Tuesday, May 26, 2015

The War On Marijuana: Institutionalized Evil

 First things first: Throughout this post, I will be using the term drug war, as shorthand for the war on marijuana. This post does not refer to the drug war as a whole, rather, it deals with the illegality of marijuana. One more detail to note: I am assuming my audience is familiar with the events that take place at Homan Square and other blacksites throughout the country. If you're not familiar with this, please take a moment to familiarize yourself with these events here.

 My stance: While marijuana use should not be actively encouraged, the drug war is an evil example of institutionalized racism and harm, and thus should not exist. Further, the medicinal uses of marijuana are plentiful- but this is not a major point of this post.

 Perhaps this isn't the best subject to start off with, because I believe that this is one case where there is a large volume of overlap between Christian argumentation and secular argumentation. In light of this, I'll start by establishing arguments that should appeal to both Christians and Atheists, then I'll go into specifically Christian of specifically secular points, if I can think of any.

 Racism of the drug war: This is fairly simple- the following is a quote from Harry Anslinger, who was head of the DEA from 1930-1962: 
       "Most marijuana smokers are Negros, Hispanics, jazz musicians, and entertainers. Their satanic music is driven by marijuana, and marijuana smoking by white women makes them want to seek sexual relations with Negros, entertainers, and others. It is a drug that causes insanity, criminality, and death - the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind."

Because, ya know, Satan obviously loves Jazz and black people. The racism of this quote ought to be self-evident, so I'll move straight to the part of the quote that could have actual impact: does marijuana really cause any violence or criminality?

 According to the ADAI, marijuna has a sedative effect on most users, making them far less likely to engage in violent activities than, say, alcohol. However, marijuana can, on rare occasions, cause short-term paranoia, fear, and/or aggression - at times resulting in a violent outburst. That settles it, right? Marijuana causes violence? Not by a longshot. First, no definitive correlation can be found between aggression and marijuana in adults. More importantly, however, Violence in anyone, including marijuana users, often has a multicausal explanation, with numerous factors impacting behavior, such as increased life stress, aggressive personality traits, multidrug use, or a history of violent behavior. Marijuana is also part of the global illegal drug market, which may increase the chances of violence occurring in some social interactions. Additionally, withdrawal symptoms my include aggression, however studies have not found an association between withdrawal symptoms and  aggression among those without a history of violence.

 So, no, it really doesn't. The quote by Mr. Anslinger sums up the original justifications for the drug war, which are all obviously ridiculous. So, what? You may ask, drugs are still bad, so we shouldn't let people have them. Well, yes, we should. This brings me to the harmful effects of the drug war. There are too many to talk about in one post, so I'll focus on the big one: it gives police an excuse to torture, kill, and anally rape anyone they want. 

 Now, I will be presenting several incidents of evil being committed in the name of the drug war, however they represent a larger, systemic problem of police using the drug war as a mechanism to quite literally get away with murder.

 An ex-drug cop testified in court that he-among other things-was ordered to illegally plant drugs too many times to count. Why? Personal revenue generation/stealing. Planting drugs is bad. Stealing is also bad. Therefore, an institutionalized system that promotes these things is also bad. Very simple.

 Yes, this is crack, not marijuana, however it still shows the institutionalized incentive to plant drugs and beat people senseless. Planting drugs is still bad. If there were no drug war, there would be no monetary incentive to plant drugs.

 Finally, more evidence of the racism and double standard of the drug war: DEA agents were told not to enforce drug laws in rich communities.

 What's more, the drug war is inherently paradoxical and insolvent. Remember when alcohol was illegal? Remember why that was insolvent? In case you don't here's a quick history lesson: National prohibition of alcohol (1920-33)—the “noble experiment”—was undertaken to reduce crime and corruption, solve social problems, reduce the tax burden created by prisons and poorhouses, and improve health and hygiene in America. The results of that experiment clearly indicate that it was a miserable failure on all counts. The evidence affirms sound economic theory, which predicts that prohibition of mutually beneficial exchanges is doomed to failure. Although consumption of alcohol fell at the beginning of Prohibition, it subsequently increased. Alcohol became more dangerous to consume; crime increased and became “organized”; the court and prison systems were stretched to the breaking point; and corruption of public officials was rampant. No measurable gains were made in productivity or reduced absenteeism. Prohibition removed a significant source of tax revenue and greatly increased government spending. It led many drinkers to switch to opium, marijuana, patent medicines, cocaine, and other dangerous substances that they would have been unlikely to encounter in the absence of Prohibition.
 Those results are documented from a variety of sources, most of which, ironically, are the work of supporters of Prohibition—most economists and social scientists supported it. Their findings make the case against Prohibition that much stronger.
 To support the drug war is to ignore morality, ignore historical precedent, and support a racist system. All of those things are supposed to be bad, regardless of what you would infer from certain conservative politicians *coughclimatechangecough*.


 Look, I don't think that recreational marijuana is a good thing- it does have adverse effects- but the drug war is even worse. No one of any religion or lack thereof, should be able to advocate this monstrosity that is founded on racism and overblown rhetoric, that encourages institutionalized stealing and planting of evidence, and that can justify pretty much any police action! Even raiding a home on a bogus tip, finding nothing incriminating, and killing the grandfather!

 What I find so disturbing, is that many conservative Christians advocate this drug war, which is nothing but a perversion of morality. This must stop.

Further reading about problems with the drug war: http://www.forbes.com/sites/artcarden/2012/04/19/lets-be-blunt-its-time-to-end-the-drug-war/https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201106/why-the-war-drugs-has-failed.

Introductions: What, Why, and Who

       What is this? I will be writing about a number of political issues over the life of this blog, perhaps indefinitely. I intend to write on each issue from two viewpoints in each post, or perhaps in separate posts if the issue is particularly large. These viewpoints? Secular and Christian. The Secular viewpoint will assume there is no such thing as God, and will be written as if to an Atheist audience. To draw my conclusion in these segments, I will be relying purely on legality, logic with almost universally accepted premises, and universally or almost universally accepted morality- simply argumentation that does not appeal to any religious mandates. The Christian viewpoint will assume Christianity is the true religion, and be written as if to a Christian audience. This does not mean I cannot use secular argumentation where appropriate in this section, it simply means that I will be focusing on proving my stance is Biblically morally correct.

       Why am I doing this? Because, frankly, I find modern conservative 'Christian' politicians immensely upsetting. Modern 'Christian' conservatism has strayed so far from what is right (see what I did there?) and true, I need somewhere to write about it. However, this does not explain why I would include secular argumentation in my posts. I aim to include secular argumentation in my posts due to the separation of Church and State. Basically, the Government can't do something because the Bible says so- in order for my policy advocacy to be valid, it must be secularly true. (I intend to do a post regarding the separation of Church and State in the near future, maybe in multiple parts.)

       Who am I? I am a super political minority! I'm a Christian, homeschooled, Liberal teenager. I don't see any more detail as particularly relevant to my posts, so I'll leave it at that for now.