Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WHY A HIGH SOCIETY IS A FREE SOCIETY
The Guardian UK ^ | 5/19/02 | A C Grayling

Posted on 05/18/2002 7:44:57 PM PDT by LarryLied

One measure of a good society is whether its individual members have the autonomy to do as they choose in respects that principally concern only them. The debate about heroin, cocaine and marijuana touches precisely on this. In my submission, a society in which such substances are legal and available is a good society not because drugs are in themselves good, but because the autonomy of those who wish to use them is respected. For other and broader reasons, many of them practical, such a society will be a better one.

I have never taken drugs other than alcohol, nicotine, caffeine and medicinal drugs. Of these, I have for many years not taken the two former. I think it is inimical to a good life to be dependent for pleasure and personal fulfilment on substances which gloss or distort reality and interfere with rationality; and yet I believe that heroin, cocaine, marijuana, ecstasy and cognates of these should be legal and available in exactly the same way as nicotine and alcohol.

In logic is no difference between legal and currently illegal drugs. Both are used for pleasure, relief from stress or anxiety, and 'holidaying' from normal life, and both are, in different degrees, dangerous to health. Given this, consistent policy must do one of two things: criminalise the use of nicotine and alcohol, in order to bring them in line with currently illegal substances; or legalise currently illegal substances under the same kinds of regime that govern nicotine and alcohol.

On civil liberties grounds the latter policy is preferable because there is no justification in a good society for policing behaviour unless, in the form of rape, murder, theft, riot or fraud, it is intrinsically damaging to the social fabric, and involves harm to unwilling third parties. Good law protects in these respects; bad law tries to coerce people into behaving according to norms chosen by people who claim to know and to do better than those for whom they legislate. But the imposition of such norms is an injustice. By all means let the disapprovers argue and exhort; giving them the power to coerce and punish as well is unacceptable.

Arguments to the effect that drugs should be kept illegal to protect children fall by the same token. On these grounds, nicotine and alcohol should be banned too. In fact there is greater danger to children from the illegality of drugs.

Almost everyone who wishes to try drugs, does so; almost everyone who wishes to make use of drugs does it irrespective of their legal status. Opponents say legalisation will lead to unrestrained use and abuse. Yet the evidence is that where laws have been relaxed there is little variation in frequency or kind of use.

The classic example is Prohibition in the USA during the 1920s. (The hysteria over alcohol extended to other drugs; heroin was made illegal in the USA in 1924, on the basis of poor research on its health risks and its alleged propensity to cause insanity and criminal behaviour.) Prohibition created a huge criminal industry. The end of Prohibition did not result in a frenzy of drinking, but did leave a much-enhanced crime problem, because the criminals turned to substances which remained illegal, and supplied them instead.

Crime destabilises society. Gangland rivalry, the use of criminal organisations to launder money, to fund terrorism and gun-running, to finance the trafficking of women and to buy political and judicial influence all destabilise the conditions for a good society far beyond such problems as could be created by private individuals' use of drugs. If drugs were legally and safely available through chemist shops, and if their use was governed by the same provisions as govern alcohol purchase and consumption, the main platform for organised crime would be removed, and thereby one large obstacle to the welfare of society.

It would also remove much petty crime, through which many users fund their habit. If addiction to drugs were treated as a medical rather than criminal matter, so that addicts could get safe, regular supplies on prescription, the crime rate would drop dramatically, as argued recently by certain police chiefs.

The safety issue is a simple one. Paracetemol is more dangerous than heroin. Taking double the standard dose of paracetemol, a non-prescription analgesic, can be dangerous. Taking double the standard medical dose of heroin (diamorphine) causes sleepiness and no lasting effects.

A good society should be able to accommodate practices which are not destructive of social bonds (in the way that theft, rape, murder and other serious crimes are), but mainly have to do with private behaviour. In fact, a good society should only interfere in private behaviour in extremis.

Until a century ago, now-criminal substances were legal and freely available. Some (opium in the form of laudanum) were widely used. Just as some people are damaged by misuse of alcohol, so a few were adversely affected by misuses of other drugs. Society as a whole was not adversely affected by the use of drugs; but it was benefited by the fact that it did not burden itself with a misjudged, unworkable and paternalistic endeavour to interfere with those who chose to use drugs.

The place of drugs in the good society is not about the drugs as such, but rather the freedom and the value to individuals and their society of openness to experimentation and alternative behaviours and lifestyles. The good society is permissive, seeking to protect third parties from harm but not presuming to order people to take this or that view about what is in their own good.



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: drugs; wod; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 1,221-1,234 next last
To: galt-jw
believing individual consciousness

How does the "government" ascertain the state of your "consciousness"? What is "consciousness"? What is life"? If a tree falls in the forest and no one to hear .....is there a sound? So many deep thoughts and so little time.

121 posted on 05/18/2002 10:38:17 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
64

knock off the personal attacks.

122 posted on 05/18/2002 10:38:43 PM PDT by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
post 94, statist or individual liberty?
123 posted on 05/18/2002 10:38:47 PM PDT by galt-jw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: apochromat
Distilled alcohol is a hard drug

Ya think? I can get just as drunk from beer. Well, maybe not American beer. Q. How is American beer like making love in a canoe? A. They're both effing close to water.

124 posted on 05/18/2002 10:38:53 PM PDT by -YYZ-
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: apochromat
Ahhh, zee faincing ... eet ees so .... how you say ... Frainch!

You brought it up...remember? What’s the matter bunky did I “parry “ too hard for you?

125 posted on 05/18/2002 10:40:44 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: apochromat
Cultivate a mind open to the truth.

"Truth" cleansed of facts? No thanks.

126 posted on 05/18/2002 10:41:14 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Excellent post!
Gave me patriotic chills!
127 posted on 05/18/2002 10:42:54 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
I think you may be on the right path. We'll see.
128 posted on 05/18/2002 10:43:56 PM PDT by apochromat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
if you dont know what consciousness is, you do not possess it. also, your sophistry indicates a primacy of consciousness philosophy. a dictionary should clear up most of your confusion. alteration of consciousness is the result of using any drug, alcohol or other. should the state dictate what an individual can or cannot do with it? so, statism or individual liberty?
129 posted on 05/18/2002 10:45:05 PM PDT by galt-jw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
I got it from you, here on FR recently, pal.
130 posted on 05/18/2002 10:45:09 PM PDT by apochromat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
But they didn't make it illegal.

Otherwise they would've had a whole swarm of Kentuckians mad at 'em and believe me nobody wants that!

131 posted on 05/18/2002 10:47:49 PM PDT by Maitre_Z
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: galt-jw
if you dont know what consciousness is, you do not possess it. also, your sophistry indicates a primacy of consciousness philosophy. a dictionary should clear up most of your confusion. alteration of consciousness is the result of using any drug, alcohol or other. should the state dictate what an individual can or cannot do with it? so, statism or individual liberty?

So let's boil it down to a level even a dumb old Texas redneck like me can get his brain around. You want the "right" to get loaded". Is that about it?

132 posted on 05/18/2002 10:48:26 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: -YYZ-
The classification of a substance may well be defied by human stupidity, and that's why it's important to test impairment, not substance, when safety demands it. Stills are dangerous. Try getting drunk around a still, and we'll see who blows up.
133 posted on 05/18/2002 10:49:15 PM PDT by apochromat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: MrRepublic
"No, the crime is an issue. The larger issue, however, is the moral decay indicated by ... I said it before, "Drugs are not 'harmless fun'" even though that is what many wish were true."

Thank you for proving my point. I win the argument. All your blather about crime is irrelevant, you want the State to impose Morality and you're willing to pay the price in crime.

134 posted on 05/18/2002 10:49:21 PM PDT by Kermit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: texasforever, roscoe,
class dismissed.
135 posted on 05/18/2002 10:50:56 PM PDT by galt-jw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
Nice line! ...socialists who have successfully conned Americans such as yourself into believing that unconstitutional government intrusions are progressive, modern, and necessary.

Thought it worthy of repeat for anyone who might have missed it.

136 posted on 05/18/2002 10:50:56 PM PDT by budwiesest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: apochromat
got it from you, here on FR recently, pal.

That's funny. You must have made very little impression on me since I frankly don't remember "parrying" with a person of your name.

137 posted on 05/18/2002 10:51:01 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
I'll call your Jefferson...

"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." — THOMAS JEFFERSON

and raise you another Jefferson...

"No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him." --Thomas Jefferson


138 posted on 05/18/2002 10:51:47 PM PDT by Zon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
When did I imply that you brought it up to me specifically? Are you drinking?
139 posted on 05/18/2002 10:52:22 PM PDT by apochromat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: galt-jw
class dismissed.

Careful walking home.

140 posted on 05/18/2002 10:52:30 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 1,221-1,234 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson