Тег: Surfactants

State drug policy

When Alexander Litreev was swept up for substances at the end of February, I published a post where I urged people to focus not so much on the specific case, but on the repeal of Article 228 itself. The suggestion was to hurry with pressuring the state through mass actions before the news cycle was replaced by something else. Alas, the news cycle was indeed replaced, and mass actions now can only occur as a result of state sabotage, as happened in the Moscow metro on the day the access system premiered.

So, while the country was gradually settling into home self-arrest, Litreev’s support group worked quietly for his release and succeeded: Alexander has been freed. But the direction of undermining state drug policy has not been forgotten, and today the Tea Club movement released a very good, detailed longread about how the state fights drugs and how it should be done.

I am aware that the Libertarian Party is on strained terms with the Tea Club, but in this particular case, I would consider it a major oversight on the part of the LP not to promote this article—even if it requires pulling it onto their own site and removing mentions of the TC and the signatures of all authors who are not party members. As Ekaterina Schulmann likes to repeat, for political success, one must unite around common interests, not common sympathies. So please, help your editorial board make the right decision.

It would also be great if Egor Zhukov forwarded the article to his recent interlocutor, Evgeny Roizman. In my February post, I naively stated that even within his cannibalistic logic, a drug user is not a criminal. Not by a long shot. On the air of Zhukov’s program “Conditionally Yours”, Roizman claimed exactly the opposite. He also indicated that he was completely unaware of the Portuguese experience—which the article describes.

Thanks to the coronavirus, another promising direction for pressuring the state has emerged. One can demand the full or partial repeal of Article 228, and one can also demand amnesty for everyone imprisoned under this article due to the threatening epidemic situation. When officials have “yes” and “no” options, it is easier for them to refuse. When there is a choice between repealing the article and granting amnesty to those imprisoned under it, the chance of amnesty increases sharply. Immediately following amnesty, one can insist on a moratorium—what is the point of releasing a bunch of people from prisons only to start filling the vacant spots under the same article. And from a moratorium, it is a short step to repeal. But even if repeal doesn’t happen, it’s not that scary—we have already lived for many years in a regime of moratorium on the application of the death penalty.

Litres. What to do.

The facts. Alexander Litreev (author of the Krasnaya Knopka app, the Connecto-VPN service, the Russian Elephant project, the Cybersecurity & Co channel, and so on) stopped by Yekaterinburg for a day before speaking at a conference in St. Petersburg to meet up with a girl—and was picked up by the cops with two MDMA pills. Subsequently, he was sent to a remand prison for two months, and if the pre-trial detention period is not extended, the trial will be on April 22, where he faces up to three years.

Currently, the Tea Club, of which Alexander was a member, is raising money for a lawyer; Navalny, for some reason and without looking into the details, is blaming the girl for everything, who, according to the assurances of Alexander’s comrades, is indeed not involved—in short, everyone is heatedly discussing what happened, but as if it were a mundane story, like the one that happened to Associate Professor Sokolov. And there are also comments to the effect that he found a terrible place to buy substances—in Roizman’s city (which is characteristic, as no one mentions the current head of Yekaterinburg, who would even be interested in him).

It seems to me that everyone is fighting the wrong battle here. Since everyone is sure that this is political persecution, this should be used, and the public reaction should also be extremely politicized. Not “freedom for Alexander Litreev!”, but “down with Article 228!”

I believe that for the Tea Club, for instance, it would be a matter of honor now to announce a rally in Yekaterinburg for the repeal of Article 228 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and, accordingly, for the complete decriminalization of psychoactive substances. Yes, specifically in Roizman’s stronghold. And if the rally, God forbid, is not approved, then shame the shitty Roizman with everything we’ve got, as if he personally killed the rally and stuffed the pills into Litreev’s sock. Let him use all his influence to get it approved. Let that scoundrel speak at this rally himself and demand that they leave at least the users alone, because a user is not a criminal even in his cannibalistic logic.

Several hundred thousand people are in prison in Russia under this damn article, and it is unknown how many more got off with suspended sentences, fines, or bribed the cops on the spot. The world is moving toward the decriminalization of substances. A state where the same action is completely legal in one jurisdiction and seriously punished in another is normal when jurisdictions are contractual. But until that is the case, we can and must change the status quo toward less cannibalistic norms.

For my part, I am ready to donate to hold the rally and promote this campaign in every way. I urge everyone who believes that Article 228 should be destroyed to distribute this text and join this call. Rallies in other cities will also be useful, but we’ll see how things play out.

It is important now not to waste time before this news hook is replaced by something else. The authorities seriously expose themselves every time they try to apply general criminal articles to political activists. The best way to react is the destruction of the articles themselves.

Is it permissible to cover others’ treasures?

Look, check this out. I have a friend who works as an admin (sort of) in a restaurant. She’s a seasoned user herself. People are constantly leaving “stashes” there, and being experienced, she naturally spots them and takes them for herself. Then the guys show up and get disappointed.

goldstein

“Zakladki” (dead drops) are a genius technology for creating a logical break in trade and logistics chains when acquiring prohibited goods. Anya packages Boris’s goods and hides them wherever she deems appropriate, receiving a reward from Boris for every hidden stash. Vera transfers bitcoins to Hydra and receives an algorithm for finding the stash. After confirming that the stash has been found, she instructs Hydra to transfer the previously deposited bitcoins to Boris. All of this is further reinforced by dispute mechanisms, reviews, penalties for Anya from Boris for poor stashes, and other ingenious mechanics.

At every stage, all participants face risks. Anya can be caught with the goods. Vera can be caught with the goods. Vera might not find the stash. An unfound stash might be relocated, or a refund might be denied, which means costs for either Boris or Vera. Finally, Boris might be an undercover officer, and his reputation will depend on how quickly Hydra bans his shop.

Naturally, because possession of a stash entails state sanctions, it is legally ownerless. Anya, Vera, and Boris will all fiercely deny any connection between themselves and a piece of substance attached with a magnet under a table, and will disclaim any ownership rights to it—if asked by the state, which is formally the guarantor of private property rights on its territory. Dasha, who finds someone else’s stash, will deny her ownership rights to it no less fiercely. She was simply cleaning her assigned area, found some junk, has no idea what it is, mechanically put it in her pocket, and forgot to throw it in the trash.

Nevertheless, Anya, Boris, Vera, and Hydra sincerely and with full justification hate Dasha, and all the more so the more systematic her activity is: she increases costs across the entire chain, thereby contributing to higher prices for an already expensive product. If Vera or Anya catches Dasha, they will not doubt for a moment their right to use violence against her.

Such, in short, are the customs of this very peculiar market, where everyone proudly bears their own risks, yet everyone, guided by their own selfish interests, does everything to ensure the market continues its uninterrupted operation, multiplying the wealth of all its participants. Even Dasha.

After all, Dasha also has her boss, Fyodor Ovchinnikov. He is not involved at all; he sells people delicious pizza. And by clearing the pizzeria’s territory of dangerous stashes, Dasha helps reduce his risks. If Dasha reported this to him, he would say thank you. But in this system, all chains of cause and effect are broken, so Fyodor will never know what he owes to his brave admin.

P.S. Usually, I use an English sequence of character names to describe such mechanisms, but “zakladki” is a purely Russian technology, so today I have every reason to show some patriotism.

Help Dasha find the stash