Drug Propaganda Thursday

A couple of months ago, the Office of National Drug Policy apparently decided that a "with it" kinda' thing to do would be to upload the agency's awful anti-drug videos up to YouTube.  Naturally, you aren't permitted to comment on the commercials, keeping with the drug warriors general approach to dissent.  Once several hundred people had given the videos poor ratings, they disabled the rating function, too.

What's disappointing is that the agency persuaded YouTube to give it its own little corner of the site, complete with unique formatting and a unique URL.  Not cool, YouTubers.

This week's propaganda video is apparently an attempt to encourage young people to buck peer pressure.  The tag line is a riot:  "When you give up the ability to decide for yourself…You give up what makes you, you."

Marvel for just a sec at the irony in that line.

Comments

[Akira MacKenize]

“When you give up the ability to decide for yourself…You give up what makes you, you.”

Just as long as your decisions conform to the priggish whims of of a bunch of puritanical assholes who dominate Western culture.

[Armed and Hammered]

“You are all individuals!”

“We are all individuals!”

Need I attribute?

[D.A. Ridgely]

“When you give up the ability to decide for yourself…You give up what makes you, you.”

I guess we won’t be seeing the FDA adopt that as its new motto.

[Rick Barton]

Once several hundred people had given the videos poor ratings, they disabled the rating function, too.

Ignoring feedback in order to save face is quite stupid. But of course we’re used to this type of thing coming from the government prohibitionists as their policies wreak tragedy throughout our nation.

“When you give up the ability to decide for yourself…You give up what makes you, you.”

Just amazing! The government idiots just came up with a fine slogan (based on a truism) for the anti- prohibitionist movement.

Come on You Tube, when you lay down with Big Brother you get up with brain rot.

[Doctor Duck]

What’s disappointing is that the agency persuaded YouTube to give it its own little corner of the site, complete with unique formatting and a unique URL. Not cool, YouTubers.

So what? As libertarians, don’t we believe that the answer to bad speech is more speech? In the marketplace of ideas, this shit is pretty cheap. Let ’em babble. They’re clearly not winning the hearts and minds of their target audience, and they never will.

Having their own little corner just makes it easier to avoid.

[chris joseph]

what happened to google’s you can make money without doing evil policy?

[Jim Walsh]

Shame on YouTube for playing along. I swear, if it wasn’t for all the free porn…

[dead_elvis]

“When you give up the ability to decide for yourself…You give up what makes you, you.”

Ability to decide for yourself? HAR HAR HAR!!! What planet are they living on?!

[tarran]

Guys, I think you are missing the point,

When you do something that you wouldn’t otherwise want to do in order to convince others that you are cool, you are giving up your individuality.

When you don’t do it because you fear armed men breaking into your home, shooting your pets, tasering your mom, confiscating your car and dooming your chances of getting into a good college, you have retained your individuality.

The former is bad, and your so called friends are evil for so pressuring you.

The latter is good, and we owe a debt of gratitude to those who risk their lives daily meddling in our personal business.

I’m so glad that I have to postpone repairing my gutters to afford the taxes that keep these mental midgets off of the street.

[Warren]

“We are all individuals!”

I’m not

[Madog]

I was curious, so I took a look at the profile of “ONCDPstaff”, the “user” who uploads their videos.
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=ONDCPstaff

Interestingly, ONCDPstaff has watched 239 videos. I wonder which ones…

[GM]

Follow Madog’s link to the user profile of ONDCP. They have disabled the comment and rating function for their videos, but you still can (literally) send a message to them from their profile. Give ’em hell!

[Garth]

ONDCP user is 18? Nah. I don’t buy it.

[R. S. Porter]

I don’t really see the why the slogan is particularily bad.

Actually I agree with it. When you do many drugs you are losing your inhibitions, and it is our inhibitions that give us our individuality. Part of one’s personality is regulating their own conduct and thus taking drugs is counteracting reason. On the peer pressure aspect there is a point too. Regardless of what the peer pressure is, conforming to anything reflexively is not a good thing. I think J.S. Mill is right in his advocation of pure individuality in all aspects of human thought.

That said, people should still be allowed to do how they please and no one should regulate their victimless actions.

Overall, though it’s more government wasting our money on moralistic propaganda, I don’t think the statement itself is so inherently wrong as you people make it out to be. There is much to object to in the ad–and the fact it even exists–but that line is the least of your worries.

[brucem]

It’s like Christi-fascists telling people “Jesus wants you to think for yourself!” … they are comfortable in their hypocrisy, irony, and blatant falsehoods because they know all dissent will be stiffled. Bloggers can point out their stupidity in small, dark corners of the web, but not on billboards, tv commercials, radio ads, and other prominent forms of advertisement which they waste our tax dollars on to get THEIR idiocy out there.

[Rick Barton]

Shame on YouTube for playing along. I swear, if it wasn’t for all the free porn…

You can get porn too?? Really? I just use it to score swell New Wave and old school punk stuff:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXpWXpCz_e0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qz-nGB6TPj4

[Rick Barton]

The ones in the orevious post were The Human League and Blondie. Here’s the Ramones:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRxrgZ1T_YM

And I also have this groovy, interesting one: The Future of Austrian Economics by Murray Rothbard:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWdUIuID8ag

Dig em if you can. But really, you can get porn too?

[Rick Barton]

R. S. Porter:

I don’t really see the why the slogan is particularily bad. Actually I agree with it. When you do many drugs you are losing your inhibitions, and it is our inhibitions that give us our individuality.

That’s kind of a stretch, is it not? On the other hand, it’s certainly true that the drug laws take away our ability to decide for ourselves.

[bill]

Does this mean I can “decide” not to pay my taxes?

[andy]

The story goes that we beat the Nazis and the commies, but sometimes I wonder if they really lost at all. Lord knows the American people lose every day.

[Non Sequitur April 5, 1999]

Rebel against non-conformity.

Conform to independent thought.

[werd]

I thought the commercial was pretty good. If drugs were legal, and a group of private individuals got together to produce this commercial, would you consider it good? If not, is it possible for an anti drug commercial to be good?

[Life of Brian (1979)]

Brian: Please, please, please listen! I’ve got one or two things to say.

The Crowd: Tell us! Tell us both of them!

Brian: Look, you’ve got it all wrong! You don’t NEED to follow ME, You don’t NEED to follow ANYBODY! You’ve got to think for your selves! You’re ALL individuals!

The Crowd: Yes! We’re all individuals!

Brian: You’re all different!

The Crowd: Yes, we ARE all different!

Man in crowd: I’m not…

The Crowd: Sch!

[Terrorific]

I’ve found that you can comment on videos uploaded by the hilariously-named ONDCPsucks.

Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khbSK9dzLuQ

[Willy]

Looks anti-family to me. Could be a pretty good idea.

[whit]

wow. the hypocrisy here is amazing, but typical.

libertarians are supposed to believe (heck, all americans who believe in the 1st amendment do) that there should be a marketplace for ideas.

apparently, the one exception is the US Govt. when was the last time somebody here referred to NORML as “propaganda”. fwiw, i am against the drug war, but NORML “propagandizes” at least as much as the govt. does, just from the opposite side of the fence.

it comes down to this . people here don’t like youtube giving a voice to all sides of the debate. nope, youtube is “giving in” if evul govt propagandists ™ are given access to a relatively freewheeling speech site that has a diversity of viewpoints.

people who are comfortable iwth the 1st amendment, and with their ideas welcome an open and free debate. others, believe that if the opposing viewpoint is given play, that the dumb sheeple ™ will be influenced and it is up to US to make sure that they don’t have the access

grow up. the best counter to bad speech is to counter it with good speech. people are free to post pro-legalization videos to youtube. that is the rational, libertarian approach, not whinging that the evul govt. propagandists are taking advantage of speech and persuasion

[Larry A]

R S Porter: I don’t really see the why the slogan is particularily bad.

It’s not bad. In fact the ad is a pretty good representation of the anti-drug peer pressure argument. But it’s also supremely ironically arrogant for the War on Drugs zero tolerance folks to promote individuality when their solution is prison for non-conforming behavior.

people here don’t like youtube giving a voice to all sides of the debate. nope, youtube is “giving in” if evul govt propagandists ™ are given access to a relatively freewheeling speech site that has a diversity of viewpoints.

I don’t see anyone saying the ONDCP should be kept from publishing on the site. There were posts saying that YouTube shouldn’t give special preferences like special formatting and an exclusive area to the ONDCP messages. Which strikes me as a pro First Amendment message.

[whit]

People give NORML the money it uses to publicise its cause.

The government takes the money to publicise its cause.

Get the difference.

Am I a hypocrite for condemning rape because I have sex with my wife?

Now, if a private organization funded by voluntary donations were to produce this, I would laugh at them, which is particpating in the market place of ideas. I certainly wouldn’t demand that they be shut down.. But so long as they take their money by threats of violence to advocate views I don’t agree with, they will get my calls to shut them down.

The wellfare queens in the various departments of the U.S. government that are dedicated to the Supression of Vice and Promotion of Virtue need to get real jobs and off the dole.

[whit]

Larry, that’s a good point. rereading the posts here, i realize you are correct.

[APL]

it comes down to this . people here don’t like youtube giving a voice to all sides of the debate. nope, youtube is “giving in” if evul govt propagandists ™ are given access to a relatively freewheeling speech site that has a diversity of viewpoints.

No, YouTube is being criticized not for hosting the video, but for removing the functions that allow users to comment on or rate the video, something they do for no other videos on their site.

I am also skeptical that many Americans really believe in a free marketplace for ideas.

[tarran]

Sorry, the above comment was mine, I was using an unfamiliar browser.

[J sub D]

whit, It is not the opinion that bothers me and others. It’s that we had to pay for this (someone else’s) opinion. Of course, nobodody like their taxes paying for positions that they disagree with. But this is the important question. Do you like your tax dollars spent to make advertisements for positions that you agree with? If the answer is “Fuck NO!, than you’ve got it right.

[Chris]

[i]”When you give up the ability to decide for yourself…You give up what makes you, you.”[/i]

I wonder if they realize that if we all follow this statement of individuality to its logical end, the government will cease to exist.

But I suspect the unspoke caveat to this is that you are perfectly free to be an individual and make your own decisions, but if your decisions conflict with the government’s, they reserve the right to kick in your door at 2am and shoot you.

[whit]

“No, YouTube is being criticized not for hosting the video, but for removing the functions that allow users to comment on or rate the video, something they do for no other videos on their site.”

false false false.

i have seen other videos on youtube that have the comment section removed.

here’s a hint. research first, form opinion second

[andy]

whit,

What about the disappearance of the ratings option? Obviously it was rated unpopularly, the fascists didn’t like it so they had Youtube remove that option. As if that detracted from the main point though: It’s not free speech because the money to pay for the ad was taken at gunpoint.

Here’s a hint. Capital letter first, lowercase second.

[Ventifact]

Is the ONDP really this stupid? Have they ever seen youtube before? Don’t they realize that they only effect of this “strategy” of theirs is that a million spoof videos will show up on the site, further turning popular opinion against drug control?

[Lazlo]

The person uploading a video to YouTube can enable or disable comments, ratings, video responses, and external-site embedding on each and every video they put on the site.

[bugmenot used]

Flagged as inappropriate. It is surely inappropriate that YOUR money which could educate your children or whatever has been confiscated to fund government propaganda. I called it ‘hate speech’ as ‘government theft’ wasn’t listed. I live elsewhere so did it on behalf of you Americans. Hope you don’t mind.

[Adam W.]

bugmenot used-that’s BRILLIANT!!! Maybe it should be marked as another ToU violation?

“submit material that is obscene, defamatory, libelous, harassing”

I’d say the ads could be considered some or all of the above. Now, if they are also “falsehoods or misrepresentations that could damage YouTube or any third party,” there’s another violation.

[VegasMassage]

I am not liking youtube lately

[bugmenot used]

Thanks Adam. You know we Aussies are right behind you in the war (on the war on drugs).

[whit]

i am glad that the people here finally realized that ANY poster of a video can remove the comments section, and it has been done by other than the govt in this case.

that was a false claim on no evidence. not surprising. it was just assumed.

people need to get real. every govt. in the history of the world i am aware of has promoted it’s official POV, which many here would refer to as “propaganda”. basically, propaganda means a POV or advocating for a policy that one does not agree with.

every person who pays taxes pays for uses of their money they don’t agree with.

this is a “free speech” issue in the grand “marketplace of ideas thang”. it is correct that youtube, a private company has no OBLIGATION to accept these videos from the govt. but they CAN and i am glad they do, even though i disagree with the policies, because i like an open debate. and an open debate doesn’t happen when only one side is heard.

as i said, the best counter for these videos is for people in opposition to post their own videos explaining why the policies are wrong, AND what policies would be better.

the whingers here (adam and bugmenot) are all excited to FLAG these videos, etc.

yawn.

a much more mature response would be to come up with alternative videos that show why your ideas are better.

[J sub D]

a much more mature response would be to come up with alternative videos that show why your ideas are better.

Great, I’ll get started as soon as I get my government funding.

[whit]

perfect example of whinging as noted. michael moore (lol) didn’t need govt. funding, nor do most of the people who post to youtube.

file under… waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

[J sub D]

whit, This thread, and my comments, are about the GOVERNMENT funded, GOVERNMENT produced video. I don’t think that you, me, or the guy behind the tree should pay fot it. What is so friggin’ hard to understand? It’s not even information. It’s a political advertisement for the drug warriors. It’s an attempt by the government to influence public opinion so they durg warriors can continue their assault on our liberties while lining their own pockets at taxpayer expense. The water temperature just went up one degree. Did you notice it, frog?

[thoreau]

I’m glad that government propaganda is so incredibly ironic. It makes me wonder if there are some pro-legalization people working for ONDCP.

We’ll know something is fishy when they produce an anti-drug poster that says “Real Heroes Are Drug-Free!” with a picture of Spider Man scaling a clock tower to rescue his Mary Jane, while the clock tower reads 4:20.

[whit]

“whit, This thread, and my comments, are about the GOVERNMENT funded, GOVERNMENT produced video. I don’t think that you, me, or the guy behind the tree should pay fot it.”

no kidding. i agree that there is tons of stuff the govt. funds that i don’t want to pay for. welcome to a representative govt.

regardless, if the videos suck so much, then exercise your creativity and counter them with a better video.

being taxed means the govt. is gonna do lots of stuff with our money we disagree with. welcome to the real world

[damaged justice]

welcome to a representative govt.

Democracy is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

Such is your love, such!

[sage]

I’m wondering if youtube would say no if NORML or the Drug Policy Alliance wanted to post their own videos. And why haven’t they yet? Or have they?

[eric]

I watched the first 1-2min of this video so forgive me if it becomes off topic.

This is a video from BBC that seems to promote legalization quite well.

Enjoy.

(click my name for the hotlink)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2908621023073531157&q=legalize+drugs

[mgmort]

[Steve Martin] Now let’s repeat the non-conformists’ oath: I promise to be different!
[audience] I promise to be different!
[SM] I promise to be unique!
[audience] I promise to be unique!
[SM] I promise not to repeat things other people say!
[audience] (laughs) I promise not to repeat things other people say!
[SM] I promise not to depreciate non-taxable items brought forth from the previous tax year!
[audience] (attempts to repeat and laughs)

–Steve Martin, “A Wild and Crazy Guy” 1978 (the year BEFORE Life of Brian)

[jvon]

The truly ironic thing is watching 100 “individuals” all posting messages agreeing with each other.

My position on this? Whatever opinion I have on the effectiveness of anti-drug commercials is outweighed by my repulsion of a hundred people bitching about how a company runs a free service.

Don’t like it? Don’t use it then.

[woobagooba]

Actually, the best “anti-drug” commercials the Feds could do would be if they could travel back in time about 30 years to the druggies I knew back then. Talk about losers and burnouts. Just show 30 seconds of someone trying to talk to one of them would be hilarious! More than anything, that would make folks want to NOT do drugs!

OTOH, the “War on Drugs” is a case of the cure being worse than the disease. I pray the cops don’t kick in my door by mistake some night, because I will definitely take one of those SOBs down with me before they kill me.

[Mister Snitch!]

Yes! I want to be a non-conformist, like everyone else!

And, what’s all this about porn?

[J sub D]

no kidding. i agree that there is tons of stuff the govt. funds that i don’t want to pay for. welcome to a representative govt.

Perhaps you were sleeping in the portion of U.S. Government 101 when the topic of enumerated powers was brought up. Perhaps you ignored it. You certainly did’nt get it.

[J sub D]

Make that …topics of enumerated powers and limited government. It better explains where I’m coming from.

[epoche*]

Would Youtube allow postings of extensive descriptions of how to make meth?

[J sub D]

Would Youtube allow postings of extensive descriptions of how to make meth?

Recipes are readily available for meth, acid and God only knows what else, on the internet. Google to your hearts content. Whether YouTube would allow it, I haven’t a clue.

[high.five]

“When you give up the ability to decide for yourself…You give up what makes you, you.”

Ranks right up there with:

“Don’t ever (!), ever(!), let a woman … … make you what you are.”

[Warren]

My position on this? Whatever opinion I have on the effectiveness of anti-drug commercials is outweighed by my repulsion of a hundred people bitching about how a company runs a free service.

Don’t like it? Don’t use it then.

Ah huh, OK how about this? Suppose the Gubmnt was producing commercials about how the Jews owned all the banks, or the lazy niggers were having more kids to collect more welfare, or the Mexicans took R yobs?

Believing in free speech means YouTube (and everybody else for that matter) has the right to say repulsive things. That doesn’t mean they’re any less dickheads for saying them. Or in this case, for bending over for the man (who doesn’t enjoy the same rights to free speech when he’s spending my money)

[M. Simon]

The idea of “addiction” is superstition.

We are acting like a South Pacific tribe enforcing tribal taboos. Buying protection against the drug demon with the lives of innocents. All gussied up to look like science. “Addiction” is science. Cargo cult science.

[Knemon]

“Am I a hypocrite for condemning rape because I have sex with my wife?”

Andrea Dworkin says: yes.