The United States Government has no legitimate role in reducing the cultivation and production of illegal drugs in other countries, or in the dictation of drug policy to other governments.-
When the US regains some credibility as a world leader, the opinions of our officials might be taken seriously.-
After eight years of misdirected aggression and war crimes abroad, an unprecedented orgy of corruption, incompetence, greed and looting, against a background of utter disdain for individual liberties at home, the US government is not in a position to point the finger at anyone. However America may be able to assist with the existing movement away from hysteria and ignorance and towards rational and cost-effective drug policies.
The implosion of the US economy may superficially be attributed to "bubbles," and other such nonsense. However calmer minds on both the left and right saw the present crisis coming a long time ago. The money is gone, looted and flushed down a toilet by the Bush administration and its corporate sponsors, and the idea that the United States can act unilaterally as a global police agency, or even domestically as a public babysitter is obsolete.
The domestic policy that has done the most damage economically and socially to the United States, as well as to citizens of drug producing nations, is the "War on Drugs." Its main result, The Prison-Industrial Complex in America is an unqualified crime against humanity. The time for damage control is upon us, and the first order of business is harm reduction.
FOUR LAME ARGUMENTS
There is a predictable group of standard arguments against the repeal of drug prohibition. They are worthy of examination, but none of them stand up to reason and reality. Here are four of them:
1. "Drugs are really, really bad."
Of course "hard drugs" are measurably harmful, or fatal to large numbers of people worldwide. Drugs of abuse and addiction are a major threat to public health globally, and it is possible to rationally advocate the complete repeal of drug prohibition on a global scale while recognizing this fact.- The reality is that as long as a public health issue remains driven underground, and entire populations are criminalized by religiously and racially based policies, the ability of qualified personnel to address the problem is impeded to the point virtual elimination.
2. "We have to protect the children."
Drugs and alcohol are not appropriate playthings for persons still in their formative years, yet they seem to get a hold of them anyway. However, the "crack store on the playground" will not materialize upon legalization. When was the last time you saw a liquor store owner giving away free samples to school children? How many children have been wounded or killed by stray bullets from gunfights between liquor company executives since the end of alcohol prohibition? And finally, when did it become the state's responsibility to teach the values and survival skills that you want your children to enter adulthood with?
3.- "Terrorists Deal Drugs"
This is also very true, and hard drugs are an ideal hard currency for the international illegal arms trade. The value of drugs to terrorists is another direct result of prohibition and the obscene profits it makes possible. Vigorous drug enforcement tends to drive independents and amateurs out of the business, and harsher penalties for traffickers tend to increase the use of lethal force in the drug trade. Temporary reductions of production and restrictions on traffic cause existing inventories to increase in value, something the Taliban was well aware of.
Legalization would cause such a drastic drop in the cash value of existing inventories that it would be a disaster for the drug lords, and for the terrorists who depend on drug sales to finance their operations.
4. "We Can Reduce Demand by Punishing Drug Users"
This approach has not worked, unless creating a level of incarceration that surpasses Stalin's Gulag was the goal, in which case it was a phenomenal success. There are so many risks involved in the use of hard drugs, most of which stem from their illegality, that incarceration loses credibility as a threat. Someone who has already become a hate-object - vilified, hunted, pitied, and given uninvited "help," facing potentially lethal situations on a daily basis - has little to lose.-
