That article was a clusterfuck of a critique that seemed to be based on the premise that “police officers” and “soldiers” are not subsets of “people.”
It also struck me as naive about the nature of the dynamics of political power, and how to change things that those who hold power may not want changed, or in some cases are violently opposed to being changed. It strikes me as odd that the author is so critical of introducing a powerful empathogen into the military and law enforcement considering that the primary criticism of the military and police is that they seem to have an institutional lack of empathy for their fellow humans. That’s something that can only be changed by changing the humans that lead and administer the institution.
It would have been nice to have the author acknowledge that the rising level of public acceptance psychedelics currently enjoy is at least partly due to the efforts of activist groups like MAPS that have had to walk a very fine line between pushing for change and causing a reactionary backlash against a class of drugs that is so poorly understood by the majority of the public that many still consider them “evil” or that they’ll melt people’s brains or drive them insane or whatever. Witch hunts are still a thing, after all. It’s only prudent to avoid antagonizing government institutions with the hardware and the mandate to destroy any “problematic” research and lock anyone involved in cages.
It almost sounds like the author thinks the “counter” culture (whatever the hell THAT is) should circle its proverbial in-group wagons to the exclusion of all groups deemed “oppressive” in society, which sounds to me like a great way to ensure that its goals will never be achieved as the oppressors would then have no incentive to tolerate advocacy for changing the status quo, unlike now when soldiers and cops are beginning to see how the status quo denies them a very effective form of health care for certain difficult conditions that are relatively common among them.
Quoting the article: “Nevertheless, such critics must reconcile the simple reality that organizations cannot meaningfully fight trauma while providing material aid to those causing trauma on a global scale.”
So his approach is basically that if you put on a uniform, you’re on your own as far as he’s concerned. That does not strike me as any more compassionate or empathetic than the attitudes he is criticizing. Perhaps he should undergo some MDMA-assisted therapy?
It's also more than a little ironic that without the CIA's assistance and funding we'd be decades behind where we are now with regards to the use and common perceptions of psychedelics. I guess the honorable thing to do would be to get rid of all our LSD and fungi (among other things) since the CIA was directly involved in bringing them to popular awareness in Western culture.