The Architects of Fear (Our Drug Prohibitionists)
There is an old “Outer Limits” episode called “The Architects of Fear” in which some scientists decide on taking drastic measures in an attempt to prevent the Cold War from erupting into nuclear holocaust. They choose one of their own, played by Robert Culp, to undergo an experimental genetic mutation that results in his transformation into a hideous alien being. A crash landing of his ’space ship’ near the UN is staged , the idea being that he would then engage in such mischief as to create a world wide panic over alien invasion. This would hopefully encourage the warring factions to put aside their differences and unite behind one common cause; the defense of the Earth.This is not a novel idea, but merely a creative Sci-Fi spin on what demagogues and tyrants have known for so very long; It is much easier to control your subjects by giving them a common enemy than it is to maintain a constantly high level of coercion and oppression. People throughout history have proven themselves to be easy pawns at the hands of master propagandists.
The Jewish Holocaust during World War II is the classic example at how unwitting dupes can be conditioned to perpetrate atrocities, just so long as the trains run on time. Many of the Nazi’s may have actually believed their imbecilic theories of a master race and the sub humanity of the Jews, but plenty of them (Albert Speer for one) felt that it was an unfortunate but necessary situation, expedient for the success of the German state. Though this despicable period in history is perhaps the nadir of ‘civilization’ it is certainly not unique.
Thank God this kind of thing can’t happen in America. But of course it can happen and it has happened. American power brokers, both private and political, have used the xenophobic tendencies of our citizens to justify stealing land from the Native American nations while simultaneously increasing their own power base. Many a politician was able to capitalize on the racial bigotry of white Americans as well as the mindless fear brought on by ignorance and propaganda, to advance their own agendas.
“But we are more enlightened now and it is obvious that these examples of fascist demagoguery are far behind us. ” I would disagree. For years now there has been a class of people that have generated such fear among our populace that our police forces have been encouraged to grow dramatically (especially the secret police), that writs of habeas corpus have been suspended and we have willingly sacrificed our protections against unlawful search and seizure. Mandatory and draconian punishments have been eagerly pursued and implemented and even convicted children are imprisoned for many years with no chance of parole. Who are these dangerous people?
In spite of the obvious excesses of the neo-Orwellian “Office of Homeland Security”, I am not talking about Islamic fundamentalists. No, these much more sinister people do not belong to an easily identifiable religion or political group nor do they consist of any singular ethnicity. They can be found at all levels of society, in all cities and towns and in most neighborhoods. In fact, I think some of these subversives may be my best friends!
I am talking about Dopers. Heads. Stoners. Tokers. Pot Heads. Kids and adults who either occasionally or regularly partake of cannabis to enjoy a sensation that is pleasurable, not unlike that of alcohol but with much more humility, much less violence and much less hangover.
Since the ‘War on Drugs’ there are more cops on the street, more people in prison and much more crime in our cities. Our country more closely resembles a police state than the old Warsaw Pact nations do. We have 19 year old kids doing mandatory 10 year sentences with no chance of parole because they were caught with LSD. Not guns, not knives, not low yield nuclear weapons. Acid.
We have parents who have had their cars seized and impounded by the local sheriff’s department because there was a joint found within. These legally stolen cars have proven to be a financial windfall for the state. What a great incentive for additional low risk police work!
There are more anti-drug laws on the books in the USA than there are in Holland yet our per capita drug consumption is higher. (As is our violent crime rate). We have even blithely ignored international law and invaded countries because of the excuse that they are exporters of illegal narcotics. Well then, what’s stopping us from attacking Canada?
The more laws and order are made prominent, the more thieves and robbers there will be. (Lao-Tzu)
I don’t want to clutter things up right now with too many examples of government excess in fighting this conjured up and hyped up “War on Drugs”. Check out what the (very conservative) Cato institute has to say instead:
http://www.cato.org/dailys/3-03-97.html
…or this article by Larry Levine: http://www.cedro-uva.org/lib/levine.secret.html
But I would suggest this; after all these years we still have this prohibition on drugs, this attempt to legislate morality, this ‘tyro-anarchy’, because it benefits people in power. It allows the government, both local and Federal , to consolidate power, to deprive people of due process, to ensure continued lucrative employment and to provide a scapegoat for social injustice that allows our self righteous citizenry to dodge their responsibility. As we sit back on a Sunday afternoon, enjoying our Budweisers and gin’n’tonics we can feel safe knowing that our tax dollars are at work providing today’s Elliott Ness with the means of protecting us from the likes of….Spikoli? From Ridgemont High? Makes me feel much safer, dude.
History has taught us that prohibition does not work. Unfortunately there are too many piglets fighting for their place at one of the many anti- drug enforcement teats to ever expect this country to come to their senses.
“Scarecrows and magic and other fatal fears do not bring people closer together. There is no magic substitute for soft caring and hard work, for self-respect and mutual love. If we can learn this from the mistake these frightened men made, then their mistake will not have been merely grotesque. It will have been at least a lesson—a lesson at last to be learned’
(from the closing narration; “The Architects of Fear”)
August 25, 2007 at 11:34 pm
Our leaders have become architects of fear. The rhetoric is that which stirs people to make choices based on fear. Using words like “fascist” and “totalitarians” to describe the supporters of terrorism is an example.
Bruce
August 26, 2007 at 8:53 am
(Playing now at devil’s advocate) aren’t I guilty of the same rhetorical sins when I label these governmental efforts as ‘fascist’? ( I am just anticipating that comment.)
BTW, a related artical from last month’s Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/maia-szalavitz/reefer-inanity-never-tru_b_58353.html
August 26, 2007 at 11:41 am
Aren’t we all guilty? Oh the Humanity!
Seriously, Fascism is Fascism. Terrorists, as we label them, are not after the formation of a police state. They are after disrupting our free societies. BTW–Our friends in the Muslim world–Turkey, Indonesia, Singapore, and Malasia, fit the definitions of Fascism more than any of those to whom GWB confers the title.
I heard the ridiculous things that are illegal in Singapore–where some prostitution is legal–such as gum chewing in public. We scoff, yet they scoff at our relative lawlessness.
Anyway, GWB and Cheney’s speech writers try and play on fear through certain buzz terms, like fascism. They know that Joe Average won’t check his Webster’s or his history to see this distinction. Fortunately, only about 35% of the public buys the rhetoric.
Bruce
August 26, 2007 at 12:57 pm
OK, OK. But I don’t want to go off on a tangent here. Let’s get back to the issue at hand - drug prohibition. Is it right or are we hypocritical? Are our intentions completely honorable or are there ulterior motives? Is it even remotely effective or is it a panacea that is actually detrimental to society in the long (and short) rung?
Is this “war” on drugs even constitutional?
August 26, 2007 at 6:10 pm
Some parts are hypocritcal, some are not.
I watched a program on one of the historic channels. The program discussed the way in which drugs were placed on the categories–Marijuana, LSD, and Heroin are class 1 drugs–prescription drugs are class 2, and OTC are class 3.
Other than LSD and Heroin, the placing of the Class 1 drugs can be interpreted as arbitrary. There are scads of substances, not only alcohol, that are legal and easily obtained.
The new thing is to pull ampetamine based OTCs such as Sudafed behind the counter. I believe this has nothing to do with worries about making Meth, but to track those who buy the drugs–another fascist move.
All of this goes back to Nixon pronouncing a War on Drugs as we fought in Vietnam.
My solution? I’m not sure about totally legalizing hemp based drugs, but this needs to be looked at seriously. We have been victims of confiscation of a vehicle under relatively minor circumstances (we may or may not lose the car). What offends me, beyond the car being seized without due process, is the attitude of the state police–they simply took the car Because they Could.
Bruce
August 26, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Funny how Nixon declared a war on drugs during Vietnam, isn’t it? Weren’t too many folks at the VFW or the Young Republican meetings smoking grass in those days. Wonder who they were targeting?
Why not legalize hemp based drugs? What are the issues at stake here? Have you ever heard of anyone getting stoned on pot and then beating there wife or kids? Pot doesn’t incite someone to anger like alcohol does. How many victims of rape or spousal abuse can be thankful that it is good Mexican weed that is illegal and not Smirnoff or Miller Lite?
What are we afraid of… terminal munchies?
(For the record, I don’t use marijuana.)
August 26, 2007 at 7:35 pm
For the record, neither do I.
I have never been stoned (I have to qualify that–but I did inhale) so I wouldn’t know if it incites anger. I was well-acquainted with a person who smoked, and he had a temper
(whether pot induced or not, I don’t know).
Bruce
August 28, 2007 at 9:14 am
I agree… It’s a known fact that people with allergies are a menace to society.
To group Heroin, LSD and Cocaine in the same category as alcohol exhibits a lack of understanding of these drugs. While certianly some folks have a propensity toward alcholism, the majority of people do not; yet it is impossible for a person to start a Heroin, LSD or Cocaine habit and not become critically addicted. Those addictions have implications that hurt far more than the addict or even the addicts family. These addictions impact all of society, the economy, crime, etc.
August 28, 2007 at 9:24 am
There is much evidence at hand to debunk this myth. The addiction is not usually related to the substance but is more due to a psychogical or emotional problem for the addict. It also can be environmental. I’ll have to look it up, but I believe it was Dartmouth medical school who conducted a ground breaking study on this in the eighties.
As far as impacting society, alcoholism and tobacco addictions take a far greater toll. It depends upon what currency we are talking about.
August 28, 2007 at 9:05 pm
Well–Yes Buddie–but I do not believe that even a free-thinker such as C. B. would lump more dangerous drugs into the same category as Pot and Alcohol.
I don’t know–I did not know LSD is addictive, but they say Cocaine really grabs ya (I heard Richard Prior talk about that one). Heroin? I don’t know about that one either. Maybe the myth is that drug addicts can function normally?
Bruce
August 28, 2007 at 9:46 pm
Without a doubt drug addiction (and I am including alcohol here) is debilitating. One of the challenges to being able to function normally for the illegal drug addict is the excessive price of the drug as well as the poor ‘quality’ control that most dealers or pushers provide. Both of these factors are a direct product of prohibition. The alcohol addict can pick up a six pack of Shlitz legally just about anywhere and you can be pretty sure that it is 100% beer.
In Holland they have been able to wean people off of herion by helping them to get a financial handle on their lives. They do not have to carry the additional financial monkey on their back.
August 28, 2007 at 10:47 pm
That is true–there is a huge stigma attached to opiates–the old hop head thing.
I am beginning a book called The Myth of Insanity. I will report on this, how we define insanity–which is attached to the way we treat drug addiction.
Am