A HUNDRED years ago a group of foreign diplomats gathered in Shanghai for the first-ever international effort to ban trade in a narcotic drug. On February 26th 1909 they agreed to set up the International Opium Commission—just a few decades after Britain had fought a war with China to assert its right to peddle the stuff. Many other bans of mood-altering drugs have followed. In 1998 the UN General Assembly committed member countries to achieving a “drug-free world” and to “eliminating or significantly reducing” the production of opium, cocaine and cannabis by 2008.
That is the kind of promise politicians love to make. It assuages the sense of moral panic that has been the handmaiden of prohibition for a century. It is intended to reassure the parents of teenagers across the world. Yet it is a hugely irresponsible promise, because it cannot be fulfilled.
Next week ministers from around the world gather in Vienna to set international drug policy for the next decade. Like first-world-war generals, many will claim that all that is needed is more of the same. In fact the war on drugs has been a disaster, creating failed states in the developing world even as addiction has flourished in the rich world. By any sensible measure, this 100-year struggle has been illiberal, murderous and pointless. That is why The Economist continues to believe that the least bad policy is to legalise drugs.
“Least bad” does not mean good. Legalisation, though clearly better for producer countries, would bring (different) risks to consumer countries. As we outline below, many vulnerable drug-takers would suffer. But in our view, more would gain.
Read The Full Article
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There really shouldn't be anything new in this article to anyone reading this blog; the horrible, miserable failure that the drug war has been along with the basic political right of any individual to do what they want provided it harms no one else should have led anyone with half a brain to push for legalization years ago. However, while this is not the first time the Economist has made the case for legalization, putting it on the cover of their magazine at this given time seems to fall in line with the general trend lately of mainstream media coverage being in favor, or at least honestly open about the drug war/legalization debate. Let's hope this leads to significant legislation finally being passed in this country that begins to end the epic fuck-up the drug war is.
1 comment:
if obama gets a second term i could maybe see it...but at this point it would be political suicide for him to advocate or support any sort of legalization.
even if certain states in the country legalize marijuana, like california is considering, obama will take serious political heat if he allows it.
Post a Comment