Drugs and the Left

[KurtFF8]

This thread isn't about the theoretical question of whether drugs should be legal or not (although I'm going to assume that most here will think that they should be legal).

One reason that libertarianism seems to be growing in popularity in America (among other reasons like the fact that capitalism is starting to make people look for other systems, although they don't fully understand if if they're supporters of libertarianism) is the libertarian focus and stance on illegal drugs.

They provide compelling arguments about the "rights" of people to have drugs that win a lot of support. I think that the left ought to also take up having our stance on the issue known. For example on the PSL site, I couldn't find anything about illegal drugs easily and their stance, but in an email they said that they see the way in which the "drug war" has progressed has hurt and divided the working class and that the state should not keep them illegal.

This is a pretty important issue in America that the left seems largely to ignore and I would suggest that we bring it up more and this (among other things) will help win the support of would-be supporters and revolutionaries.

Just a thought about an addition to the political strategy of the left.

[Labor Shall Rule]

I've noticed that middle class Ron Paul fanatics, fratboys, and aspiring internet businessmen have been the primary political shock-troops of legalizing Siberian Husky sodomizing, drug use, and to end 'coercive' laws that put pedophiles in prison. It's a myth that they are growing in popularity - in fact, I'm sure that if most working people were to hear their platform they'd puke whatever they just ate in the last week out of their mouths.

The laws in place today criminalizes people (a disproportionate number of colored working class youth) for seeking a cheap means of recreation, and that's not their fault - this is a society where your income index pre-determines and superimposes your desires and wants; where a pauper's idea of 'fun' can only be the meth produced and shipped from cat piss-smelling gloomy apartments, while the capitalist can visit his second-house in the Bahamas, or can afford art or yoga classes.

The 'war on drugs' is obviously irrefutably reactionary - while Blacks constitute 13% of all monthly drug users, they represent over 74% of drug prison sentences, because the police and paramilitary actions are targeted at their neighborhoods more than anything. But to drink the libertarian kool-aid and think that 'legalization' will empty the prison-houses is stupid - killer cops, in this dehumanizing food-chain of white supremacy, do not need a logical reason to pick out and frisk a Black kid in the streets. They can do it because they can. Moreover, the 'legal' poison of alcohol plagues Native American communities yearly, so to pretend that taking drug use from it's underground status and to convenient store racks would make things 'better', is a simple lie.

[Cheung Mo]

I'd take a dump truck full of weed over an oversized estate in a banana republic any day.

Incidentally, if I were the U.S. President, the first two things I would do would be to end the drug wars and then create a registry of White supremacist groups and their members and create a system of re-education camps. In these camps, their human rights would be respected to the fullest extent (no torture and no abuse of any sort, acceptable food) and their accommodations would be similar to what one would find in a decent Scandinavian prison (it would be more Sweden than Stalin), but they would be deprived of all economic, civil, and political liberties until their re-education was complete.

[KurtFF8]

I've noticed that middle class Ron Paul fanatics, fratboys, and aspiring internet businessmen have been the primary political shock-troops of legalizing Siberian Husky sodomizing, drug use, and to end 'coercive' laws that put pedophiles in prison. It's a myth that they are growing in popularity - in fact, I'm sure that if most working people were to hear their platform they'd puke whatever they just ate in the last week out of their mouths.

Well they are growing in popularity (maybe not as much as they would like of course) in places like the Universities and young people who are as I often label them "confused leftists".


The 'war on drugs' is obviously irrefutably reactionary - while Blacks constitute 13% of all monthly drug users, they represent over 74% of drug prison sentences, because the police and paramilitary actions are targeted at their neighborhoods more than anything. But to drink the libertarian kool-aid and think that 'legalization' will empty the prison-houses is stupid - killer cops, in this dehumanizing food-chain of white supremacy, do not need a logical reason to pick out and frisk a Black kid in the streets. They can do it because they can. Moreover, the 'legal' poison of alcohol plagues Native American communities yearly, so to pretend that taking drug use from it's underground status and to convenient store racks would make things 'better', is a simple lie.

I'm not disputing your claim in the first sentence here, but can you provide a source? I think that's quite interesting.

And of course simply legalizing drugs/ending the drug war wouldn't be a "solve all" solution. But it would certainly help in the struggle as the propertied class wouldn't be able to use that tool anymore and resort to more overt oppressive tools (like the police and what they did before the drug war). This would make it more obvious where the lower classes stand in regard to the capitalists and the state.

[Sam_b]

The very simple (and as usual in these instances, very short!) answer is that nobody has the right to tell someone what to do with their own bodies. Thus all drugs should be legalised.

A good debate on the subject can be found in the 'practice' forum: http://www.revleft.com/vb/daad-t79954/index.html

[Dragonsign]

In my opinion drugs should not be allowed do to the massive damage it causes on the body ( and the society)

[RedAnarchist]

In my opinion drugs should not be allowed do to the massive damage it causes on the body ( and the society)

What damage? Some illegal drugs are far safer and far less addictive than many legal drugs such as alcohol and tobacco.

[KurtFF8]

True, but that isn't what this topic is about. This is about the left using the drug war as part of a strategy to gain support.

[politics student]

What damage? Some illegal drugs are far safer and far less addictive than many legal drugs such as alcohol and tobacco.

You may also be interested in the fact that many of the dangerous illegal drugs are so damaging due to the supply source being highly unreliable or new users copying experienced users and ODing.

The USA has had a lot of anti left propaganda over many decades due to the cold war. Iron man.... captain America.... all aimed at children. You also have all major news forms controlled be companies with a vested interest in keeping the left silenced.

(Looks like I finally found a great forum)

[politics student]

True, but that isn't what this topic is about. This is about the left using the drug war as part of a strategy to gain support.

I apologize for joining the derailing part of the thread.


I can see it being worth while for getting people to read Marxist material at least if they see us supporting legalization of drugs (at least I hope most of us do, would not touch them myself I hardly drink alcohol.)

[Aurelia]

Subjectively perhaps libertarianism may seem like it's growing in America, but it's positions are so ridiclous that it's a doomed movement to begin with, and it can only find support in two types of people:

1. The incredibly naive and young, usually to the point of stupidity. That is why most grow out of it when they realize how ludicrous it is.

2. The incredibly old, usually to the pointed of decrepit Ayn-Rand style, really old and wretched supporting 'negative rights'. These people are a tiny minority.

Objectively though, libertarianism is already dead.

[KurtFF8]

HAh that's quite alright, it makes sense to want to discuss the issue in that framework. But I'm trying to deal with how the left deals with the war on drugs and how it could be advantageous to focus on it a little more as an example of oppression.

[Pogue]

I'd rather see drug distribution in the hands of a safe body who make sure there is no exploitation or crime involved in the trade, rather than it being controlled by criminal filth. Theres too much death and other crime related with drugs.
It begs moral question though, such as do we have a duty to protect people. Also, if everyone gets drug related health problems theres a strain on the health service, and thats not good.

[rocker935]

In my opinion drugs should not be allowed do to the massive damage it causes on the body ( and the society)

Well, in fact, Alcohol and Cigarretes are worse for the body than pot is. They have both claimed FAR more lives.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html

And at any rate, don't the people have the right to make mistakes? You being a Libertarian Communist should understand this better than anyone.

[politics student]

HAh that's quite alright, it makes sense to want to discuss the issue in that framework. But I'm trying to deal with how the left deals with the war on drugs and how it could be advantageous to focus on it a little more as an example of oppression.

The war on drugs or the war on drugs which can not be taxed unlike alcohol or tobacco.

I think if the left produced major drug legalization websites and organized a few rallies, you would find a lot more people told that ideology is dead or that the left is wrong look at china or the Stalin may educate themselves in political theory.

[KrazyRabidSheep]

where a pauper's idea of 'fun' can only be the meth produced and shipped from cat piss-smelling gloomy apartmentsThat's not cat urine you smell: http://www.mappsd.org/Urine%20Extraction%20Labs.htm

First time I became aware of this was a couple years ago when I was called to a house explosion. There were no serious injuries, but I noticed about a hundred milk jugs in one room (adjacent to the room which exploded) that I later found out were full of urine.


You may also be interested in the fact that many of the dangerous illegal drugs are so damaging due to the supply source being highly unreliable or new users copying experienced users and ODing.This is true.

One time I was called to an individual who had massive respiratory damage after inhaling bad cocaine. The dealer had apparently added dried out Drain-o to his stock to inflate the volume.

The user was inexperienced, and didn't realize anything was wrong until his nose, throat, eyes, and lungs were burning. When we picked him up, his nasal septum (the area of your nose that separates your nostrils) was completely eaten away, as was much of his face.

I never asked the doctor later how he fared because even if he lived, he would certainly be blind, facially deformed, and living on a respirator today.


The war on drugs or the war on drugs which can not be taxed unlike alcohol or tobacco.
Unfortunately, as long as there are people who are paid to find/ eliminate the illegal drug trade, the illegal drug trade will flourish.

Think about it; how many thousands of people would be out of a job if tomorrow all drugs and drug use ceased? It would be a bad career move for many people to stamp out drugs; you've got to leave yourself work for tomorrow.

It is fairly common knowledge that there are many crooked cops, many who are narcs, who either take bribes or distribute drugs themselves. These cops are getting paid from both sides, and ensuring job security.

Anybody seen the movie "American Gangster"? For every honest cop, there are several crooked cops who engage in the type of behaviour seen in that movie (although it is usually not at quite the scale found in the movie.)

Legalization would not only allow regulation of the distribution and production of these drugs, but it would put many crooked people, gangsters and cops, out of business.

Finally, if illegal drugs were legalized, then they could be taxed, and such tax money could be used for noble purposes such as health care (as many cigarette taxes do.)

Yes, there might be some adverse medical effects of drug use, but they exist whether the drugs are legal or not; may as well help fund the health care with the money used to hurt yourself with anyway.

[BobKKKindle$]

In my opinion drugs should not be allowed do to the massive damage it causes on the body ( and the society)

There are many activities or substances which harm or have the potential to harm the individual - but the fact that something is harmful does not mean the government has the right to stop people from doing it by imposing a ban, because people should be given the ability to make their own choices based on what they think will best suit their own needs and preferences.

Even when drugs are banned, there will always be people who will want to take drugs, despite the risks involved. By legalizing the production and consumption of drugs which are currently banned, the government will be able to ensure that all drugs meet a basic quality standard and do not contain any other substances which are used to increase the volume of a drug purchase, and thereby minimize the risk to users.