Opinions - So you want to end the drug war

[Heretic.Ape.]

There is a lot of scattered discussion throughout the policy, law and order, and drug news (and pretty much everywhere else in the forums) about various peoples ideas on how crazy the drug war and drug policy is, different ideas on what needs to be done about it, reasons things are the way they are, lamenting about it, and how to go about making changes. Here's a place to really get down to the brass tacks of the matter.
Here's how we'll play this game if anyone is interested in playing with me.

1) No ideology allowed. There's all kinds of discussion about how immoral, insane, etc things are and all kinds of philosophical treatise on Utopian visions of how it ought to be. Stay grounded. Politics have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with ideals beyond how ideals can be spread and used as leverage. As far as people involved in policy, they are concerned with money and maintaining power (getting funding and getting reelected). As far as regular citizens, they will not care at all about drug issues unless they see a damn good reason that it's relevant to them. This will NOT be because current policy is illogical or "wrong". Most people in developed nations couldn't give a shit about revolution as long as they can still get fast food and 100 channels of TV. There are practical reasons for everything. This does not necessarily mean these reasons are logical. This leads us to the next rule.

2) Don't count on logic for your impelling force. Do not assume that the fact that your argument is logical and the Truth with a capital T that anyone will give a shit. People do not in actuality base their actions or realities on what is reasonable and are rarely motivated by lofty ambitions of a world run in accordance with Truth, Justice, Freedom, etc. Most people just want to make some money, buy some toys to play with, impress someone attractive so they can get laid, and to look good in front of their peers.

3) If you have an article that is relevant or something like that please post it in it's appropriate forum and provide a link to it here with your comments on its relevance, etc rather than posting the whole article here so we can avoid making this thread overly cluttered. (it's bound to be cluttered enough as it is)


Here are a few random thoughts and questions to get the ball rolling. I'm sure most of you are aware that policy is made by and for the benefit of multi-national corporations, very wealthy families and such. If you think policy is made "by the people, for the people" go do some more studying and come back when your bubble is burst and your cherry popped in how democracy works. What most of us live in is not so much democracy as oligarchy.

We see immediately that action must be broken into two categories of people to address, two audiences. Those who are involved in policy and the average citizen. In focusing on those who actually make policy we need to address why they benefit and possible plausible alternatives to present them with that do not fuck with their bottom line. Oh, sure we could discuss overthrowing the bastards, I'm open to that, but be practical and don't count on any large scale revolution--remember, most people are ruled by apathy.

As far as addressing the average citizen it is mainly education to turn around public opinion so that the policy makers will not lose face in going "soft on drugs", and ideally (I know, I'm breaking my own rule) getting people riled up enough they might even demand some action however unlikely that may be.

Some of the logical questions to address are things like who in this pantheon of power is invested in the drug war? Why? Who has the resources to pay for policy and benefits from prohibition? Be specific. Saying "the government" won't fly. Who is "the government"? That's a sweeping term covering millions of people from peons to monarchs. What industries are effected? What leverage does looking "tough on drugs" give politicians?

In this regard you might consider the fact that many governments are being taken over by Christians and other people toting religion to attract easy votes by seeming "moral". So in addressing this we might ask further why are drugs considered immoral? Who says? What are their arguments and how valid are they? How can we change that view? By focusing on addicts as needing salvation (appealing to the Christian thing)? Etc.

A common thing said is that we need to educate the public about drugs. What do we need to educate them about? Usually people focus on the myths of drugs as being what we need to address. Do you think people will care about the "truth about drugs"? Why? Remember people don't care about Truth. How does it impact them? It is definitely true we need to get the truth about drugs out there but not as an impetus for action from the everyman. Education in this regard most likely is relevant for making people accept any changes we can manage to make in policy makers actions (saving them face for turning their views around, etc).

Would it perhaps be more beneficial to focus on educating about the negative impacts of the drug war on society as a whole? What aspects? How should we convey this message in a way that will make someone care, and in less than 30 seconds? If you think anyone's going to listen to you for longer than that you may be deluded. You probably have around that long to get them feeling engaged, meaning it has to be immediately relevant. Emotion works much better than logic in doing this. So how do we play on emotion? What emotions should we try to play on--self-righteous indignation, fear, sympathy/compassion, guilt, being "hip", "cool", or "with it"? What emotional messages will people ignore because they are too soft, which ones will be ignored because they make people uncomfortable (too hard), and which ones will hold peoples attention, giving just enough of a slap to catch attention without being too hot for people to hold on to?

How do we distribute information at a level that will actually be heard? Do you think any of the neoliberal controlled media (most media that people actually see) is going to run a flashy headline story for this side of the argument? Is it possible to get proper financial backing to run ad campaigns for awareness? How do we make these look catchy and credible at the same time? How do we get the money to actually be visible?


Now, it can be surmised from the above that we're looking at a very conservative angle (trying to be realistic) because I don't think the current zietgiest would offer us a chance at any widespread revolution. If we want to we can start a separate thread dealing with more radical ideas like how to orchestrate, incite, and carry out an actual revolution that would disrupt the power (im)balance. Let me know if you're interested in this and I'll start another thread.

Ok, if anyone is interested I'd love to hear some thoughts and discussion. Happy brainstorming
h.a.

Reputation Comments on this post:

	WoD thread, thought about making one myself.
	Thanks for starting this thread. Too bad there hasn't been much activity in it lately.
	cool read