# Cannabis friendly in Cardiff



## mabinogi (Oct 6, 2005)

.


----------



## Col_Buendia (Oct 6, 2005)

mabinogi said:
			
		

> Anyone know of any cannabis friendly bars, cafes in Cardiff?



Well, if there is, with the way things are going on the re-de-un-recriminalisation of cannabis atm, I imagine they wouldn't want their names advertised on a board!

What do people reckon the SWP's attitude to hash/grass is? I have one mate who was once found carrying a personal-use amount of hash. Now, cos he is a slacker stoner with obvious dreads, _every single time_ the same cop sees him, he gets stopped and searched. Presumably robocop reckons my mate is a guaranteed increase on his monthly bust points  Does one bust mean that the cops then have free licence to stop & search you everytime they spot you?


----------



## spacemonkey (Oct 6, 2005)

mabinogi said:
			
		

> Anyone know of any cannabis friendly bars, cafes in Cardiff?



If there are, they're well hidden! Lived here for 22 years and not heard of one....


----------



## Udo Erasmus (Oct 6, 2005)

The difference between socialists and liberals on the legalisation of cannabis, is that (following legalisation) liberals would allow multinationals to control marijuana production, with all the attendant advertising and rip-off prices.

A more enlightened socialist administration would nationalize cannabis production and use any profits to build hospitals and schools.

We would also use hemp as a much more ecological resource for paper and clothes.

Probably under socialism people wouldn't have recourse to artificial highs - as just the experience of living in a revolutionary society would be pretty mind-expanding!


----------



## Poi E (Oct 6, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> A more enlightened socialist administration would nationalize cannabis production and use any profits to build hospitals and schools.!



Why would "liberals" not be in favour of decriminalisation as opposed to legalisation? In fact, most advocates of cannabis law reform do not advocate turning it into another booze industry.

Bugger the government growing it. They'd regulate the strength, etc and we'd all be smoking crap.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 6, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> Probably under socialism people wouldn't have recourse to artificial highs - as just the experience of living in a revolutionary society would be pretty mind-expanding!



You must be smoking


----------



## Col_Buendia (Oct 6, 2005)

*at Udo*

That must be one of the most off-topic replies I've yet seen in my years on these boards 

Nice one Udo!







Edited to add: Ah-ha!! You mistunderstood my reference to the SWP to mean the one and only true SWP, the way, the truth and the light - the Social Workers Party!

In fact I was referring to the South Wales Police, a substantially more powerful organisation that nevertheless shares your basic assumptions about the fundamentally evil status of human nature...

(you didn't, perhaps, pick up on the following references to my mate being stopped and searched? Or has *your* SWP taken to frisking people as they leave Albany Rd post office on a Sat morning to make sure they've bought a copy of Social Worker? )


----------



## Udo Erasmus (Oct 6, 2005)

Poi E said:
			
		

> Why would "liberals" not be in favour of decriminalisation as opposed to legalisation? In fact, most advocates of cannabis law reform do not advocate turning it into another booze industry.
> 
> Bugger the government growing it. They'd regulate the strength, etc and we'd all be smoking crap.



Firstly, if Cannabis was decriminalised/legalised under any of the main parties in government it is almost certain that private companies and multi-nationals would be rushing in to take control of this lucrative market and that this would be blessed by the government who would probably tax dope to fund  imperialist wars.

Probably in this situation the government would make it a criminal offence to grow your own stash (as the government would probably be in bed with the multinationals and is in hoc to big business as usual).

Secondly, the ideal situation would be cannabis grown for _need not profit _ - perhaps by individuals for personal use or workers co-operatives, but whatever way the wind blows, I would hope production would be under workers control - the point is to make sure that production is not hijacked by big business.

From each according to his/her MEANS - To each according to his/her NEEDS!
Udo Erasmus    

PS. I have heard when the leaders of the SWP reach a political deadlock they usually drop acid to get inspiration - aparently the idea of RESPECT was arrived at via some partiularly good acid


----------



## ICB (Oct 6, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> The difference between socialists and liberals on the legalisation of cannabis, is that (following legalisation) liberals would allow multinationals to control marijuana production, with all the attendant advertising and rip-off prices.
> 
> A more enlightened socialist administration would nationalize cannabis production and use any profits to build hospitals and schools.
> 
> ...



Yeah, let a govt control it cos they're so much better at doing stuff than other megolithic institutions like multinationals.    

A proper liberal attitude would be to just let people grow their own shit instead of levying a tax on it.


----------



## Udo Erasmus (Oct 6, 2005)

Col_Buendia said:
			
		

> That must be one of the most off-topic replies I've yet seen in my years on these boards
> 
> Nice one Udo!
> 
> ...



I'm not sure how I have a basic assumption about the fundamentally evil status of human nature?

Surely, the fact that I believe in a society where people can live co-operatively and satisfy their material and spiritual needs without the exploitation of others would suggest that I have a rather optimistic view of human potential and human nature?


----------



## Poi E (Oct 6, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> PS. I have heard when the leaders of the SWP reach a political deadlock they usually drop acid to get inspiration - aparently the idea of RESPECT was arrived at via some partiularly good acid



 Nice one. 

You are certainly an optimist. Not a bad thing at all. It's them idealists we gotta watch.


----------



## Udo Erasmus (Oct 6, 2005)

*Artificial Paradises*




			
				ICB said:
			
		

> Yeah, let a govt control it cos they're so much better at doing stuff than other megolithic institutions like multinationals.
> 
> A proper liberal attitude would be to just let people grow their own shit instead of levying a tax on it.



If hemp was being widely used for intoxication AND making clothes and paper presumably it wouldn't just be grown in a pot plant by the window but on farms - but I already said people should be free to grow their own tea.

 I seriously doubt if the Neo-Liberal Democrats or New Labour legalised dope that this would be allowed. Afterall people being able to grow their own shit would conflict with the interests of big business who would want to rake in profits from grass.

In this situation it would make sense to have co-operative farms under democratic workers control

I should make clear that my favoured form of government is a workers state based on the principle of democratically run workplaces and communities: The Boss needs you - You don't need the boss! And remember a stoned boss is still a boss!


----------



## Udo Erasmus (Oct 6, 2005)

Another quick point:

If cannabis was legalised it would mean an end to massive amounts of money going to the police to harrass users and dealers.

This money saved could be used instead to fund programmes to help people addicted to hard drugs (which should also be de-criminalised in my opinion)


----------



## ICB (Oct 6, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> If hemp was being widely used for intoxication AND making clothes and paper presumably it wouldn't just be grown in a pot plant by the window but on farms - but I already said people should be free to grow their own tea.



I must have missed the bit where you said that.  Hemp production for oil and fabric, etc. requires a very different strain from that required for psychoactive purposes, people could easily grow their own of the latter just as they already do, but without fear of conviction and imprisonment.



> I seriously doubt if the Neo-Liberal Democrats or New Labour legalised dope that this would be allowed. Afterall people being able to grow their own shit would conflict with the interests of big business who would want to rake in profits from grass.



So do I, although I think there's slightly more chance of it under the LDs than NL.



> In this situation it would make sense to have co-operative farms under democratic workers control



I think that probably makes sense anyway, cf kyser's comments in the countryside thread in theory/history/philosophy.



> I should make clear that my favoured form of government is a workers state based on the principle of democratically run workplaces and communities: The Boss needs you - You don't need the boss! And remember a stoned boss is still a boss!



I should make it clear that I have no ideological bent whatsoever and don't argue politics on here anymore since IME it leads otherwise decent and pleasant people to be extremely rude to each other.


----------



## Col_Buendia (Oct 6, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> <snip> I believe in a society where people can live co-operatively and satisfy their material and spiritual needs without the exploitation of others <snip>






			
				Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> <snip>
> I should make clear that my favoured form of government is a workers state based on the principle of democratically run workplaces and communities<snip>



Heh heh, you fell for it!

So what's it to be mucker? Co-operatives or government? Cos if you have a truly benevolent view of human nature, you'd trust people to govern themselves, ahem. But as you still believe (apparently) that there is a need for a government to take decisions for people, the suggests to me that you don't trust them.

Ba-ding!



-----------------> p&p's that way


----------



## Poi E (Oct 6, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> In this situation it would make sense to have co-operative farms under democratic workers control



Can't see the workers doing much work.


----------



## ICB (Oct 6, 2005)

Col_Buendia said:
			
		

> -----------------> p&p's that way



Health and Safety Warning: U75 P&P forums can seriously damage your sanity and sense of humour


----------



## Col_Buendia (Oct 6, 2005)

ICB said:
			
		

> Health and Safety Warning: U75 P&P forums can seriously damage your sanity and sense of humour



Naw mate, me an Udo are gonna show the people of u75 the way... could you believe only a year ago he was calling me a fuckwit! Now we can cheerfully trade gentle banter, safe in the knowledge that neither of our respective ideologies has a snowball's chance of making any significant difference... well, his anyway


----------



## ICB (Oct 6, 2005)

Col_Buendia said:
			
		

> Naw mate, me an Udo are gonna show the people of u75 the way... could you believe only a year ago he was calling me a fuckwit! Now we can cheerfully trade gentle banter, safe in the knowledge that neither of our respective ideologies has a snowball's chance of making any significant difference... well, his anyway



 I'm sure you'll be very happy together, in the pit of despond


----------



## mabinogi (Oct 6, 2005)

.


----------



## zog (Oct 6, 2005)

> Probably under socialism people wouldn't have recourse to artificial highs - as just the experience of living in a revolutionary society would be pretty mind-expanding!



hahahaahahhahahahahahahahahhahahahh.


----------



## herman (Oct 6, 2005)

mabinogi said:
			
		

> Interesting debate.  Don't want any multinationals supplying it but neither do I want the govt. involved either.  But anyway, I take it that there is nowhere in Cardiff.  Cheers for the replies.




Plenty of places in the Valleys though- though I am not prepared to post names on here as I guess they are better off kept beneath the radar.


----------



## mabinogi (Oct 7, 2005)

Weed should be legalized and big business and the govt. should keep their fiflthy hands off.  Homegrown with no paranoia is the only way to go!


----------



## shortygoldtooth (Oct 7, 2005)

So in answer to the original question?


----------



## rioted (Oct 7, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> ......socialists.............profits............


System Failure. Does not compute!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## RubberBuccaneer (Oct 7, 2005)

How many people do you think would buy nationalised cannabis?

I think the black market would thrive.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 7, 2005)

shortygoldtooth said:
			
		

> So in answer to the original question?


----------



## Udo Erasmus (Oct 10, 2005)

I was very inspired by the wisdom of anti-psychiatrist David Cooper, (a colleague of R. D Laing).

He argues that heavy cannabis use might be useful for activists in instilling the requisite paranoia that reflects their real relation to bourgeois society.

He also profoundly argues for the use of LSD by marxists to provide them with vital near-death experiences that they may need to cope with the risks that they run in their activist career.

But of course their are problems . . . he muses, if Che took acid it could be a problem - because he might not want to fight any more


----------



## tobyjug (Oct 10, 2005)

Col_Buendia said:
			
		

> Does one bust mean that the cops then have free licence to stop & search you everytime they spot you?



Since cannabis reclassification yes it does.


----------



## Col_Buendia (Oct 11, 2005)

tobyjug said:
			
		

> Since cannabis reclassification yes it does.



Why? If your past record can't be held against you in a court case, why should a past bust count as reasonable grounds for a stop & search?


----------



## BrixiSteve (Oct 11, 2005)

ICB said:
			
		

> I must have missed the bit where you said that.  Hemp production for oil and fabric, etc. requires a very different strain from that required for psychoactive purposes, people could easily grow their own of the latter just as they already do, but without fear of conviction and imprisonment.
> 
> I may be wrong but I seem to recall that this new strain of hemp (they are calling it 'Rasta') is usefull both psychoactively and in terms of it being used for paper and cloth, etc..   ??


----------



## Udo Erasmus (Oct 12, 2005)

BrixiSteve said:
			
		

> ICB said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## osterberg (Oct 12, 2005)

Col_Buendia said:
			
		

> What do people reckon the SWP's attitude to hash/grass is? I have one mate who was once found carrying a personal-use amount of hash. Now, cos he is a slacker stoner with obvious dreads, _every single time_ the same cop sees him, he gets stopped and searched. Presumably robocop reckons my mate is a guaranteed increase on his monthly bust points  Does one bust mean that the cops then have free licence to stop & search you everytime they spot you?



 By 'SWP' , you do mean South Wales Police , do you? I mean this could cause confusion  .

 Editing to say I'm a lazy sod who should have noticed that this was mentioned in a previous post.


----------

