Mollydukes:

You made some good points.

I wasn't suggesting the rich would necessarily give anyone a donation. I was talking about the ability of ordinary folk to help each other out in times of need.

I have done a fair bit of reading on drugs available to indigenous people in various nations, before the white man came.

No matter who they were, they smoked, drank and ingested all manner of hallucinogenic plants, including mushrooms, which grew in various media.

http://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/health/aboriginal-alcohol-consumption.html

http://www.druginfo.adf.org.au/drug-facts/hallucinogens

Lorikeet your link even says that it was a weak concoction that our Aborigines used, not mushrooms or strong alcohol. Are we quibbling unneccessarily?

It is accepted by the anthropology people that some Aboriginal tribes smoked a type of plant that had a small effect on their consciousness, and up in the north, where they traded with the Islanders, Australian Aborigines had access to the alcoholic drinks that the Islanders brewed, eg kava.

So they could have made alcohol if they had wanted to; it would have spread if they were inclined that way back then. Kava is supposed to be pretty strong but the Aborigines who knew about it, did not hit the grog the way they do now.

So on the basis of this reasoning I think my idea that their lifestyle provided them with sufficient happiness that they were not driven to discover alcohol is worth thinking about.

It is the shame that many Aborigines feel about themselves that leads them to drown their sorrows; the loss of pride in themselves and their culture that they once had.

Not that I would want to live like they did, just saying that we could look at the things other cultures have done that makes people happy and there just might be something that the Aborigines knew about building a stable society, that we, with our ever-changing culture haven't discovered yet.

But Aborigines are way off topic.

Lorikeet, I really don't understand why a person who indulges in the use of illicit drugs should be faced with the option of either dying on the streets or spending their life in jail. If one assumes that the illicit drug user has not broken any other laws then on what basis does does a mature society have to interfere in his/her life?

Further more what does Greenpeace have to do with the list of social ills that you apparently believe they are responsible for? Greenpeace are a political movement and no different than the Liberals or Labor parties.

The question of the use in society of drugs that have been deemed as illegal is an elitist point of view. It assumes that people in government are somehow blessed with the knowledge of doctors and scientists. In my mind they are no better than me and they have no right to interfere in the life of any adult who is of age. If a man or woman can make the decision to die for their country in places they have never heard of than I am sure that they can ingest what pleases them as long as they are breaking no other law in doing it.

Dominic Perrottet,
Thanks for bringing some complexity to the debate.
But why does "society" in this quote, "Everyone wants to minimise the harm that is caused by drugs in society", look like the innocent party in all this?
"I" don't want to minimise the harm caused by drugs in society, I want to know why our society breeds substance-abuse on such a vast scale? By substance abuse I could mean alcohol, prescription drugs, junk food, passive media consumption etc. etc., as well as illicit drugs.
If we look to minimising the harm caused by wholesale passive escapism, aren't we evading the real problem? Indeed normalising it? The tacit conclusion being that humans are by nature hopelessly addicted to escapism in one form or another?
Has anyone else put two and two together and figured out that the "problem" is really about a vast industry out there being wasted on the black market? It's not an ethical problem at all.
Legalising drugs would be a shot in the arm for the economy, as lucrative as fracking, but on the biological scale. And think of all the small business opportunities that could rise up to cater for a new legitimised form of consumption, everything from cafes to psychologists to palliative-relief wards.
"I do not have the answer to the problem of drugs in our society".
I do, or at least I have a reformulation; it's not a problem of drugs, The problem is our society, which no one can take straight!

>>Lorikeet, I know for a fact that magic mushrooms only grow in cow poop, and there were no cows in their country so I'm pretty sure that the Australian Aborigines didn't use them.<<

Magic mushrooms can be found all over the world. From wikipedia:

>>In general, psilocybin-containing species are dark-spored, gilled mushrooms that grow in meadows and woods of the subtropics and tropics, usually in soils rich in humus and plant debris. Psilocybin mushrooms occur on all continents, but the majority of species are found in subtropical humid forests. Psilocybe species commonly found in the tropics include P. cubensis and P. subcubensis. P. semilanceata - considered by Guzmán to be the world's most widely distributed psilocybin mushroom — is found in Europe, North America, Asia, South America, Australia and New Zealand<<

That doesn't mean that the Aboriginals ever used them: just that they had access to them.

>>Australian Aborigines had access to the alcoholic drinks that the Islanders brewed, eg kava.<<

Kava is not an alcoholic drink. It is made from the root of the kava plant and is not fermented. Its intoxicating qualities come from chemicals called kavalactones.

Aboriginals may have had access to alcoholic drinks but until the Europeans arrived all those drinks would have only been fermented and not distilled. They would have been fairly weak and harmless unlike the rum the British introduced which wreaked plenty of havoc in the colony who were used to it - it is easy to see why the Aboriginals who were not used to it experienced such devastation from it.

Cheers,

Tony

No one deliberatly sets out to become an addict. People try mind/mood altering substances for a number of reasons. Some of them are to mask horrible personal experiences while others are seeking the buzz or high. Unfortunately addiction can follow for some. I haven't seen anyone on here admit to being an addict or alcoholic...well I'm an alcoholic and spent time in rehab with alkies and drug addicts of all types. No one enjoys the life that comes with being an addict. It is one of lost opportunities, deprivation, financial ruin, poor health, devastated families and many, many more negatives.

Giving up is difficult as it can mean trying to change up to decades of a certain behaviour or dealing with emotional/psychological pain I hope none of you ever experience (in rehab my roommate was a 24 year old widower and father of 2. At 18 he got pack-raped in jail. The 18 year old boy never got to grow up.). The brain gets rewired to seek the substance that causes so much pain and grief or relief. Logic ceases to exist. For the addict only one thing becomes important: the next high or hit. Getting treatment can be difficult and many attempts are often required before long term sobriety can be achieved.

The war on drugs is a failure and will never be won. Decriminalise drugs and only let registered users buy from pharmacies. Give much heavier penalties to trafickers and dealers, particularly if they deal to children. Fund rehabalitation centres and put in place much better programs. As it stands rehab is primarily for the very rich or the very poor. If you're in the middle there is virtually nothing.

And if you have to make ignorant comments about something you obviously know nothing about then think twice before exposing your blissful ignorance to the world.