Somedays, I verge on anarchism. This is why.

[elfs]

It's the "realistic" so-called libertarians who show up in one or other forum to chide the movement for marginalizing itself by pursuing the "fringe issue" of drug prohibition. But realistically, drug prohibition is the whole political ballgame. It drives the aggrandizement of police power and the paring of civil liberties. It establishes precedents that generalize to other law enforcement issues. It exemplifies and undergirds the principles of the Loco Parentis state. It is everything any libertarianism worthy of the name must not only oppose, but make central. There is no area of American life where the state has said more clearly, "We must be free to kill you with impunity to protect you from making bad choices."

From Unqualified Offerings, and well worth reading.

Comments

[sierra-nevada.livejournal.com]

That's a lovely principle, but my impression of the American electorate is that they won't vote for the "big bang" (repeal of the Controlled Substances Act), so, a strategy of incrementalism is more likely to bring progress towards the goal.

According to an editorial I read in a local newspaper the other day, another decriminalization initiative is on the ballot in Nevada this November. Part of the pitch is to free up police resources to fight the scourge of crystal meth.

[tagryn]

Interesting writeup, thanks for the link.

I remain skeptical whenever any one single issue is presented as "the whole political ballgame." Usually its a symptom of tunnel vision and/or obsessiveness about the issue being pushed, neither of which are positive qualities in a political perspective.