I found the following story intriguing. I picked up the book in New Zealand and read it over the interminable flight across the Pacific, twelve hours.

…listening to people describe their drug experiences tends to be tiresome. …But I have one story from my own misadventures that I feel is worth sharing.

Sitting on a beach in Devon in August, 2003, I contemplated grumpily the sprinkling reflection of the swirling ocean that I would return home in three days to Toronto. University, a relentless bar gig, newspaper job, and the usual routine of five hours sleep a night, massive endocrinology textbooks and painfully dry statistics modules. And the upcoming, demoralizing Canadian winter. I wasn’t excited.

“I think I have a solution to the way you feel”, said a friend. I’ve got some DMT: it’s pretty much the world’s strongest hallucinogen.

After pondering, I agreed to try it. Why not? Just this once.

I followed his instructions, smoked three tiny grains from a pipe , and fell to the round in a retching fit, vomiting profusely into the sweet English grass. I emptied the contents of my stomach unceasingly, internally cursing myself for my gullibility. (It felt like hours, but my friends all concurred: the wretching lasted no more than 20 seconds. Such is the nature of psychedelic delusion.)

Once the sickness subsided, I lay back with my eyes closed, gasping for breath, and tried to breathe deeply. Opening my eyes, I looked down at my prostrate body. Every inch of me was covered in grasshoppers. They waved their antennae at me casually, and looked at me with bright compound eyes.

I looked behind me at my friends, and though I had been rendered non-verbal, the look in my eyes clearly communicated what was on my mind … really? Surely this was the spectacular illusion of one of the world’s strongest drugs.

“You are NOT hallucinating,” said one friend. “You are actually covered in grasshoppers.”

“They love you!” another enthused.

Is Dr [Rick] Strassman right? Does DMT wind through all living things – from grass to grasshoppers, hippies, hippos and humans – and is it the key to all spiritual experience?

There’s no hard evidence to back up Dr. Strassman’s beliefs that DMT has some kind of magical property, binding all living things together – and I’m dubious about his claims.

All I can say is that I smoked three grains of his favourite chemical, and found myself covered with grasshoppers. Needless to say, I don’t have a peer-reviewed study to validate the experience with statistical significance. But I do have four friends who saw it with their own sober eyes.

I have been offered DMT many times since – and have never taken it. Once was enough.

Most stories about other people’s drug experiences are boring. I hope this wasn’t.

(Zoe Cormier, Sex, Drugs and Rock n Roll: The Science of Hedonism and the Hedonism of Science, p182)

The following is from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) and is a description of the symptoms used in diagnosing ADD and ADHD, two made-up diseases whereby children who are bored in school are drugged to get them out of teacher’s hair. Please note how any of these symptoms can easily be seen to be normal if a child is merely bored. It can only mean that teachers, school counselors, psychiatrists and psychologists got together and brainstormed to find a way of placing the failure of our schools and education system on kids.

What brain malfunction causes a kid to lose focus, not stay in-tune as teacher does a monologue on a matter of no importance, or fail to expend mental effort in things that are boring? What possible brain malfunction affects four million American school children, but only eight thousand in the whole of France?

Kids are almost all born bright. It takes thirteen years of American schooling to get them slowed down enough to live in our society and not go crazy.
__________________________________

Inattention: Six or more symptoms of inattention for children up to age 16, or five or more for adolescents 17 and older and adults; symptoms of inattention have been present for at least 6 months, and they are inappropriate for developmental level:
• Often fails to give close attention to details or makes careless mistakes in schoolwork, at work, or with other activities.
• Often has trouble holding attention on tasks or play activities.
• Often does not seem to listen when spoken to directly.
• Often does not follow through on instructions and fails to finish schoolwork, chores, or duties in the workplace (e.g., loses focus, side-tracked).
• Often has trouble organizing tasks and activities.
• Often avoids, dislikes, or is reluctant to do tasks that require mental effort over a long period of time (such as schoolwork or homework).
• Often loses things necessary for tasks and activities (e.g. school materials, pencils, books, tools, wallets, keys, paperwork, eyeglasses, mobile telephones).
• Is often easily distracted.
• Is often forgetful in daily activities.

Hyperactivity and Impulsivity: Six or more symptoms of hyperactivity-impulsivity for children up to age 16, or five or more for adolescents 17 and older and adults; symptoms of hyperactivity-impulsivity have been present for at least 6 months to an extent that is disruptive and inappropriate for the person’s developmental level:
• Often fidgets with or taps hands or feet, or squirms in seat.
• Often leaves seat in situations when remaining seated is expected.
• Often runs about or climbs in situations where it is not appropriate (adolescents or adults may be limited to feeling restless).
• Often unable to play or take part in leisure activities quietly.
• Is often “on the go” acting as if “driven by a motor”.
• Often talks excessively.
• Often blurts out an answer before a question has been completed.
• Often has trouble waiting his/her turn.
• Often interrupts or intrudes on others (e.g., butts into conversations or games)

In addition, the following conditions must be met:
• Several inattentive or hyperactive-impulsive symptoms were present before age 12 years.
• Several symptoms are present in two or more setting, (e.g., at home, school or work; with friends or relatives; in other activities).
• There is clear evidence that the symptoms interfere with, or reduce the quality of, social, school, or work functioning.
• The symptoms do not happen only during the course of schizophrenia or another psychotic disorder.
• The symptoms are not better explained by another mental disorder (e.g. Mood Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, Dissociative Disorder, or a Personality Disorder).

I am on an email list that sends out updates on “net neutrality.” Today I got one saying that various forces in congress are trying to undo the FCC’s classification of the Internet as a public utility, which it obviously is. As such, it comes under regulation not just by FCC but by every state in the union. They asked me to send $5 to help them in their battle. That’s a bit like putting in fluorescent bulbs to fight global warming, a feel-good but otherwise pointless exercise.

The whole of the neutrality battle leaves me confused, so I hope others can clarify it for me. There was a time when we all used dial-up for Internet, and people were buying second phone numbers. The nation’s phone infrastructure was stressed, but the problem soon righted itself as we all strung cables out of the wall for high-speed dedicated Internet service. And now it’s a wi-fi/4G world and will continually improve.

The assumption with the neutrality battle is that we are dealing with a limited commodity, band width, but I don’t think we are. It will expand, and what we use today will seem dial-up by comparison ten years from now.

Something else is going on. The band width cartel that has naturally formed is openly threatening to slow down web sites that do not pony up extra dough. That would effectively shut down web sites like this one and tens of millions of others. I doubt the driving force is naked greed. The Internet giants have already cordoned off the market and can print money as they please.

So I am thinking a little more in line with my general sense that we live in a totalitarian society, an iron fist barely concealed beneath a velvet glove. The objective of elimination of net neutrality would have nothing to do with available band width or constraints on corporate greed. Rather, its effect would be its objective – to silence all of those voices that have so changed the landscape, tiny to mid-sized Internet sites that nag nag nag at the heels of power. Mine is nothing, and I suffer no illusions.

I can access information from all over the globe that would have been relegated to the “alternative media” just twenty years ago. Alex Jones, for instance, is a potent force with millions of patrons (I am not one). Assuming he is the genuine article, a real voice of dissent (I do not suffer that illusion either), his traffic would slow to a crawl, and he’d effectively be silenced. There are thousands of other sites of far more value that would also be quashed by this corporate attack on band width freedom.

The object, then, of elimination of net neutrality would be to return us to the good old days when the bulk of the population was relegated to a few heavily censored sources for news, like NBC and New York Times, for instance. For that reason, I expect the pressure on FCC to return Internet to its unnatural designation as a non-utility to grow to hysterical screaming. It is indeed a monumental struggle, and $5 from a few concerned citizens ain’t gonna get it done. Is DemandProgress.org, the source of that $5 request, a blind alley used to distract real concern, make sure it all goes nowhere? That’s all I can make of such a pointless gesture.

This is just the beginning. The object, as I see it, is to quash real first amendment freedom before it gets out of hand.

The long journey home was made even longer by a storm in Denver that saddled us at LAX, forcing us to return to the terminal even as the plane was set to take off. We were only delayed a couple of hours, but at DIA we passed a line of people forced to reschedule that went on for blocks. We were tired but felt the pain of all those people who are delayed by a full day in getting to their destinations by a storm that shut down DIA for a mere one hour. Our national transportation system is a complex interdependent web, and I marvel at its efficiency.

At home we were under a foot of snow, so digging out was hard work. We had a guy come in and plow while we were gone, but he left a pile of snow blocking access to our back yard. I’ve carried back a traveler’s’ bug that has been nagging for over a week, and fatigue is one of its symptoms, so running the snow thrower and hacking away at a pile of ice chunks blocking access was a mighty chore.

New Zealand is a beautiful place. My brief exposure to its news media left me with the impression it is heavily censored, like ours. What coverage of world events I saw in newspapers was the London viewpoint, and their TV news was heavily focused on sports and local crimes and accidents, which are few. So passive observers in that place will know very little of the world, just like here.

People are nice everywhere, very nice. Food is bland (but my point of view is tainted by my gastrointestinal baggage – nothing had any appeal). At LAX I had chicken quesadilla and a glass of Chardonnay and my taste buds were awakened … spices! Hispanic flavors! I’m home! Fleeting are the joys of life, however, as the bug allows only brief periods to savor such pleasure.

My overall impression … New Zealand is like the Swiss Alps, beautiful, and like Switzerland, a land mostly unaffected by passage of violence in world events. This leaves a soft people not used to troubles. There are 4.5 million people there, and 28 million sheep (not double-counting). The World Cricket Tournament is going on there now, and that, like our Super Bowl, dominates the public mind. It’s a silly place.

But so beautiful. Two days before leaving I was going through photos on my camera, getting rid of duds. One photo was taking a long time to be erased, and I suddenly shrieked a Homer Simpson shriek – I was erasing the entire trip! I quickly removed the battery, but too late. Every photo gone. I don’t take great photos, just point and shoot, so no great loss. On Milford Track it was too wet, so I left the camera in the pack. We bought ninety photos of that Shangri-La and others have emailed us some of theirs. And we have a few stored on the iPad and iPhones. And as my wife says, it only means we have to go back.

Fine, but I am going to smuggle in some spices. Those people do not know food.

Tha above images are, according to Geoffrey Pyatt, U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, satellite photos proving there are Russian artillery systems stationed near the town of Lomuvatka, about 20 kilometers northeast of Debaltsevo. (See link.)

Take a close look and see if you see what I see … splotches. See now how our propaganda system functions. The image becomes what authority figures say it is. According to Pyatt, “we are confident these are Russian military, not separatist, systems.” Take special note of his word, “confident,” as in “confidence game.”

On the right-hand side of the photo, next to the “N” indicator, if you look closely, you will also see the Brooklyn Bridge, currently for sale.

The Russians play tit for tat.

“These materials were posted to Twitter not by accident, as their authenticity is impossible to prove – due to the absence of the attribution to the exact area, and an extremely low resolution. Let alone using them as ‘photographic evidence'” according to Major General Igor Konashenkov, spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry.

But it’s a confidence game, and those Americans who believe what they are told with complete lack of guile and utter simple trust in authority will believe that the gray splotches are exactly what Pyatt claims they are. His job is far too easy.

“It’s no secret to anyone that fakes like this are made by a group of US counselors staying in the Kiev building of the Security Council, led by General Randy Kee,” says Konashenkov, showing that two sides can play the same game.

After being savaged by New Zealand prices for over two weeks, I purchased a magazine (North and South, $9.00NZ, $6.75US) with a cover article, Why Prices are so Bloody High, by Chris Barton. It’s long and mostly anecdotal, but a key paragraph follows:

” It is estimated New Zealand’s economic growth rate would have been 15.5 percentage points higher between 1990 and 2010 if income inequality had not surged in the Rogernomics and Ruthanasia years after 1985,” said business commenter Bernard Hickey. “the report essentially argues the ‘trickle down’ theory used for much of the last half century by most developed countries does not work and the best method of improving economic growth is to reduce income inequality.”

I assume that Roger and Ruth were former government officials here. I don’t follow these things.

At another point Barton cites social historian Gordon McLauchlan, so says “You have to take power away from those people who make $4 million a year and think they are worth it.”

I see the simmering resentment in McLauchlan’s remark. I don’t see any way that one person is worth a hundred, much less a thousand times more than another. Luck has a lot to do with wealth, as does scaling, exploitation of other humans, subsidy and choice of birth canal. I also do not understand how anyone can think a human being unworthy of food, shelter and health care.

I take it one step further however. Every powerful person has the ability to buy pet economists, train and feed them and teach them to speak in a given manner. It should not be surprising that the Chicago School is more properly called the Rockefeller School of economics. These social pariah will parrot any idea that pays well, and plays it out in the future to be for the good of all.

But the paymasters know better. Neoliberalism was not meant to “succeed” in the sense that all would enjoy its benefits. Rather, it was a stalking horse for those who do benefit, the haves who want more. So in that sense, it has not failed, but rather succeeded, wildly.