It would be interesting to see if microdosing LSD would lead to any ethical objections to war or violence on the part of the Marines.
I've read that before it was made illegal LSD was the most studied pharmaceutical compound in the world, with literally thousands of papers written on it.
There were clearly medical uses, and it was being used medically. Whether the research was "conclusive" is a matter of opinion.
Pretty much all of the psychedelic researchers I've read or heard interviews with (which is a lot) were completely convinced of its effectiveness.
But that didn't matter to the administrators and lawmakers, who were much more interested in the headlines than the science.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/neurophilosophy/2014/sep...
This was the end of 50s early 60s, seems we still did stuff like lobotomies. Idk if I can blame law makers for not taking psychiatry seriously at the time.
LSD was made illegal in 1968, so actually it was the late 60's (right at the peak of social unrest and reactionary backlash in the US), and they took psychiatry very seriously then, but they didn't ban lobotomies, just LSD.
It was pretty clearly a moral panic. Had absolutely nothing to do with science.
> I'm pretty sure the tendency for LSD users to ethically object to war or other offensive violence is exactly why the US decided it should be treated as more dangerous than crystal meth
The point I was trying to make
> It was pretty clearly a moral panic. Had absolutely nothing to do with science.
It has nothing to with being anti war, lawmakers panicked when it became a recreational drug and didn't know what to do.
Also california and nevada made lsd illegal in 1966
So still the late 60's, not "the end of 50s early 60s".
"It has nothing to with being anti war, lawmakers panicked when it became a recreational drug and didn't know what to do"
It was a recreational drug long before it was made illegal, and the illegality had nothing to do with it being a recreational drug, but rather had to do with panic over sensationalized media stories about LSD's involvement in things like the Manson murders, and Art Linkletter's daughter committing suicide.
LSD's role is Linkletter's daughter's suicide is highly questionable, as are all the urban legends at the time of people frying their eyes out by staring at the sun under the influence of LSD, or their chromosomes breaking because of LSD, etc. Yet sensational media coverage like this, along with a panic over "look what all these crazy kids are doing! They're having orgies and frying their brains on LSD!!!", combined with LSD's association with the anti-war movement and the counterculture (including Leary very publicly telling kids to "drop out", LSD being associated with "free love", etc), which shocked and outraged the very conservative powers that be is absolutely what led to it being banned.
LSD use was basically seen as a threat to established social order.
Why would crack be legal If cocaine was banned 60 years earlier?
https://www.npr.org/2013/02/14/171822608/the-drug-laws-that-...
There were, to my knowledge, no scientific studies of this relationship, and anyway it was confounded by the US being in a hugely unpopular war, with the Civil Rights movement making non-violence a popular position among its supporters, and by the fact that there was a draft. Now there's no draft, no war, an all-volunteer military.
Also, back then LSD tended to be used in way higher doses. So even if there was a relationship between large-dose LSD use and anti-violence or anti-war views, that doesn't mean that there'd be a similar connection when microdosing LSD.
Something else to consider is that while in the popular consciousness, LSD is associated with hippies and peacenicks, and psychedelics are also associated with peaceful indigenous peoples around the world, there have been some societies (like the Jivaro) which both used psychedelics and were extremely warlike and violent.
So the connection between psychedelics and anti-violent/anti-war views is far from established. That's why it'd make for a very interesting study.
I agree it's absurd that it's illegal (or that any drug is illegal, but it's especially absurd that LSD is considered more dangerous than amphetamine, as you say), but I'm skeptical both of the motive you state (that the US government banned it because they feared it'd make more people opposed to the war) and that it necessarily correlates much with generating anti-war sentiment in people who otherwise didn't have any.
I think the effects are highly dependent on the environment, the intentions, and existing predisposition of the user and the people around them. For example, it's been reported that viking berserkers used to take psychedelic mushrooms before entering battle, because the mushrooms would help induce the berserk state.