• footfaults [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    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

  • Nationalgoatism [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    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.

  • LeylaLove [she/her, love/loves]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    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.

    • GreenTeaRedFlag [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      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
        6
        ·
        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

  • AlpineSteakHouse [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    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
      11
      ·
      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.

        • Juice [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Its a thorny issue but I think youre way off the mark. It’s not about a molecule, it is about cultural “capital” built up over hundreds or thousands of years, and then that culture being taken apart, bit by bit, anything of value gets commodified and repackaged to colonizing people, alienating and severing it from its cultural significance, and anything else that can’t be made into a commodity is subsequently destroyed or otherwise alienated from as much of the past and the culture as possible. Its part of a process of domination. Youre basically making the same argument as the above dunk subject, that because this substance has been intentionally, forcefully and painfully alienated from its original cultural significance, that it is inherently alien. Shrouding this argument in the language of science doesn’t work either: in my opinion we should be suspect of the language of science and its seemingly disaffected and intellectually distanced, sanitizing affect. In this case, as in most cases, science is political.

          Noone really teaches us the definitions of cultural appropriation and I don’t think that even most leftists have a solid formulation for it. So I don’t blame you but you’re making a big error here.

          I use the term “capital” above because that’s what its become, due to the totalizing quality of capital, but the real cultural and historical significance is beyond my ability to comprehend. We have to trust the victims of erasure, otherwise we are just chuds

        • Kynuck97 [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          11 months ago

          They don’t have a right to the chemical structure of mescaline though. It’s like saying Chinese tea growers have the right to bar western people from drinking energy drinks because they both contain caffeine.

          My dude, what? We’re talking about settlers appropriating the culture of indigenous Americans. I’m not versed in the history of the Chinese Tea trade, but it has historically been exported and shared. The key difference being “Exported and Shared”. Willfully sharing parts of your culture with other people is not at all comparable to having it be appropriated by colonizers despite your express protests.

          Would you stop taking Aspirin if Egyptian people said that you were appropriating their use of willow bark?

          Willow trees grow worldwide, and people generally use the resources that are available to them. There is definitely a case to be made about the imperialist nature of western medicine, but that is a completely separate conversation from what we’re talking about here.

          They have a right to the rituals, images, and other unique elements of culture involving peyote. They do not have a right to the chemical structure itself.

          Why are you so intent on determining what parts of their culture they have a right to and which parts they don’t?

          • robot_dog_with_gun [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            11 months ago

            Why are you so intent on determining what parts of their culture they have a right to and which parts they don’t?

            seems real weird to say a microscopic chemical is part of a culture. Like we don’t buy chromosome arguments from transphobes because gender was established before we knew about them and before that cultural meaning could’ve existed.

      • Othello [comrade/them, love/loves]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        we absolutely should be respecting indigenous people. if they say we shouldnt use it then we shouldn’t use it its that fucking simple. its not some random people either the church is the one saying it. if you cant do that you are a settler and an asshole. youre not entitled to treats! its not a necessity, recreational drugs have the be the most treat like treats.

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

              I appreciate the response - I understand what you are saying. I do want to clarify that I’m not trying to argue from an arbitrary moral/idpol perspective. In the article in the linked thread, they interviewed a person who is a part of the Navajo nation, who argues explicitly against the consumption of Mescaline for outsiders, synthetic or not.

              “How would Christians feel if Jesus Christ was cloned?” asked Justin Jones, a Diné peyote practitioner and legal counsel for the Native American church of North America, a non-profit organization that advocates for more than 300,000 members. “And while the real Jesus is protected, people could do whatever they wanted to the clone.”

              Creating synthetic mescaline in a lab or growing peyote in a greenhouse is a violation of natural law, and interrupts the unique symbiotic relationship with the plant. “What western scientists call mescaline is for us the essence of the medicine,” said Jones. “It is the soul of it and what makes it holy.”

              If I am understanding you correctly - that would shift this from being a purely value-neutral form of appropriation, to being actively harmful and disrespectful.

              • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                11 months ago

                Does it? I kinda feel like you’re approaching the idea of listening to native voices uncritically. Protecting their practices and ability to practice their culture is important, but the idea that their religious beliefs about nonpractitioners should be enforced isn’t acceptable, just like it isn’t from any other religion.
                Certainly we should be protecting peyote, returning the lands it grows on to the tribes/NAC, and stopping others from harvesting it, but there isn’t a justification for stopping people from using mescaline that was created sythetically or grown from other cultivated species. The theft and oppression that stops them from practicing their religion is harmful, but just using mescaline derived from other sources doesn’t affect them or their ability to practice.

      • Shinji_Ikari [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        I think some context is lost here, is the plant the culture, or the ritual surrounding the plant?

        Catholicism uses wine in a ritual form in a very integral part of the religion, but wine itself is naturally occurring when you forget about your berries in the jar.

        If these people were going around performing the entire native ritual in some commodified way, it’d be 1000x more horrifying than tech bros wanting to get loopy.

        • Kynuck97 [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          According the the person interviewed in the article, it is the plant, and the chemical itself.

          Creating synthetic mescaline in a lab or growing peyote in a greenhouse is a violation of natural law, and interrupts the unique symbiotic relationship with the plant. “What western scientists call mescaline is for us the essence of the medicine,” said Jones. “It is the soul of it and what makes it holy.”

          There’s definitely a branch of “Psychonauts” that want to engage in the whole ritual practice (See all these psychedelic retreats/therapies/ayauasca “experiences”), but it sounds like many of them don’t want the chemical commodified at all either.

      • dat_math [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        if they have an issue with white colonizers using synthetic Peyote mescaline, is that not also worth consideration and empathy

        Edited because I think I misunderstood the argument you’re making. Apologies for being a big dummy.

        I can absolutely see why commodifying mescaline or rituals associated with constitutes harmful appropriation of indigenous culture against their expressed desires, but I don’t see why synthesizing (or growing and extracting at home) a substance outside of the context of its traditional use, and using it privately is harmful. Obviously it’s done against the expressed preferences of a culture that has used the chemical for centuries+ but I’m encountering some trouble accepting the notion that a being colonized necessarily prioritizes one people’s spiritual belief over private drug use.

        If this also completely misses the argument you’re making, I apologize.

    • Kynuck97 [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      11 months ago

      Sure, but Peyote takes 10-30 years to grow in a very specific climate, and is endangered due to overharvesting. Growing your own is one thing, but exploiting an endangered plant and telling the groups that use it to “Grow it on their own land” is blatant colonizer behavior.

    • AlkaliMarxist@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Edit: apparently I’m 20 minutes late and 4 other people said the same stuff. Oh well.

      I think there is more going on than just “it’s ours, you shouldn’t have it” though. Peyote in the US is designated legal for religious use by indigenous people as part of traditional practices only. It’s also extremely slow growing and requires very careful harvesting to keep the plant alive, it’s listed as an endangered species in the wild, explicitly due to over-harvesting.

      Basically people using it as a recreational drug can have a very real impact on the legality and availability of the plant for indigenous people.

      The people in the OP are not engaging with any of this stuff and treating it simply as culture war, with an attitude of extreme contempt and hostility to the people who they see as potentially stopping them from getting high, which I find pretty gross - regardless of whether you think it’s fair to gatekeep the plant.

  • Mardoniush [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    11 months ago

    Ok, if you want to have the cultural experience, then fucking do so like many Western defectors to First Nations did.

    Go through all the rituals that a person of that actual culture would, learn the language, immerse yourself for decades, and then, maybe, you can have the treat plant.

  • Hexbear2 [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    11 months ago

    I don’t think people should be fucking with these psychedelic alkaloids for recreational purposes, many of them result in dangerously high blood pressures.