MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Drug Legalization’

Two Approaches to Getting Rid of Mexican Cartels: Drug Legalization and the Bukele Model

Posted by M. C. on March 28, 2024

How will this help to undermine the power and pelf of Mexican gangs? It is simple: a significant amount of their financial resources emanates from this one quarter. Running a bunch of hooligans takes finances, serious finances. The less wherewithal these mobsters have, the weaker they will be, and the more likely they will succumb to the forces of law and order in Mexico.

https://walterblock.substack.com/p/two-approaches-to-getting-rid-of

By RICARDO BENJAMIN SALINAS PLIEGO and WALTER E BLOCK

It is no exaggeration to say that gangs in Mexico are now more powerful than the Mexican police force. It is almost possible, but not quite, to say that these groups of criminals can fight even the Mexican Army on an almost equal basis. Needless to say, this situation calls for rectification, if the prosperity, flourishing and even the lives of innocent Mexicans are once again to be safeguarded.

From an anarcho-capitalist point of view, the purest form of libertarianism, the attitude toward this situation would be one of “A pox on both your houses.” You are both criminal gangs, albeit one of you has far more legitimacy than the other, mainly based on far better public relations than anything substantive. Both mulct funds from innocent people on a coercive basis. For one, these payments are “taxes”; for the other, “payments” or “payoffs.” But there is no real difference between the two.

However, such a philosophy is articulated by an estimated only 1% of all those calling themselves libertarians. What is the position of the other 99%, who aver that a very limited government is indeed justified? It would be one limited to providing armies to protect against foreign invasion, police to quell domestic robbers, rapists, murderers and their ilk, and courts to distinguish guilt from innocence and to uphold free enterprise and personal and private property rights. This is limited government libertarianism.

So, from this perspective, how best to deal with these Mexican criminal gangs which have been preying on innocent folk? It is certainly not to “hug” them. They are criminals, and must be dealt with accordingly; that is, harshly. Presumably, the Mexican government is now doing the best it can to achieve this goal. Is there any other option that does not call for more treasure, more soldiers, more sophisticated weaponry? Yes there is.

Legalize drugs. All of them. Without exception. The US state of Oregon has already taken a teeny, tiny, baby step in this direction. The recommendation to the Mexican government is to carry this civilized plan further, far further. Legalization should encompass all (addictive) drugs without exception.

How will this help to undermine the power and pelf of Mexican gangs? It is simple: a significant amount of their financial resources emanates from this one quarter. Running a bunch of hooligans takes finances, serious finances. The less wherewithal these mobsters have, the weaker they will be, and the more likely they will succumb to the forces of law and order in Mexico.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Which Aspect of Government Do Anarcho-Capitalists Favor? | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on March 23, 2023

Every fiber of our being cries out against the central state in Washington DC.

Far too many crave it.

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/which-aspect-of-government-do-anarcho-capitalists-favor/

by Walter E. Block

uncle sam magazine cover

The short answer to that question, and an accurate one, is none of the above. That is the very definition of this philosophical perspective: the state is merely a gang of robbers and murderers, and the ideal is to banish it entirely.

States Mr. Libertarian on this matter: “…if you wish to know how libertarians regard the State and any of its acts, simply think of the State as a criminal band, and all of the libertarian attitudes will logically fall into place.”

However, there is indeed an entirely different and also a proper way to answer that question: whichever aspect of it is most compatible with the libertarian ideal of non-initiatory aggression and private property rights is favored by libertarians in any specific case.

For example, during the New Deal, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was for a time balked by the Supreme Court. The former tried to implement a socialist policy, and the latter was having none of it, continually finding his initiatives unconstitutional. FDR threatened court packing and the nine justices caved in.

What, pray tell, would be the radical libertarian position on this matter? Obviously, to favor the Supreme Court. That is, only in comparison to the president in this case. The support would thus be a relative one. Supporters of economic freedom would rank the initial behavior of the nine justices higher than that of Roosevelt.

Take another case. President Reagan threatened the mayor and City Council of New York City that if the latter strengthened its rent control laws, the federal government would withhold funds from the Big Apple. We stipulate, arguendo, that rent control is an unjustified uncompensated “taking” from landlords, and thus per se unjustified (it also ruins the housing stock of any jurisdiction which implements this policy). Where does the libertarian fall out on this one? In an instance of “strange bedfellows” the supporter of property rights sides with the federal government. Again, not absolutely, of course, only relative to the city authorities.

What about drug legalization? Oregon has decriminalized not only marijuana, but cocaine as well. The federales have not even made legal the former, except for medicinal purposes. On which side of this disparity does the freedom philosophy come down on? Obviously, the former. Hooray for the Beaver State! It is a rights violation to interfere with what adults place into their bodies, on a voluntary basis.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Most Shameful Conservative Attack on Drug Legalization – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on July 28, 2021

One, drugs have not been legalized, so it is impossible to say that drug legalization is a disaster.

But drugs are illegal, so how could legalizing them be responsible for conditions that already exists?

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/07/laurence-m-vance/the-most-shameful-conservative-attack-on-drug-legalization/

By Laurence M. Vance

Christopher Bedford is against drug legalization. He is really against drug legalization. He is so against drug legalization that he penned the most shameful conservative attack on drug legalization that I have ever read—and I have read a lot of conservative attacks on drug legalization during the time that I have written over 100 articles on the drug war.

Beford is the author of the article “Drug Legalization Is a Disaster, and Your Leaders Don’t Care About You,” published by The Federalist.

I had actually never heard of Bedford until I came across his article. According to his bio:

Christopher Bedford is a senior editor at The Federalist, the vice chairman of Young Americans for Freedom, a board member at the National Journalism Center, and the author of The Art of the Donald. His work has been featured in The American Mind, National Review, the New York Post and the Daily Caller, where he led the Daily Caller News Foundation and spent eight years. A frequent guest on Fox News and Fox Business, he was raised in Massachusetts and lives on Capitol Hill.

Let’s begin at the beginning with the title: “Drug Legalization Is a Disaster, and Your Leaders Don’t Care About You.” Just the title is enough to dismiss this article as the ravings of an incorrigible drug warrior.

One, drugs have not been legalized, so it is impossible to say that drug legalization is a disaster. It is true that 36 states have legalized the medical use of marijuana, 27 states have decriminalized the possession of marijuana, and 18 states have legalized the recreational marijuana. But marijuana is still illegal on the federal level, the possession of marijuana that is not a criminal offense is a small amount, the legalization of marijuana for medical or recreational use is full of regulations and restrictions, and it is only marijuana that has been “legalized”—not cocaine, not heroin, not fentanyl, not meth, not LSD, not ecstasy.

And two, who doesn’t know that our “leaders” don’t care about us? They care about themselves, their power, and their next election. We have never meant anything to them but a dollar, a vote, and a serf to be told how to live our lives. Who would waste his time writing an article about how our “leaders” don’t care about us? And who would waste his time reading it?

Now we can move on to the first paragraph:

America has been fighting a war on drugs for decades now, and for almost as long we’ve been told by the left and many libertarians on the right that the best way to end the war is to surrender. Legalizing drugs, they say, would solve a bunch of our country’s problems, including high rates of imprisonment, fatherlessness, crime, cartel activity, excess overdose deaths, budget deficits. The list goes on.

First of all, America has not been fighting anything. The federal government is the entity that declared war on drugs, not America or the American people—two things that should never be confused with the federal government.

Second, very few on the left want to end the war on drugs. Many of them want to legalize and tax and regulate marijuana, but not all drugs or even any other drug. When the Democrats controlled the House and the Senate during the first two years of Obama’s presidency, they could have easily legalized some or all drugs on the federal level, yet they didn’t even attempt to legalize marijuana. Neither President Biden nor any other Democrat who ran for president called for the legalization of drugs. Drug freedom is not a tenet of liberalism.

Third, there are no libertarians on the right. Libertarianism is neither left nor right, as Walter Block has famously said. There are Republicans, conservatives, and constitutionalists who are libertarian-leaning, but most of them would eschew the label libertarian and reject some of libertarianism’s precepts.

Fourth, the way to end the war on drugs is to end it. This is a one-sided war. There is no one or no thing to surrender to. There are no drugs storming America’s beaches, dropping from the skies, invading from Canada, jumping out of trees, coming up out of the ground, or trying to break down our doors. The federal government should just acknowledge that the war on drugs has been a disaster for individual liberty and property rights, has failed to stop the availability and use of drugs, has misdirected and corrupted law enforcement, and is a monstrous evil that has ruined more lives than drugs themselves and simply end it.

Fifth, legalizing drugs would help solve a bunch of our country’s problems because it is the drug war that is responsible for a part of the problems. High rates of imprisonment? Partly because of the war on drugs. Fatherlessness? Partly because of the war on drugs. Crime? Partly because of the war on drugs. Cartel activity? Partly because of the war on drugs. Excess overdose deaths? Partly because of the war on drugs. Budget deficits. Legalizing and taxing drugs, even at astronomical levels, would not end budget deficits. These are caused by profligate members of Congress and state legislators who squander the taxpayers’ money. Libertarians don’t believe that the government should legalize drugs so that the drugs can be taxed to alleviate budget deficits. Libertarians don’t believe that drugs should be taxed at all. And yes, the list does go on. Ending the drug war would unclog the judicial system, cut down on violence, reduce unlawful searches and seizures, restore financial privacy, stop hindering legitimate pain treatment, and protect civil liberties.

The rest of the article goes on to blame drugs for “ripping apart your city, your town, your neighborhood” or “your friends, your siblings, your children”; homelessness; encampments “completely overrun by filthy, barely clothed muttering madmen”; walkers on trails reeking of human waste “menaced by junkies on couches blocking the trail and underneath the bridges”; carjackings; the public harassment of women; unemployment; estrangement from families; robberies; and filth-covered lawns.

But drugs are illegal, so how could legalizing them be responsible for conditions that already exists?

Bedford may have written some other things that are worth reading, but when it comes to the subject of drugs he has lost his mind. He has not only written the most shameful conservative attack on drug legalization, but the most stupid one as well. He is an embarrassment to real conservatives.

Laurence M. Vance [send him mail] writes from central Florida. He is the author of The War on Drugs Is a War on Freedom; War, Christianity, and the State: Essays on the Follies of Christian Militarism; War, Empire, and the Military: Essays on the Follies of War and U.S. Foreign Policy; King James, His Bible, and Its Translators, and many other books. His newest books are Free Trade or Protectionism? and The Free Society.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »