The truce on drugs
And yet the prohibition on marijuana is something more than just a fading relic of the culture wars. It has also been part of the ad hoc assemblage of laws, treaties, and policies that together we call the “war on drugs,” and it is in this context that the votes on Election Day may have their furthest reach. When activists in California tried to fully legalize marijuana there in 2010, the most deeply felt opposition came from the president of Mexico, who called the initiative “absurd,” telling reporters that an America that legalized marijuana had “very little moral authority to condemn a Mexican farmer who for hunger is planting marijuana to sustain the insatiable North American market for drugs.” This year, the reaction from the chief strategist for the incoming Mexican president was even broader and more pointed. The votes in Colorado and Washington, he said, “change somewhat the rules of the game … we have to carry out a review of our joint policies in regard to drug trafficking and security in general.” The suggestion from south of the border wasn’t that cocaine should be subject to the same regime as marijuana. It was: If we are going to rewrite the rules on drug policy to make them more sensible, why stop at only one drug? Why go partway?
Something unexpected has happened in the past five years. The condemnations of the war on drugs—of the mechanized imprisonment of much of our inner cities, of the brutal wars sustained in Latin America at our behest, of the sheer cost of prohibition, now likely past a trillion dollars—have migrated out from the left-wing cul-de-sacs that they have long inhabited and into the political Establishment. “The war on drugs, though well-intentioned, has been a failure,” New Jersey governor Chris Christie said this summer. A global blue-ribbon panel that included both the former Reagan secretary of State George Shultz and Kofi Annan had reached the same conclusion the previous June: “The global war on drugs has failed, with devastating consequences for individuals and societies.” The pressures from south of the border have grown far more urgent: The presidents of Colombia, Guatemala, Mexico, Honduras, Belize, and Costa Rica have all called for a broad reconsideration of the drug war in the past year, and the Organization of American States is now trying to work out what realistic alternatives there might be.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
The War on Drugs is over.
Drugs won…
JohnGalt23 on November 27, 2012 at 11:04 AM
FIFM
JohnGalt23 on November 27, 2012 at 11:04 AM
That’s cool, I’d rather be sedated for the next four years.
Flange on November 27, 2012 at 11:07 AM
Well, we’re about to make a “truce” in Afghanistan, why not a “truce” on drugs? If we don’t have the spine to fight head-chopping terrorists we sure as hell don’t have the spine to protect our children and young adults from destruction-by-drugs.
MelonCollie on November 27, 2012 at 11:20 AM
Naturally a narco state like Mexico is opposed to the legalization of drugs. If we legalize drugs, its biggest cash crop is out of business. Follow the money. Weed and cocaine are made for pennies a pound. Making it illegal is what makes it worth gold.
keep the change on November 27, 2012 at 11:25 AM
Is he a rapper?
bob77 on November 27, 2012 at 11:30 AM
I’ve said before, federalism is the grand bargain that can save this country. And provoking state / federal conflicts over these laws may be the best way to convince the left of that.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Come get me DEA
bernverdnardo1 on November 27, 2012 at 12:01 PM
This is the true key to fiscal sanity. Imagine what states could spend on infrastructure and education if they were not spending so much of their budgets housing people for non-violent drug offenses.
libfreeordie on November 27, 2012 at 12:11 PM
Wow, what a grouping of non-sequitur conclusions.
“Civil-liberties individualism on the left and capitalist individualism on the right” is the politics of “outsiders”? Hasn’t it been the exact opposite — the driving force of historical American politics?
“A free marketplace is too ruthless to be tolerated.” When has there ever been a free marketplace solution attempted?
ShainS on November 27, 2012 at 12:21 PM
I read a quasi-academic article a few years back that claimed that were the US to legalize all drugs tomorrow, within 12 months the economy of Mexico would contract by 30%.
JohnGalt23 on November 27, 2012 at 12:21 PM
I can see that, but the grip on power that the cartels have would be broken and a real economy would then have a chance to grow. At least that’s what would hopefully happen.
Flange on November 27, 2012 at 12:28 PM
Mmmm… no. His opposition to liberalized pot laws in the US stems from the fact that it’s a huge cash crop in Mayheeco. Once it can be grown legally in the US, there will be less demand for pot grown in his craphole country.
Akzed on November 27, 2012 at 12:28 PM
Exactically.
Akzed on November 27, 2012 at 12:31 PM
It’s hard to separate out all the intertwining threads of crazy idiocy here, but one more thing that pops out: If Mexican farmers are growing marijuana because they are “starving,” couldn’t they just change to planting, I don’t know, maybe… FOOD!?!?!
logis on November 27, 2012 at 12:34 PM
Maybe if we were actually fought an aggressive war on drugs it would have worked.
nazo311 on November 27, 2012 at 12:52 PM
Booker T. Washington dealt with this problem exactly, except his people were planting cotton instead of pot.
“The common diet of the people was fat pork and corn bread. At times I have eaten in cabins where they had only corn bread and “black-eye peas” cooked in plain water. The people seemed to have no other idea than to live on this fat meat and corn bread,—the meat, and the meal of which the bread was made, having been bought at a high price at a store in town, notwithstanding the fact that the land all about the cabin homes could easily have been made to produce nearly every kind of garden vegetable that is raised anywhere in the country. Their one object seemed to be to plant nothing but cotton; and in many cases cotton was planted up to the very door of the cabin.”
Substitute traditional Mexican foods for “fat pork and corn bread” and “cotton” for “pot”, and you’re dealing with the same frustrations.
MelonCollie on November 27, 2012 at 12:55 PM
Don’t expect big pharmacy to roll over on this one either. As someone eluded to up thread, follow the money.
filetandrelease on November 27, 2012 at 12:55 PM
This is also a factor. It is impossible for a nation to truly fight addictive pleasure drugs when abortion is a right, murderers are not executed, corruption is running rampant and the incarnation of Affirmative Action wins a 2nd term in office as the President.
MelonCollie on November 27, 2012 at 12:58 PM
How astute of you, if its one thing this country does not have enough of, it is nonviolent offenders, either sanctioned or in jail.
LevStrauss on November 27, 2012 at 1:09 PM
In the real world, the consequences of legalizing marijuana would not be anything like as dire as legalizing all, or even most, currently illegal drugs. In fact, swapping alcohol’s legal status with that of marijuana’s would likely have an overall positive effect on society. In other words, with its long social history and considering the thorough evaluation that has been made concerning it’s physical effects on the human body, I think there are some ‘sober’, rational arguments that can be made for legalizing pot from the conservative point of view. Crystal Meth, not so much.
Knott Buyinit on November 27, 2012 at 1:23 PM
Aggressive measures against illegal drugs failed just as easily as lenient ones. Alcohol Prohibition was enforced aggressively, and it failed as well. Without true totalitarian police powers, no form of prohibition will succeed when the demand is sufficiently, um, high.
JurysOut on November 27, 2012 at 4:15 PM