內文摘錄：大麻能以十分之一的成本，取代非常多的天然材料。同樣地，那些能帶來經濟實惠的電動汽車、明智的健康照顧體系、每個家庭都能使用的太陽能供熱和太陽能電力，你們遲遲不去大量推動生產。多年來，你們早就有所需的資源和科技來生產和推動這些東西....為什麼你們不去做呢？參閱本篇：
聽神談【正視：大部分法令仍在保護最有權勢者的利益】
你們的法律反映出的是：權勢在掌控社會。社會大部分情況都是如此。
尼爾：那麼，解決的辦法是什麼？
法律和限制，越少越好。
大麻之所以不合法，只是表面上為了健康的理由。實情則是，大麻並不比菸草和酒精更有害健康，而後面兩者卻受到法律的保障。為什麼大麻不被允許呢？因為如果讓它生長，則全世界半數的棉花農、尼龍和人造絲製造業者以及木材業者，都會歇業倒閉。
大麻正是是你們星球上最有用、最強、最壯、最耐用的材料之一。你們製造不出比它更好的衣料，更結實的繩材，更容易收成的紙漿材料。你們每年砍幾百萬棵樹來做紙漿，好讓你們在報紙上讀到全球的森林是如何被摧折。大麻可以供應你們數百萬份的報紙，而不用砍一棵樹。確實，大麻能以十分之一(1/10)的成本取代非常多的天然材料(Indeed, it could substitute for so many resource materials, at one-tenth cost.)。
這才是關鍵。如果這神奇的植物被允許種植——順便提到，大麻也有非凡的藥物性能——則有些人會喪失金錢利益。而這就是為何大麻在你們國家是非法的原因！
也是同樣的原因，那些能帶來經濟實惠的電動汽車、明智的健康照顧體系、每個家庭都使用太陽能供熱和太陽能電力，你們遲遲不去大量推動生產。
多年來，你們早就有所需的資源和科技來生產這些東西。然而，為什麼你們不去做呢？去看看如果你們做了，誰會喪失金錢利益，你們就會找到答案。
這是你們如此自傲的偉大社會嗎？你們的「偉大社會」必需慢吞吞地進行、必需被踢、必須有人怒吼，才會考慮公共福利。每當有人提及公共福利或集體利益時，人人都叫喊是「共產主義」！在你們的社會，如果為眾人提供福利而沒有對某人獲得重大利益的事，往往都會石沉大海。
不僅你們國家(美國)如此，全世界都一樣。因此，人類所面臨的基本問題是：個人的利益(self-interest)是否可以被最佳的利益(best interests)——公眾的利益(common interest)——取代？如果可以，要如何取代？
在美國，你們試圖透過法律來提供最佳利益——公眾的利益。但你們失敗得很慘。你們的國家是全球最富裕、最強盛的國家，而你們的嬰兒死亡率卻名列世界前茅。為什麼？因為窮人付不起產前和產後的照顧——而你們的社會卻是因為唯利是圖。我舉這個例子只是一個你們可悲的失敗。你們國家比大部分工業化國家的嬰兒死亡率高的這項事實，應當讓你們憂心才對。但並非如此。這大大的說明了你們社會所優先關注的為何。其他的國家供養病患、貧窮、老年和體弱的人。你們卻供養有錢有勢、有地位的人。百分之八十五的美國退休人士過著貧窮的生活。許多這些年長的美國人和大部分的低收入戶，都以當地醫院的急診室為他們的「家庭醫生」，在極為悲慘的環境下尋求醫療，而實際上完全得不到預防性的醫療照顧。
你看懂了嗎，在沒什麼錢可花的人身上是無利可圖的……他們的效益已經被耗盡了……
而這就是你們的偉大社會嗎？
摘自《與神對話 II》第10章
Your laws, therefore, do not reflect what your society thinks of itself, and wishes to be—your laws reflect where the power is.
Neale:Then what is the solution?
To have as few laws—which are really limits—as possible.
The reason the first weed is outlawed is only ostensibly about health. The truth is, the first weed is no more addictive and no more a health risk than cigarettes or alcohol, both of which are protected by the law. Why is it then not allowed? Because if it were grown, half the cotton growers, nylon and rayon manufacturers, and timber products people in the world would go out of business.
Hemp happens to be one of the most useful, strongest, toughest, longest-lasting materials on your planet. You cannot produce a better fiber for clothes, a stronger substance for ropes, an easier-to-grow-and-harvest source for pulp. You cut down hundreds of thousands of trees per year to give yourself Sunday papers, so that you can read about the decimation of the world's forests. Hemp could provide you with millions of Sunday papers without cutting down one tree. Indeed, it could substitute for so many resource materials, at one-tenth the cost.
And that is the catch. Somebody loses money if this miraculous plant—which also has extraordinary medicinal properties, incidentally—is allowed to be grown. And that is why marijuana is illegal in your country.
It is the same reason you have taken so long to mass produce electric cars, provide affordable, sensible health care, or use solar heat and solar power in every home.
You've had the wherewithal and the technology to produce all of these things for years. Why, then, do you not have them? Look to see who would lose money if you did. There you will find your answer.
This is the Great Society of which you are so proud? Your "great society" has to be dragged, kicking and screaming, to consider the common good. Whenever common good or collective good is mentioned, everyone yells "communism!" In your society, if providing for the good of the many does not produce a huge profit for someone, the good of the many is more often than not ignored.
This is true not only in your country, but also around the world. The basic question facing humankind, therefore, is: Can self-interest ever be replaced by the best interests, the common interest, of humankind? If so, how?
In the United States you have tried to provide for the common interest, the best interest, through laws. You have failed miserably. Your nation is the richest, most powerful on the Earth, and it has one of the highest infant mortality rates. Why? Because poor people cannot afford quality prenatal and postnatal care—and your society is profit driven. I cite this as just one example of your miserable failure. The fact that your babies are dying at a higher rate than most other industrialized nations in the world should bother you. It does not. That says volumes about where your priorities are as a society. Other countries provide for the sick and needy, the elderly and infirm. You provide for the rich and wealthy, the influential and the well-placed. Eighty-five percent of retired Americans live in poverty. Many of these older Americans, and most people on low income, use the local hospital emergency room as their "family doctor," seeking medical treatment under only the most dire of circumstances, and receiving virtually no preventive health maintenance care at all.
There's no profit, you see, in people who have little to spend… they've worn out their usefulness... And this is your great society—
