now thinks maybe it should be used more a a sacrament with some sort of ritual to prepare before dosing. SWIM would like to see what the general consensus is among the DFers

First off, I wanna say that I don't think that LSD will ever have a legal religious following.

If we look at general availability from the point of view of an lsd chemist(main source), I would assume that intellect isn't even a considered factor in "who gets to take acid".

LSD requires a pretty strong knowledge of Chem. Like graduate school shit. Making acid is a long term devotion and investment with a risk of life sentances; Making it a high stakes investment(graduate school tuition and 6+ years of college is a life decision). Let's not shit ourselves, if any of us were sitting on millions of hits we would be straped and in isolation, and fucking paranoid. Anyone who puts this much risk should expect a very high return.

That said, I say that the nature of the acid market will continue to only consist of unregulated, illegal availability for the time being. Discriminating the demand when you have an extremely high supply will not work. Anyways, when a new batch of LSD is made, supply skyrockets and prices are cheap as fuck.


If the chemist is a "intelectual elite", I would assume that a vast amount of other close "intelectual elites" would eat as many hits as they wanted for free. This validates both ideas. If LSD is ever generally regulated, revenue from acid would go to the drug free pockets of pharmaceutical corporations, instead of to "rogue" chemists, and noone would get hooked up.