Skip to main content

How to end the war on drugs?

Ezra Klein asks a question:
The Global Commission on Drug Policy recently reported back. What it said was what most everyone who's looked into this issue already knew: "The global war on drugs has failed, with devastating consequences for individuals and societies around the world." A new approach, one based more on realistic interventions than martial metaphors, is needed.

The news, however, was who was saying this: Former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker. Former secretary of state George P. Schultz. Former president of Brazil Fernando Henrique Cardozo. Former secretary-general of the United Nations Kofi Annan. Former president of Switzerland Ruth Dreifuss. And many more important "formers."

So here's my question: What alignment of political forces and events would be needed for America to seriously rethink its drug laws? Would it have to begin in the states? Is it something a law-and-order Republican needs to do?
The last few years has seen a slow fruition of years of work from the drug policy reform community.  A batch of organizations and individuals, from SSDP to NORML to Erowid, from Gary Johnson to Bill Maher to Pete Guither, have brought the issue onto the national radar.  Still, I see a few big realignments that need to happen or progress before anything besides marijuana can be addressed intelligently.

1) Drug policy reform must be anointed with Seriousness.  One of the biggest obstacles here is the media's usual portrayal of reformers as wild-eyed DFHs or drug-addled monsters.  As Jay Rosen has said, "the power to place certain people, causes and ideas within the deviant sphere is one of the most ideological things journalists ever do."  This is partially the fault of irresponsible fools like Timothy Leary, and as the memories and fears of the sixties fade, the effectiveness of the "soft on drugs" charge will slowly fade.

This realignment is starting to happen, particularly with the rise of fine new media organizations like TPM.  Reports like the one from the Global Commission on Drug Policy, and pressure from groups like SSDP, are key to keeping this trend going and taking some of the air out of the "tough on drugs" stance.

2) Various middle-income and poor countries that are being devastated by anti-drug policies must assert their views and be taken seriously.  Places like Columbia, Nicaragua, and Mexico have serious and continuing problems because of the massive amounts of money to be made creating drugs to be sold on the US market, and the US's insistence on using chemical defoliants to try and poison the drug fields.  Moreover, those same countries are often stuck with obnoxious treaties on things like coca leaf that were stuffed down their throats years ago by the US.  Here again, there are some positive things happening; Evo Morales' crusade against anti-coca trade agreements is a good example.

3) Drugs, particularly "hard" ones, must be reconsidered.  The popular image of cocaine, heroin and meth is one mostly taken from drug memoirs.  This says that they are staggeringly dangerous substances where one try leads nearly inevitably to a life of crime and irreversible brain damage.  This is simply not true.  Take this review article about cocaine:
After a decade when cocaine use was reported to be rampant and uncontrollable for a sizable group of Americans, the 1990 National Household Survey of Drug Abuse (NHSDA) found that 11.5 percent of Americans reported ever using cocaine, 3 percent used cocaine within the past year, and 0.9 percent used in the last month (NIDA, 1991; see Harrison, 1994). Of current users (those who have used the drug in the last year), a third used the drug 12 or more times a year, and 10 percent used cocaine once a week or more. These results replicate another, earlier study:
Cocaine use appears to be experimental in nature and to involve few experiences for a substantial portion of those who report any lifetime experience with the drug. One-half (53%) of the male users and two-thirds (67 %) of the female users have used cocaine less than 10 times in their lives; 34% and 28 %, respectively, have used 10 to 99 times, 9% and 3% have used 100 to 999 times, 3% and 2% have used 1,000 or more times. (Kandel, Murphy, & Karus, 1985)
A Canadian survey found 5 percent of current users used monthly or more often (Adlaf, Smart, & Canale, 1991). But monthly and weekly use are far from addiction, and only 10-25 percent of regular users resemble clinical addicts, or about 1-2 percent of all current users (Erickson & Alexander, 1989).
To be sure, hard drugs are not to be trifled with.  But the reality of drug use needs to be part of any reasonable policy calculation—and the common view of "drugs" as substances of distilled evil is a big part of propping up the drug war architecture.  At the very least, drugs like LSD and marijuana must be untangled from their association with heroin and meth in federal law.  Psychedelics, in particular, are completely unsuited to their current designation under the Controlled Substances Act.  (The strangling of psychedelics research for more than forty years, only now being haltingly reversed, is a big scientific tragedy.)

As to Ezra's final questions: I'm somewhat skeptical that reform could start in the states.  Steps toward even marijuana reform are now being met with federal SWAT teams and legal threats (by an alleged Democrat!).  Absent at least federal nonintervention, I don't see serious reform happening.

There could be a Nixon-in-China effect for some conservative Republican who decided to tackle drug policy reform, but the idea of someone making it through the Tea Party meat grinder with such a policy beggars belief.  Gary Johnson and Ron Paul will never win the nomination because they are just such supporters.  Believe me, I would be the first to cheer if Johnson was the nominee, but I don't see it happening.

Comments

  1. Interesting, Ryan. I have 2 questions, and I apologize for my ignorance. What is a DHF? What is a middle income country? Thanks, B

    ReplyDelete
  2. Oops, sorry. Make that What is a DFH? B

    ReplyDelete
  3. A DFH is a Dirty Fucking Hippy, which fits nicely with the point Ryan was making.

    Ryan can chime in with his definition of "middle-income country," but I'm assuming he means the countries that are not quite fully developed (i.e. up to par with Japan/US/western Europe/S. Korea etc) but don't live in abject poverty (like most of sub-Saharan Africa) either. I would imagine countries like Mexico, Brazil, Indonesia fit into this category.

    That's just my guess though - I'll let Ryan chime in so he can define his own term.
    -Dan

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Did Reality Winner Leak to the Intercept?

So Reality Winner, former NSA contractor, is in federal prison for leaking classified information — for five years and three months, the longest sentence of any whistleblower in history. She gave documents on how Russia had attempted to hack vendors of election machinery and software to The Intercept , which completely bungled basic security procedures (according to a recent New York Times piece from Ben Smith, the main fault lay with Matthew Cole and Richard Esposito ), leading to her capture within hours. Winner recently contracted COVID-19 in prison, and is reportedly suffering some lingering aftereffects. Glenn Greenwald has been furiously denying that he had anything at all to do with the Winner clusterfuck, and I recently got in an argument with him about it on Twitter. I read a New York story about Winner, which clearly implies that she was listening to the Intercepted podcast of March 22, 2017 , where Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill expressed skepticism about Russia actually b

The Basic Instinct of Socialism

This year I finally decided to stop beating around the bush and start calling myself a democratic socialist. I think the reason for the long hesitation is the very long record of horrifying atrocities carried out by self-described socialist countries. Of course, there is no social system that doesn't have a long, bloody rap sheet, capitalism very much included . But I've never described myself as a capitalist either, and the whole point of socialism is that it's supposed to be better than that. So of course I cannot be a tankie — Stalin and Mao were evil, terrible butchers, some of the worst people who ever lived. There are two basic lessons to be learned from the failures of Soviet and Chinese Communism, I think. One is that Marxism-Leninism is not a just or workable system. One cannot simply skip over capitalist development, and any socialist project must be democratic and preserve basic liberal freedoms. The second, perhaps more profound lesson, is that there is no s

Varanus albigularis albigularis

That is the Latin name for the white-throated monitor lizard , a large reptile native to southern Africa that can grow up to two meters long (see pictures of one at the Oakland Zoo here ). In Setswana, it's called a "gopane." I saw one of these in my village yesterday on the way back from my run. Some kids from school found it in the riverbed and tortured it to death, stabbing out its eyes, cutting off its tail, and gutting it which finally killed it. It seemed to be a female as there were a bunch of round white things I can only imagine were eggs amongst the guts. I only arrived after it was already dead, but they described what had happened with much hilarity and re-enactment. When I asked why they killed it, they said it was because it would eat their chickens and eggs, which is probably true, and because it sucks blood from people, which is completely ridiculous. It might bite a person, but not unless threatened. It seems roughly the same as killing wolves that