Decades of exposure to intentionally misleading propaganda is difficult to ignore. It becomes a part of the worldview, making it hard to even think outside that box.
True. Once things become 'cultural facts' they're hard to change. Another is explaining remote work to older generations, a lot of them just can't equate it to 'real work'
Age discrimination almost certainly goes one way in these cases. That's if you're above 40, and looking to join an early stage start-up, you'll find you're often not a culture fit.
True. But some part of that propaganda is from pot smokers themselves. Some enjoy the image of the laid-back happy carefree pothead. Their cult leaders (used to be) Cheech and Chong.
Maybe they've just bought in to someone elses' worldview. But I don't think so.
There are a lot more people that do or have smoked pot, than those who base their identity on it. The cults were always a minority.
It's like the difference between a commuter on bike here in the Netherlands (more than 30% of all trips) vs the handful of cyclists in spandex with some fragile unsafe bike wanking about how light their bike is.
One is a cult, where it becomes part of someone's identity, one is just person trying to get to work.
We should have the discipline to realize that the people carrying the flag of anything are the least likely to be true representatives of the thing.
I’m willing to bet that the annoyance meme of spandex cyclists is intentionally amplified, possibly even created, by marketing agencies working for oil and car companies.
I’m also willing to bet that Cheech & Chong et al. are manifestations of a similarly forced meme, with many industries funding the various ”lazy brainless stoners”.
The exact same pattern can be found from nicotine vapes (the entire ”vape nation” annoyance meme was definitely a graft), and probably a lot of other things.
The point seems to be to control people socially by associating their habits with annoying qualities and fictional negative outcomes, superficially supported by anecdotes represented as scientific truth.
I really like this: "we should [develop] the discipline to realize that the people carrying the flag of anything are the least likely to be the true representatives of the thing."
What other examples are there? Am I one of these people in ways I don't even realize?
I would love to be eating a meal with someone who says this, and then have a really fantastic conversation spring from it: Does this help me feel out my own blind-spots better? Is this always bad? Is this always true?
As someone with a very personal relationship with marijuana, I really despise the "pothead" culture. The idea that weed makes you permanently stupid or incapable of working normally whilst sober is simply wrong.
Like everything, being responsible goes a long way. There are responsible marijuana users and irresponsible ones. Blaming it on the weed is really the lazy part of "pothead" culture.
Cheech and Chong are a couple of goofy comedians from the '70s. They are not leaders, and they don't have followers. Maybe they have fans (and are C&C still alive?)
Well no, there are serious health risk associated with weed. Maybe alcohol have them too, yes both deserve legality, but this is not to say it is "safe", especially in young.
And the last I heard, oxygen was "combustible". Inhaling a combustible isn't a health risk; inhaling combustion products might be. But many pot smokers use a vape, set to well-below the combustion temperature for their chosen herb.
Vapes have issues too, which include exposure to heavy metals. By combustibles I mean anything you burn. Again, not a doctor and not a medical scientist so I may be using the wrong words but most people who use weed know these things. Most notably, anything that is smoked will incur a small but sharp rise in blood pressure. If you wear a heart monitor (or wrist watch with one) it's fairly trivial to detect.
Absolutely, i more made reference to how when somebody mention health impact of weed somebody else say "whatabout alcohol unhealthiness" as though it is relevant.
Of course it is relevant. Many of those 95,000 annual deaths would be preventable if a good variety of quality cannabis was more widely available and its use was more socially acceptable.
I also believe such a paradigm shift would largely eradicate domestic violence.
