The War On Drugs

[poliphilo]

The war on drugs is stupid.  Mainly because it's a war on human nature. The need to get out of one's skull is a fundamental  human need- only a little less fundamental than the need for sex. Like all great Puritan enterprises- like Prohibition for instance- ithe war on drugs was doomed from the start.

By criminalising drugs we criminalise millions of overwise law-abiding citizens- and give thousands of not-so-law-abiding citizens a vast international business to get stuck into. Worse than that, we criminalise the economies of entire nations- eg Colombia and Afghanistan. 

Has the war on drugs achieved anything? Not that I can see. If anything it's been counterproductive. Our society is awash with the damn things. 

I'd legalise everything. Yes, I know drugs are dangerous. So is whiskey.   And, yes- OK- I also know this is pie-in-the-sky talk and we've got ourselves into a position where what I'm advocating is politically unthinkable so I might as well shut up.

But it's not as though drugs have always been criminalised. The war on drugs is a 20th century lunacy. It's akin to all those other 20th century lunacies- like facism and communism- that tried to change the human animal into something it isn't by  action of the state. The Victorians were up to their eyeballs in laudanum and it didn't stop them running an empire and writing great novels. 

In the past people were kept in line by the attitude of their peers.  Just because it was legal didn't mean everybody was doing it.  There was a stigma. Dr Watson didn't think it was clever of Holmes to mainline cocaine.  But at least addicts were pitied not banged up. 

I don't like drugs. I prefer to keep my head clear. For the record I've smoked dope and it made me cough and I've dropped acid and it made things go all funny. 

On the other hand if it hadn't been for the drugs Coleridge wouldn't have written Kubla Khan and Lennon wouldn't have written I Am The Walrus and Philip K Dick wouldn't have written anything.  Drugs do interesting things to the mind. It's sort of accepted that it's OK for artists and musicians to take drugs because it can be filed under research. It's OK for tribal shamans too. 

I'm not saying we should all take drugs. I'm saying we should all have the right to take drugs if we want to. Drug taking is a matter of personal morality. And for the State to intervene in matters of personal morality is despotic and futile.

Comments

[frumiousb.livejournal.com]

The Victorians were up to their eyeballs in laudanum and it didn't stop them running an empire and writing great novels.

Just to play devil's advocate, how much of this was because drugs were only available to either elites or criminals?

I'm not okay with the war on drugs, find it counterproductive and kind of silly. But on the other hand, I'm not sure about how I would feel about a "right to take drugs" in a broader sense. I'm sure that this makes me a bad libertarian, but then I knew that. It goes beyond personal morality if you have a substance so addictive that it impacts families, or causes people to steal to support their habits. Then it is a larger issue, and only government is positioned to address the larger issues.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

In the 19th century drugs that are now illegal were available to anyone who could afford them. Laudanum- for instance- which is opium dissolved in wine- was sold as a medicine. Unless I'm very much mistaken Queen Victoria herself had a considerable laudanum habit.

We already tolerate alcohol and tobacco- both of which are addictive, dangerous to health and the first of which causes violent and anti-social behaviour in some people. I agree there's a problem with all addictive substances, but making them illegal doesn't make the problem go away. Prohibition is the perfect model. It didn't get rid of booze, merely created a situation in which organised criminality flourished and grew very rich and powerful.

[frumiousb.livejournal.com]

I completely agree with your point about prohibition, just saying that I think that it isn't true that it is purely a matter of personal morality.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

No you're right. I'm being simplistic there. Society is concerned and needs to have checks and balances in place. I think drugs should be controlled and policed the way alcohol is.