TED Conversations

Sartaj Anand

Founder, Egomonk , Melton Foundation


This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »


Imagine you have complete access to some of the best speakers in the world, TED Fellows, the TED Team and a bunch of the most talented TEDx organizers on the planet. Now imagine all of this happening in Doha, Qatar on 16th April, 2012.

I'm fortunate enough to have the opportunity to attend the TEDxSummit in Doha and now I ask you to share with me a question or an idea which needs to be heard.

I'll try my very best to ask/share it with them :)


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Apr 6 2012: The war on drugs has been raging all my life and drugs seem to be more available and popular than I can ever remember. Unscrupulous people are getting rich off it and not paying tax on their income. This is not new eg the gangsters during prohabition. In the west we conceded the war alcahol but yet we fill goals with drug users and low level suppliers. The idea of making alcohol illegal in the west because some people have a problem has very little support but this is used as a reason to keep other drugs illegal. The illegal nature of drugs has ment that users often don't know what they are taking making their use more unsafe. The hipocracy between alcohol and illegal mind altering drugs seems strange to me and I don't use either. My question is should alcohol be illegal or should other popular illegal drugs be made legal? Some countries have taken this choice what has been their experience what are the pros and cons in doing so? Do we need to rethink the war on drugs as a health issue or do we need to include alcohol in that war?
    • thumb
      Apr 11 2012: I say definitely full legalization. We repealed alcohol prohibition because it created more problems than it solved - by an astonishing degree. Turf wars, cartels enriched, adulterated product, police corruption, high spending on "enforcement" - all the same issues We see with "drug" prohibition - and with the use of drugs (it was never illegal to DRINK alcohol - just manufacture, transport and sell) being illegal, common citizens become "criminals" by merely choosing to exercise Their Human right to ingest whatever They want.

      The answer seems pretty clear to Me.
      • thumb
        Apr 12 2012: I agree, full legalisation is logical. A human bodily need to 'transcend the mind' dates back to early human civilisations. Just have to bypass the heavy moral roots that it now has in society - not to mention the ones that make the big bucks off it, whether its from those in the streets or in parliament.
        • thumb
          Apr 12 2012: And there are so many making money off prohibition! Either directly or indirectly. The CIA, the "drug lords," the pharmaceutical companies, the prison industrial complex, the alcohol & spirits industry, the cotton industry (though here in the US hemp is now allowed to be imported...), the oil companies (hemp oil can run cars and make plastics...), the police departments (property seizure bolsters many departments' coffers - while 80% of People who lose property on mere accusation are never charged with a crime), and on and on.

          The solution is to get rid of the need for money, I would say. And it is possible. Add abundantly what money represents: meaningful energy expended, in the form of "free energy" (overunity) and robots to do all necessary work no One wants to do (or not enough People). And overunity has been around since Tesla, but because the power elite know Their power, which relies on money, would dissipate, They keep it hidden and suppressed. Electrogravitics, studied openly in all major aerospace companies in the 1950's, was pulled into black projects late in that decade. It offered overunity and gravity control and drew energy from the zero point field negentropically (negative entropy).

          If You are interested in finding out more, check out The End of Entropy in My blog linked in My profile here.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.