WHY IS IT THAT EVERY TIME the country wants to tackle some besetting problem, it “declares war” on it?
Just in the time I’ve been alive, we’ve had a War on Litter, a War on Cancer, a War on Illiteracy, a War on Drugs, and so on.
I think the appeal of using war as a metaphor can be traced to the memory our civilization has of World War II. Not the war in the sense of the actual combat experienced by the troops of all sides — anyone who was anywhere near the fighting is happy to confirm that it was not something to be nostalgic over — but more about the way the war affected the United States.
The appeal of that long-ago conflict has much more to do with the way the entire country came together — industry, finance, the scientific community, even schoolchildren — and produced from their efforts an incredible victory in three and a half years.
It is hard to overstate the scope of their accomplishment. The U.S. economy nearly doubled in output during the war. Towns across the country watched land near them cleared, colossal factories built within months as armies of workers produced astonishing quantities of materiel. American aircraft factories produced — again, in just three and a half years — a mass of warplanes equivalent to 53 current U.S. Air Forces, as many tanks as nine current U.S. Armies, and so on.
Given all this, it is natural to look back on the war as an example of what this country can accomplish when it sets its mind to it.
The problem is that WWII was a unique (please, God …) circumstance: The U.S. faced a literally existential threat from two foes that were both extremely capable and almost cartoonishly evil. We’ve not faced anything remotely similar since — and given the diversity and variety of world views within American society, I think it is unrealistic to expect WWII levels of consensus on pretty much any issue of consequence. I mean, have you watched the cable news shows?
There is one particular war metaphor that I want to talk about this week, and that is the War on Drugs, which I have come to see as not just ineffective but also deeply immoral.
According to a 2011 report from the Global Commission on Drug Policy (hardly a radical organization: it includes such luminaries as former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volker and Reagan administration Secretary of State George P. Schulz):
“The global war on drugs has failed, with devastating consequences for individuals and societies around the world. Fifty years after the initiation of the UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, and 40 years after President Nixon launched the U.S. government’s war on drugs, fundamental reforms in national and global drug control policies are urgently needed. Vast expenditures on criminalization and repressive measures directed at producers, traffickers and consumers of illegal drugs have clearly failed to effectively curtail supply or consumption. Apparent victories in eliminating one source or trafficking organization are negated almost instantly by the emergence of other sources and traffickers. Repressive efforts directed at consumers impede public health measures to reduce HIV/AIDS, overdose fatalities and other harmful consequences of drug use. Government expenditures on futile supply reduction strategies and incarceration displace more cost-effective and evidence-based investments in demand and harm reduction.”
While I don’t favor fully legalizing drugs, I think it is time to decriminalize their use. I envision this working along the lines of what Portugal did at the beginning of this century. That country changed the category of offense for possessing typical-user-scale amounts of any drug from a criminal offense to an administrative one, so rather than prison time you get the equivalent of a traffic ticket and fine, plus access to a greatly expanded drug treatment infrastructure.
I would actually take it a step further and decriminalize the manufacture of drugs.
I have a friend who lives up in Humboldt County, a major source of illicit marijuana growth and production. While he is a law-abiding citizen, the pot farming business is pervasive enough that there are growers among his acquaintances. He has told me they all oppose a Colorado-style legalization of pot because if everyone could grow it, the demand and price for their crop would drop ruinously.
I believe decriminalizing all drug manufacture would have the effect of quickly lowering the price of harder drugs, too, which would be devastating to the profits of the various drug cartels currently murdering one another in near-military numbers in various places between our southern border and South America.
The preceding would save a large amount of money — incarcerating people is expensive. I think it would be essential to commit a large portion of those savings to drug treatment programs, including residential rehab facilities.
I know from the experience of people close to me how devastating drug abuse can be to the bodies, minds and souls of addicts. But what we’ve been doing for the last 40 years has not worked, and has often made the problem worse. I think it is time to rethink our approach.
Matt Talbot is a writer and poet, as well as an old Benicia hand. He works for a tech start-up in San Francisco.
Sharing is caring!
From the article: I think the appeal of using war as a metaphor can be traced to the memory our civilization has of World War II.
I believe the metaphor goes back even further. Didn’t J. Edgar Hoover term the battle against the bootleggers as a “War on Crime”?
As to the main point: drugs. We should differentiate between manufactured/processed drugs (heroin, meth, crack) and drugs such as cannabis.
I am opposed though to legalizing pot, with government controls, as a method of increasing excise taxes to raise revenue.
If a person wants to grow pot in his backyard and light up, or share with friends, the government should have no right to stop him.
.
Interesting article – my two cents. We need to do something different. When a kid or anyone under 18 can buy marijuana easier than they can buy cigarettes something must change.
However, I have been and will continue to be against the use of any phrase using war, be it a war on drugs, war on crime or in a reference to a sporting event. These are not wars and trivialize what a war is all about.
I agree. The effort we put into many things doesn’t look anything like war. The war on drugs? What a joke. We barely even wage a small battle on that front let alone a war. Heck we barely wage battle in the wars that we fight. Our foreign policies have so crippled our military personnel in the name of political correctness and humanitarianism. War is war!
The criminalization of drug use has failed and is a disaster for users incarcerated. Drug sellers and suppliers, yes, should be prosecuted, but users need treatment.
I believe we should tax drug users in the form of higher Medicare/Medicaid taxes, higher insurance premiums, and higher local taxes. Drug users cost society a lot of money through health and sometimes criminal behavior. Tax them! They want to use, so be it, but they need to pay the price for their activities.
Our current open borders policy of this Administration also allows easy access to drugs. Solving the border issues may also help.
And, silly as it may seem, the “Just Say No” campaign actually helped. We need societal pressure placed to slow drug use.
I believe we should tax drug users in the form of higher Medicare/Medicaid taxes, higher insurance premiums, and higher local taxes. Drug users cost society a lot of money through health and sometimes criminal behavior.
We should really include users of alcohol here, as well.
More taxes on people that eat too many hamburgers
Tax people that never served in the military
Tax churches and people that believe in god.
Now that makes a lot of sense …… NOT!
“………..NOT!” LOL!
Taxing churches? = Super sensible idea.
Now there is a cash cow that could use a good milking
Think about what kind of impact that would have on society. Before welfare, the church was who took care of those that were needy. That is still a very active part of society. To begin taxing churches would only cause great harm. And you libs are supposedly the ones that are for the little guy according to your words, but not so much by your actions. Sad!
Lib, lol, maybe libertarian, I’m pro oil, pipeline, and more.. I just look at all issues on an individual basis. I’m all for churches helping the community. Eliminate my taxes and I’ll help out too.
If you donate your money to a church it is tax deductible. You should try it.
Well, maybe not all churches.. The Sunday Assembly can get a free ride. How about just tax the crap out of the Adventists and the Evangelicals?
I’d like to see church’s be required to feed and shelter the homeless in order to get tax free status . Especially the wealthy church’s
You don’t have to force them. They already do. Don’t be so big government. When people are left with less government they rise above. More government just oppresses people socially and fiscally.
JLB stated: Don’t be so big government
One question I have yet to see addressed is: Who really benefits from big government?
Not the poor, we still have poor.
Not students, education has become a joke.
Not the health care system, 0bama care is a joke, as well.
Not the auto industry, look at Detroit.
So who does benefit? Answer: Politicians and government employees.
We will never reduce the size of government until such time as big government ceases to be a benefit to the politicians.
Yes just look at how many people enter government as average income earners and leave as millionaires. Simple math really. When nothing else makes sense, follow the money. It is a clear trail.
Not the poor, we still have poor.
Not students, education has become a joke.
Not the health care system, 0bama care is a joke, as well.
Not the auto industry, look at Detroit.
All those problems would be worse without government. Call it “big” if you like, it’s just as big as it needs to be. In some cases maybe not big enough.
Also, as to Obamacare, I realize the right has a narrative they don’t want to let go of, but Obamacare is working and helping millions. It is a huge step forward for this country. Sorry to be the bearer of good news.
You should tax criminal or destructive behavior. Churches and religion is a positive. They help people and are charitable. To equate them to drug users is a shame … No, pathetic.
Unfortunately that is just the mindset of the radical left as well represented on this forum. They are shameful, pathetic and can’t formulate and original thought.
JLB stated:They are shameful, pathetic and can’t formulate and original thought.
The primary reason hateful people feel so free to attack Christians while spouting their ignorance is that Christians are not running around sawing off heads with pocket knives or blowing up “just folks” in a Jewish deli.
These same people will then declare any comments against Islamic terrorism as bigoted ‘hate speech
I see much more of the radical right represented on this forum. Maybe you object to the term radical — but all of the right is radical, extreme and out of the mainstream these days. My conservative father is rolling in his grave. Reagan probably is, too.
Apparently you are not paying attention. There is a lot of evidence to suggest you are flat out wrong. Take for one, the fact that we have taken back the house. Next we took back the senate. America is pushing back on much of the lefts policies. Next we will take back the POTUS. You will really be bummed then. Bummer your views are not well represented in America. Maybe you are the extremist.
You will really be bummed out by 12-16 years of “leftist” POTUS leadership, despite it immeasurably helping this country.
Religion is fine, as long as they stop trying to indoctrinate with all the talking dragon and cloud city stories. Oh, and the intolerance and bigotry kind of sucks. Also, Christian rock; that has got to be one of the biggest crimes against humanity. Oh, and the anti science thing? Talk about destructive.
Also, taxing criminal behavior? I really hope that is not what you intended to say. Prison time might actually be better.
“Religion is positive”. Which one?
I don’t put religion and spirituality in the same category. Religion is an organization. Spirituality is what is in you and in others. You can be a “religious pot smoker”, which I think some on here are but that doesn’t make you spiritual. Although in a high state, some may be thinking they are having a spiritual experience, but I digress.
There are a lot of things that are stated to being done in the name of one religion or another, but Christians cutting off people’s heads because they don’t agree with their extremism isn’t one of them. If people followed Christ’s teaching, no harm would come to others. So TP what is so wrong with that?
I find it sad that there are those that cannot differentiate between good and bad w/o the teachings of Christ. Be responsible for yourself. Spirituality has nothing to do with it. All religions are cut from the same cloth. Ironically, they are all morphine for the masses.
Death is going to really suck for you!
Wishful thinking on your part, for sure. Such a good Christian.
Wrong again Thomas. My wish is exactly the opposite but I can not remove the blinders from your eyes. Only you can do that. My wish would be that you would come to a point of knowledge and understanding. You can lead a horse to water but you can not make them drink. Your ongoing commentaries convince me that you are set in your ways and not open change. That is the reason why death is going to suck for you. By your own choosing. My wish would seriously and sincerely be otherwise.
Honesty, I could not care less whether you want to believe in fairy tales. If that is the what gives you solace, good for you. Just spare me the self righteous vagaries, and asinine conjecture.
stings doesn’t it!
Were you really that butt-hurt by me opining that churches should pay taxes? Talk about thin- skinned!
You may some how think that you commentary is powerful but don’t get your hopes up. I don’t get butt hurt. I could care less what you think. Even less when you say stupid things. It was clearly not a well thought out comment on your part. I was trying to help you clarify your thinking with some useful information. Sorry you missed it.
“”It was clearly not a well thought out comment””
Then the score is now 50 to 1. You have the clear lead.
Death really sucks for everybody
Drug buyers and sellers already pay a special tax besides sales tax at the local med marijuana stores.
Marijuana should be fully legal in the USA. Also, drug testing for pot should be limited to impairment testing, not the current type of testing used. Colorado has lowered crime, lowered roadway deaths and greatly increased tax income. If pot smokers were all lazy, why do we need drug testing at work? The vast majority of smokers work for a living.
Chris young stated: Colorado has lowered crime, lowered roadway deaths.
Yes, when you make something legal which was previously illegal, crime by definition will go down.
As to deaths being lowered, do you have a source to support that statement? Logically, one would expect the opposite, as these sources attest :
NBC News: “As medical marijuana sales expanded into 20 states, legal weed was detected in the bodies of dead drivers three times more often during 2010 when compared to those who died behind the wheel in 1999, according to a new study from Columbia University published in the American Journal of Epidemiology.”
Source: http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/pot-fuels-surge-drugged-driving-deaths-n22991
From Medical Press: The researchers found that fatal motor vehicle crashes in Colorado involving at least one driver who tested positive for marijuana accounted for 4.5 percent in the first six months of 1994; this percentage increased to 10 percent in the last six months of 2011. They reported that Colorado underwent a significant increase in the proportion of drivers in a fatal motor vehicle crash who were marijuana-positive after the commercialization of medical marijuana in the middle of 2009.
Source: http://medicalxpress.com/news/2014-05-marijuana-involved-fatal-accidents-colorado.html
As for me personally, I think the Medical Marijuana is more of a scam for those who just simply enjoy getting high then it is a real treatment (yes, for some it has positive benefit).
Personally, I think it should be legal to grow and smoke your own, as the government has not right to tell anyone they cannot do so in the privacy of their home.
But let’s make a decision on this based on facts.