United Liberty
Is the Drug War Turning Inside Out?
Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:10am | posted by Jeremy Kolassa
Is the Drug War flipping inside out?
For decades, we’ve had conservatives—traditionally associated with the Republican Party and the right wing of American politics—rail against drug use and fight for a stronger Drug War that throws more people in jail, while liberals—traditionally associated with the Democrats and the left wing—did the exact opposite, arguing for legalizing drugs or at least scaling back the war. Now, this has never been a perfect analogy—Buckley himself wrote in National Review that the Drug War was stupid and could not be enforced, and many liberals in the government have done truly nothing to try and end this war, and in fact have reveled in it (see: Clinton, Bill and Obama, Barack.)
But lately, we’ve been seeing a complete switch. First, on the conservative side, we have Pat Robertson coming out against marijuana prohibition, followed by George Will’s latest columns that, while not actually arguing for legalization, is seriously questioning prohibiting hard drugs. Meanwhile, President Obama says he wants to have a “debate” about it, but says that legalization is “not the answer.” (To which I say, “Well, then what is, big guy?”)
Of course, we can rack a lot of this up to people being out of power and others being in (and needing to appease the government beasts.) But still, it seems quite baffling to me, where we have conservatives/Republicans questioning the Drug War and liberals/Democrats more or less supporting it.
What I think is happening is that the silliness of the Drug War is now out on full parade, it’s reality as a welfare program for government bureaucrats and donut-chomping police bullies (and not to mention bullet manufacturers) exposed for all to see. In this environment, anyone holding the reins of government must continue to support it, or face the wrath of police and prison guard unions.
You have to ask yourself: who would be hurt by drug legalization? Some might say “the cheeeldruun!” but that is clearly not the case. Others might say the drug cartels, and they’d be right. But the real “victims” would be law enforcement. If the government stopped drug prohibition, you would see a great deal of police funding stop, because there would be no point. The DEA would be closed down if there ever was full drug legalization, and the ATF and Border Patrol would likely have their budgets cut as well. There would also be fewer contracts to construct prisons, and the FBI would have a few taskforces shrunk.
No longer is this a conservative vs. liberal issue. It’s now a purely incumbent vs. opposition issue.
We may have gotten to a point in this mess where the politicians just don’t matter when it comes to drugs. It looks like the bureaucratic leviathan underneath them is what we need to be hacking away at. Ending public sector unions would be one good start, but we might just have to come out and say “Let’s dismantle the national security state entirely.” End DHS, end the NSA, end the ATF, end the DEA, end all that crap. Clear it out. Reboot the government. It might be our only chance to end this madness.
So, when faced with the problem of bureaucracies supporting a policy that even social conservatives are starting to question, and with 50% of the country now supporting legalizing marijuana, the only possible answer is to take on the incredibly hard task of abolishing several police and intelligence agencies and public sector unions?
How about, instead, we just continue austerity (to keep their budgets in check) and build on the trend toward decriminalization and legalization? If you want to accelerate the process, tell the as-yet-unconverted conservatives that this will *lead to* diminishing the public sector unions’ power.
Agreed. You make a good point. We will never have decriminalization or legalization in this country because power-hungry people on both sides of the law have built empires over it. No government thug or criminal is going to let money be taken out of their pocket and power out of their hands without a “tooth-and-nail” fight.
Perhaps the reluctance of liberals to embrace legalization or decriminalization is due to their trust in government and their philosophy that Mommy Government knows what’s best for you. We see that liberals are always on the side of removing choice for us, whether the issue is smoking or eating fatty foods. We are customarily treated like children who are not responsible for following our own destinies.
Furthermore, because government is seen as such a benevolent authority, liberals are incensed that individuals might ignore government’s capricious laws and do what they want to anyway. How dare they indulge in civil disobedience when all Mommy Government wants to do is protect them from themselves!
Liberals have given up on human rights and civil liberties as they apply to all of us. To a liberal, only “disadvantaged” groups (and the liberals will tell you which groups are “disadvantaged” and which aren’t) and thugs (but not their victims) are deserving of human rights and civil liberties.
One cannabis plant will produce in one year over ten pounds. One person per year might smoke under 12 oz, or one ounce a month at the cost of $400 or $5.000/year tax free. So one plant in one year can provide one persons use for over ten years.
All pot laws are to stop one person from growing one or two plants in their entire lifetime. And for that we have lost most rights, lost democracy which we can’t have when over 1/3 of your people are considered criminals just for smoking a non toxic plant which real purpose is to power our cars pollution free. Smoking pot is less then one percent of the total uses, yet it is all we talk about.
People will always smoke pot, that can not be stopped.
Free the plant and see just how much violence levels, death levels, pollution levels worldwide get lowered.
Post new comment