• LeylaLove [she/her, love/loves]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    As someone who loved drugs back in the day, I always told people that they should grow their own San Pedro’s or another common mescaline cactus and not peyote. I know a guy whose entire house is filled with different species of peyote, literally every inch of his floor covered in pots. He had trichoceruses he kept for tripping. If it didn’t keep him busy and happy with himself, I’d say it was a hoard. But he was growing for repopulation and regularly planted around town, so it’s healthy-ish for him. Got himself off heroin by growing peyote for repopulation, not by taking it. He was the only white guy I’ve ever met that taking peyote would be perfectly ethical, but still didn’t do it

    It’s not hard to be respectful. Especially when San Pedros are legal and extremely easy to get.

  • Nationalgoatism [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I don’t think it’s a matter of gate keeping the drug do much as it is of keeping the plant from going extinct due to over harvesting. Grow your own peyote (most won’t bc they lack the necessary skills and patience, even if they have an appropriate climate) or just use other psychedelics.

    • GreenTeaRedFlag [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      TBF, I’ve abandoned shame in myself as well, I see it as a form of social control I don’t need or want in myself. The main problem is that they didn’t decide not to feel shame, they just became immune due to an over-abundance. That was their only moral check, was not looking bad to others. Once they lost it they have nothing holding back their appetites.

      • Budwig_v_1337hoven [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        sounds good and healthy tbh - and yet you still know the word shame. What I felt was so funny about the part I quoted is, that it seemed like the guy struggled to verbalize the very concept of shaming and as such defaulted to construct something with a virtue-component (that’s what the libs have right) and ended up with this hilariously over-complex-yet-primitive turn of phrase. Virtue-blackmailing alone just kinda sent me

        Not saying shame is a good thing to cultivate or w/e

  • footfaults [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Although Anderson sympathized with the landowners, who wished to make their land productive and protect themselves from litigation by anyone who was injured on their ranch while collecting peyote, the closure of peyote harvesting grounds produced “serious tensions” between indigenous people and the ranchers. According to Salvador Johnson, the largest peyote distributor in Texas, 100 percent of the land in Texas where peyote grows is privately owned, which means that if peyoteros are going to harvest peyote, they need permission from landowners.

    mao-wtf

    https://www.vice.com/en/article/zmdzbw/the-decline-of-american-peyote-v24n5

  • AlpineSteakHouse [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    I read the original article and the only thing I have against it is the anti-synthetic peyote stance they have. I get it’s a sacred plant but if the option is people foraging it to extinction or letting them have a lab grown version then just let them make it in the lab. As much as I support indigenous folks in their anti-crakkker stance they don’t have the right to the molecule itself especially if it isn’t derived from peyote.

    I assume that’s the point of the first comment. Not “Let me forage this plant to extinction” but “If you say I can’t have a synthetic version and I can’t forage then what do you want me to do?” Just let them have the lab-grown stuff and keep the plants yourself. Less foraging, psych folks get their trips, everyone’s happy.

    • Kynuck97 [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Yeah i re-read the article a few times and came to a similar conclusion. At the same time - if they have an issue with white colonizers using synthetic Peyote mescaline, is that not also worth consideration and empathy? It subverts the supply issue, but it feels to me (as a white colonizer) like approptiation of someone’s culture, against the protest of the people who’s culture is being appropriated.

      Should we really be forcing onto any indigenous peoples our views of whats “fair”? There exist many alternatives to mescaline, and I think their desire to not have it commodified and shared should be respected.

          • DayOfDoom [any, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Appropriation is a value-neutral concept. And also not rooted in exploitation per se. There’s an erroneous conflation here between colonialist appropriation which does material harm to the people being colonized as well as possibly being a component to the ideology of colonialism (like Israel taking Palestinian culture into itself to use as a justification of their superiority to them) which marxism will sometimes talk about, versus neutral appropriation like white people using synthetic peyote or American teenagers making vaporwave from '80s J-Pop.

            It’s not inherently disrespectful to use things without chaining ourselves to the original contexts they were used in. It can sometimes be harmful and/or disrespectful but idpol liberals literally only care about turning anti-imperialism and morality into arbitrary dinner etiquette. So they just call it all cultural appropriation and tell people not to do arbitrary things.