Kevin A. Sabet, who I saw debate Kris Krane at the recent International SSDP Conference (Krane won handily, but at least Sabet’s a good sport) has come up with recommendations for the new drug czar.
It really is silly how the prohibitionists (and their apologists) have to avoid at all costs actually addressing alternatives to prohibition and instead clutch at ridiculous straws to “save” prohibition, such as:
The next drug czar must not be afraid to flex his muscle.
Really? That’s why prohibition has been such a failure? If he just flexes his muscle more, the economic laws of supply and demand will cower before his blinding manhood?
So how does he address alternatives?
Drug policy is rarely a bone of contention among Democrats and Republicans. Everyone believes in prevention, law enforcement and treatment. And legalization remains (rightfully) the stuff of dreams (nightmares, really, when you take into account the heavy social costs that would result from a free, commercial market for illegal drugs).
No proof. No justification. No acknowledgement of the fact that there is absolutely no empirical evidence to support such claims, and no acknowledgement of the extreme social costs of prohibition. Note also the unexplained assumption that legalization necessarily means “free commercial market” when most legalization advocates call for regulation.
It’s dishonest, but that’s what we’ve come to expect from the prohibition enablers.
[Hat tip to Mark Kleiman for the (favorable?) link to Sabet’s piece.]
Not to mention the contradiction in terms
And legalization remains (rightfully) the stuff of dreams… heavy social costs that would result from a free, commercial market for **illegal** drugs).
If it was legalized, it wouldn’t be illegal now would it?
Pingback: UTILITY DOCUMENT » Kevin Sabet moving on? » UTILITY DOCUMENT
Pingback: Kevin Sabet moving on? Â» UTILITY DOCUMENTS