WAR ON DRUGS - A WAR ON LIBERTY

Demonizing of Private Pot Use Shows Ugly Side of American Conservatism

The late '60s and early '70s were my graduate school days, at UC Santa
Barbara, and there was then plenty of pot smoking going on. Some of it
was reckless, just as alcohol consumption or gambling or other
peaceful conduct can be quite reckless, but most of it was merely a
bit mind-numbing and consciousness-altering. Many, many young people
got high, yet few if any suffered greatly, certainly not by moving on
to hard drugs. At least no more so than the number of moderate wine
consumers who move on to become alcoholics.

But while the United States was parading itself as the leader of the
free world during that Cold War era, it was mostly the champions of
patriotism and loyalty to the flag who insisted on making pot
consumption a crime. Their persistence led to the abomination we know
as "the war on drugs," an immensely costly and vicious undertaking by
government to punish people engaged in the trade and consumption of a
substance that does not cause anyone to do anything criminal (even if
it does lead some people to become lethargic and temporarily
confused). The policy also resulted in making the U.S. a massive home
to prisoners who have violated no one's rights at all.

Nothing above is meant to suggest that consuming pot is OK. It is very
risky to any user, and extremecaution needs to be exercised with it,
just as with alcohol. Indeed, abstinence is probably best, for most of
us.

But that doesn't excuse the fact that, in targeting pot, a dominant
element of American culture turned directly against the political
principles on which the country was founded. We all, individually,
have the unalienable right to our lives, liberty and pursuit of
happiness, as the founders stated.

They learned this from people like John Locke, the English political
philosopher, and from their knowledge of the history of human
community life. That history showed them that government is to be the
hired servant of people, not their ruler - ergo, the importance of
asserting those rights.

Sadly, conservatives, who pride themselves on wanting to retain the
principles on which their communities are founded, completely
jettisoned their commitment to honor this country's most important
tradition and switched, instead, to embracing the statist conservatism
of Europe and the rest of the world.

Of course, deciding which of several competing traditions to embrace
is a continuing problem. So this switch was not all that surprising -
just look at the current President Bush and his reversal of Ronald
Reagan's efforts to cut back the scope and size of government, all the
while claiming to be a conservative.

The price of the drug witch-hunt, however, is staggering. Thousands of
lives have been ruined because these conservatives - and by now others
as well - take it upon themselves to disregard the unalienable rights
of individuals and impose their will on the rest of us.

We may see a little relief from this shameful tyranny in our "free"
society. The U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether at least some
people - those who are likely to gain health benefits from consuming
marijuana - will have their right to liberty protected. If the
justices rule in favor of this, they would uphold another conservative
ideal, namely, states' rights, something that used to be partisanbut
now is embraced not just by advocates of medical marijuana use but
many environmentalists. And they would also exempt a few folks from
the tyranny of the drug war.

Yet, sadly, they would also affirm a disgraceful policy of
discrimination by continuing to classify others with a different but
equally peaceful use of pot as criminals.

The real answer is the abolition of prohibition - just as it was,
once again, with alcohol.