Skip to main content

The Science of Dark Humour | Hri-write

I'd like to begin by saying this blog isn't meant to offend anyone. It's all for the sake of fun and entertainment, and to satisfy my sadistic desideratum. If you're easily offended, or if this blog offended you in any way, it's because it was meant to.

(If that last line offended you, get out right now. It's going to get much worse.)

It might be worthwhile to address the question of 'why we laugh' before dealing with comedy styles such as dark humour.
We believe laughter evolved from the panting behavior of our ancient primate ancestors. Today, if we tickle chimps or gorillas, they don’t laugh “ha ha ha” but exhibit a panting sound. That’s the sound of ape laughter. And it’s the root of human laughter. Apes laugh in conditions in which human laughter is produced, like tickle, rough and tumble play, and chasing games. Other animals produce vocalizations during play, but they are so different that it’s difficult to equate them with laughter. Rats, for e…

Hot take: The War on Drugs is a huge failure

I try my best to refrain from topics that have anything to do with psychotropic or psychedelic substances, but the implications of this topic in this day and age are so vast that talking about it would do more good than bad.

The 'War on Drugs' was a name dubbed to the criminalisation of hallucinogenic substances during the presidency of US President Richard Nixon. It wasn't just a national campaign, because the US is a superpower, almost every country followed suit with some style of criminalising hallucinogens. This list included Cocaine, LSD, Heroin and the hotly debated Marijuana, which is making a comeback.

Today, the war on drugs is a huge failure. The entire nature of the policy has caused numerous, devastating consequences. It's lead to mass incarceration (particularly in the US), anarchy, civil dissent and human rights abuses across the world. All of this comes at the expense of billions of dollars of investment into fighting drugs, while creating the very cartels and drug dealers that the goal is to fight.

The core 'equation' or idea of fighting drugs is effectively summed up by "No drugs = No problem". So, all the efforts to attain this have revolved largely around persecuting/prosecuting drug offenders and the people who supply drugs. However, they ignored the entire concept of supply and demand while drawing up the schemes for the war on drugs.

If you reduce the supply without reducing the demand first, the prices skyrocket. While the high prices may have deterred the sales of other things, this is not the case with drugs. Drugs will be consumed no matter what they cost, so the unintended effect was that it caused recruitment of traffickers and producers of drugs to increase its availability. This created a situation similar to that one arcade game, 'Whack A Mole'.

Effectively what happens in this scenario is, when you attempt to curb one avenue of drug production, another takes its place. Even if drug production or a major supply route is destroyed, the supply for the end user is not reduced. 

A prime example of this is the attempt of the US' DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency) to curb the production of Meth. I don't want to waste time on the particulars, but here's a general outline:

The US government made attempts to halt the production of Methane-amphetamine (Crystal Meth) by regulating the sales of the chemicals that were being used to manufacture the drugs. This caused a large scale decline in big meth operations, however, it caused thousands of smaller, home grown meth producers to spring up across the country. To further limit this, the US government further regulated the sales, which choked out even the small scale meth businesses. However, just as this happened, drug cartels in Mexico took over, determined to make profits on stronger, more potent meth. Many cartels had a lot of experience in smuggling already, and their meth was even better than before. This just made the drug more dangerous, while it didn't affect the supply at all.

Currently, the DEA has an efficiency rating of less than 1%, while billions of dollars are being poured into the agency. 

The presidency of Richard Nixon was a hotly controversial one, he was blamed of being a liar among other things. (peek the Watergate Scandal)

However, after his presidency, John Ehrlichman, who served as domestic policy chief for President Richard Nixon confessed the following:

At the time, I was writing a book about the politics of drug prohibition. I started to ask Ehrlichman a series of earnest, wonky questions that he impatiently waved away. "You want to know what this was really all about?" he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. "The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."

In case you missed the message, here's what he's saying, paraphrased.

"The war on drugs was a ploy, to undermine Nixon's critics, black people and critics of the Vietnam war. The entire scheme was drawn up was to criminalize black people."

That's appalling. The legal system and prisons is where you can see the effect of the war on drugs the most: the incarceration of non-violent drug offenders. The United States, for example, has 5% of the world's total population, but 25% of the world's prison population.

Not only are drugs stronger than ever, demand is unbroken, and widely available, for many minors around the world, it's as easy to get illegal drugs as it is to get alcohol. Let that sink in for a second.

What can we do?

Let's examine a case study: Switzerland in the 1980s.

During this time, Switzerland was experiencing a public health crisis, the abuse of heroin. As a result, HIV rates shot through the roof, and street crime became an immense problem. Instead of punishing the offenders, the Swiss government adopted a new strategy, 'Harm reduction'.

They opened free heroin treatment centers, where people would be treated and stabilized. Here, people would be given heroin of high quality, clean needles and have access to safe injection rooms, medical care, showers and beds.

Social workers helped them with other problems such as counselling and housing. Two-thirds of the people in these centers got regular jobs. Today, nearly 75% of all heroin addicts in Switzerland get treatment. HIV and deaths from overdose, street crime have dropped drastically.

There are ways out. Understanding addiction is the first step. I strongly suggest you watch this video.



Popular posts from this blog

Where is all the 'alien life?' - Fermi Paradox and other theories

My first blog, ever, was about understanding the odds of alien life. I've gotten much better at writing blogs since then (or so I like to tell myself), and it would only be right if I reinstate the legacy of that one.

We should openly admit that when we happen to be under a starry night and see a sight similar to this, we all have a react in a different and interesting way. Some people are left boggled by the immense size of the universe, others by the sheer glamour of the scene and if you're anything like me, you're paralysed by the sudden realisation that you have a negligible impact on the universe. The point is, we all feel something.

When he looked up at the sky, Italian physicist Enrico Fermi too felt something, a thought that lingered around this question, "Where is everyone else?" It's been half a decade since Fermi passed on, but he left us with a fundamental query and idea.

Fermi realised that in a universe as old and vast as this, there should be…

Understanding extremist terrorism

While I hate to talk about such a grim, dark topic, terrorism is running rampant across the globe, and there just seems to be no end. In 2017, the face of terrorism are organisations like ISIS. So, what exactly is terrorism? Merriam-Webster calls terrorism "the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal."

Let's face it, terrorism isn't new. It's been around for a long time. The word, in fact, dates back to the late 18th century around the time of the French revolution. So why is it such a big deal now?

Because now terrorist organisations aren't local. They are getting more radical, and they don't just have political agendas. They've become irrational, crazed with the idea of securing the world under their woeful grasp.

To understand terrorism, it's essential to understand where it begins. All terrorist activities are motivated by one or two things, social/political injustice or the idea th…

The Psychology of External Validation

A recent conversation intrigued me to explore this topic, and I find it perhaps one of the most relevant ones I have written about. So, here goes.

I've known people who always get hundreds of likes on their posts hours within posting them. I have never been one of these people. I've never received many likes or shares, and when I was in my younger years, it was hurtful, in a way. I used to see my posts and shares sit on my wall for days with only a few likes, and back then, it was painful for me, so to say. It made me doubt my worthiness, and created a feeling that no one cared about what I had to say. I used to post a lot on Facebook just to see how many likes/shares/comments would accumulate in a few hours. I would be disheartened when that number didn't live upto my expectations. I'm sure some of you have had this feeling, and it's okay.

Why? Why, just why is it like this? Why do we doubt our worth, why do we feel so bad just because someone didn't press or…