Skip to content

The bizarre universe of drug prohibition: an introduction to the oD Drug Policy Forum

International drug policy is at a tipping point. Emerging from a forty year repressive dark age following the excesses of the 1960s, has the world learned enough to craft a saner, more compassionate approach to drug use?

Published:

International drug policy is at a tipping point. Emerging from a forty  year repressive dark age following the excesses of the 1960-1970s, the  world seems ready to begin making serious changes in response to  problems that have not been getting any better. But has the world  learned enough to craft a saner, more compassionate approach to drug  use? This question is on the lips of politicians, policy makers, and  reformers everywhere, as the consequences of repression—bloated  bureaucracies and prison systems, spiraling cartel violence, abrogated  civil liberties, millions addicted and millions more  disenfranchised—have become larger than the problems they were put in  place to solve.

Let's take a quick tour through the status quo.  

Imagine your child is addicted to heroin. For some this is not  imagination, but daunting, visceral reality. As you read this sentence,  perhaps 30 million people worldwide are addicted to opiates, a figure  equal to the population of Greater Tokyo, the world's largest city.

Knowing  you will do anything to save that child's life, what are you facing?  Despite tens of billions of tax dollars spent on combatting drug use  every year, you can't run from the drug, because legal and illegal  versions are everywhere, in your cities, in your schools, in your  medicine cabinet, in every corner of society. If you want to get your  child off the drug, you quickly find that treatment is prohibitively  expensive, and subsidized treatment is in short supply and requires long  waits. If you can find treatment, you soon learn that the few legal  methods available are meant only to substitute a legal opiate for an  illegal one, so now your child has a methadone addiction. In this case,  the medical establishment's solution to addiction is more addiction. For  other drugs, it blithely prescribes total abstinence, and a Twelve-Step  program. The long term success rate of these treatments are less than 10%.

Imagine,  in your desperate search to save your child, you come across ancient  indigenous psychedelic plants like Ayahuasca, Iboga, or Peyote, that  have shown to be remarkably safe and effective healing treatments for  addiction. Imagine your confusion when you learn that they are illegal  and classified as Schedule 1 substances, with a "high potential for  addiction and no known medicinal properties." Imagine your anger when  you investigate further and discover that pharmaceutical companies have  known about these, but refuse to develop them as widespread treatments  because curing addiction is less profitable than treating a chronic  disease. Your child is a criminal for using drugs. and will continue to  engage in criminal activity if he or she tries to end their addiction by  these alternative means.

If your child continues his or her  addiction, odds are that sooner rather than later they will run afoul of  law enforcement and, without considerable financial resources (which  also permits one to avoid many of the legal entrapments), will  eventually end up in prison. Nearly 2 million people were arrested for  drug offenses in the US last year while UK drug arrests totaled nearly  300,000. Drug arrests are so prevalent in our criminal justice milieu  that in the United States, roughly half of its 2.5 million prisoners are  incarcerated on nonviolent drug charges. The combined cost of the US/UK  war on drugs, and their companion criminal justice systems, amounts to  hundreds of billions of dollars, larger than the defense spending of  most nations. Ironically, it nearly equals the annual revenue reaped by  the global illicit drug trade, which the UN estimates at around $312  billion.

Now imagine that you discover that the heroin your child  is addicted to is coming from Afghanistan, where your other child has been deployed. Your government is telling  you it is occupying this country, and your child is risking his or her life, in part, to eradicate the heroin  trade, yet you discover that every year since the invasion opium  production increased. In fact, you soon discover that everywhere the US  and UK have deployed to interdict the drug trade—Afghanistan, Colombia,  Mexico, Southeast Asia—drug production has increased. Despite forty  years of a War on Drugs, there has been no appreciable decrease in  either drug use or supply.

And imagine that your child comes home from his or her tour of duty,  and like most, is suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. How surprised would you be to learn that MDMA, once maligned as "ecstasy" the dangerous "rave drug," is now being used to treat this terrible condition? Though still illegal, approved clinical trials on veterans are underway in the US, Israel, Jordan, and Switzerland.

All of this exists because of an  international policy of prohibition, and this may be why 90% of all  addicts never break free.

But of course not everyone is an  addict. Drug use is an integral part of the human existence. Nearly  every culture throughout history has had some form of chemical rite of  passage because, as Carl Jung taught, we have an instinctual need or  drive to transcend our consciousness, to relieve our state of being from  suffering. In this pursuit billions consume legal drugs like alcohol  and tobacco and prescription medication, and up to 250 million people  worldwide will use some illicit drug at least once this year. That's  just under the population of the United States, the world's third most  populous nation.

In this bizarre universe alcohol and tobacco are  legal, taxed, and regulated substances that easily kill more than half a  million people every year in the US and UK, yet the most anyone ever  does to try and stop their use is to put a warning label on the package.  Meanwhile, cannabis, a relatively benign, medically effective plant,  responsible for zero annual deaths, is classified by the governments of  Britain and America as "highly addictive with no known medicinal  applications." Despite these ominous warnings, millions use it, making  it the largest cash crop in America, and sixteen states have legalized  it for medicinal use. In the US, 1 in 34 children are taking addictive  amphetamines to treat ADHD, at the same time, quietly in the  background, US and EU politicians are trying to implement the CODEX  Alimentarius, which will make natural vitamin supplements available only  by prescription. 1 in 31 American adults are in the correctional  system, and more African-American men will go to prison than college.

These  paradoxes are at the heart of the hypocrisy and insanity that has  characterized the American war on drugs, which it has been imposing on  the world since the first international drug convention in the Hague in  1912, and continues today through the United Nations and NATO. It is  hypocritical because prior to the 1912 Convention opium and other drug  monopolies were legal and integral tools for colonial expansion, and  subsequent to the Convention they became the purview of Western  intelligence services, who used their proceeds to fund covert military  operations around the world. These paradoxes are insane because they  begin from the supposition that drug use can be wiped out like poverty  or war, and whether or not that is a legitimate goal or merely a cover  for other political machinations, its clear that all official positions  on drug use run counter to human nature, and scientific reality.

There  is a new movement afoot, however, to change all this. In just the last  few years international drug policy has seen seismic shifts. In defiance  of the old international conventions foisted by the US, countries like  Spain, Portugal, Switzerland, Canada, the Netherlands, Argentina,  Mexico, and even the UK, have all decriminalized various levels of  personal drug use. In the United States, the budget crisis facing the  states has made their bloated prison systems no longer manageable,  prompting Federal judges to order nonviolent offenders to be released.  Acknowledging the role of the War on Drugs in expanding the national  prison system, a bill has been introduced by Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) to  form a National Criminal Justice Commission, the first real attempt at  prison reform since the late 1970s. For the first time in forty years  the FDA is permitting the formal study of psychedelic medicine, and in  November Californians will vote on whether to tax and regulate cannabis.

It is, by past standards, a sea change in public opinion, evidenced  by the recent conference held by the Multidisciplinary Association for  Psychedelic Studies, which was widely covered in the mainstream media. Many believe this heralds a new age of professionalism and normalization  in intellectual and spiritual inquiry. Even the most cynical and strident prohibitionists admit that the policies are likely to shift to accomodate new economic realities.

In policy circles we  often refer to a Libertarian term, "Cognitive Liberty," as the freedom  to learn, grow, operate, and heal through methods of one's choosing. In  simpler terms, it means that someone, for example, can be free to employ  whatever substances he or she chooses as part of one's intellectual,  medical, or spiritual pursuits. If one wants to substitute marijuana for  Ritalin, if one wishes to take ibogaine instead of methadone, if one  wishes to take LSD or drink Ayahuasca with the Daime in pursuit of the  Divine, is this not an inherent right? Cognitive Liberty implies that  one has sovereignty over one's own body. On a larger meta-level, the  prohibition struggle is merely one front in the ongoing war against all  civil liberties that the US and UK are waging against their own citizens  in the name of "security." At its most personal, it's about the freedom  to make the most intimate choices and decisions about who and what we  are.  

The system we face is entrenched beyond all reason. Despite their own exhaustive study of the illicit drug trade over the last 100  years, and their admissions that prohibition is ineffective, enforcement  budgets are unsustainable, and the black market propagates the cartel  violence infecting much of the world, the United Nations Office of Drug  Control Policy's most recent position (in answer to the groundswell that  has risen in favor of decriminalization) is that illicit drugs must  remain illicit at all costs. Their reasoning: more people will do drugs  if they are made legal.

This flimsy, dubious rationale, is the piece of  gum holding the international drug conventions together, and it was spit  from the mouth of American policymakers. Despite campaigning on a  promise to reform the US approach to the drug war, end the emphasis on  enforcement, and shift the focus to treatment and prevention, the Obama  Administration's leaked 2011 Drug Control Strategy reveals it is  virtually the same as the Bush Administration's, focusing on largely  futile interdiction efforts as well as arresting, prosecuting and  incarcerating extraordinary numbers of people, with a significantly  smaller percentage earmarked for demand reduction. In the UK the War on  Drugs continues despite being regarded as "phony" and "a failure" by  virtually everyone.

When you get down to it, beneath all the  pontificate moralizing on crime and drug use, the primary drivers of  this issue are economic: money and jobs. Any significant shift in either drug  control or criminal justice policy would invariably lead to politically  unacceptable levels of unemployment. The US Criminal Justice system  consumes $212 billion a year and employs 2.4 million people, more  than America's two largest private employers, Wal-Mart and McDonald's,  combined. It may economically behoove the US to tax and regulate cannabis, because marijuana users generally dont end up in prison, but it's a whole other story when we're talking about cocaine and heroin, which comprise the bulk of drug incarcerations (and which are central to our covert foreign policy). Just like military spending, any attempts to cut criminal  justice or prison budgets is considered political suicide. This is  because America's War on Drugs and its' prison empire were built upon a  "tough on crime" political philosophy that emerged forty years ago in response to  the social crises of the day. It has proven to be an intransigent  ideology that now requires distorting the truth in order to maintain its  own survival.

It is only through changing the cultural story behind this  entrenched ideology that we will find a way beyond it, and that can only  be achieved by humanizing the story. That is the intention of the  openDemocracy Drug Policy Forum, which will frame the stories of drug  policy and criminal justice reform, and bring the human arguments into  the policy agenda. From the street corner to the poppy field, the Drug  Policy Forum will rigorously examine existing policies and their  alternatives, encourage collaboration in pursuit of common solutions,  and debate with Prohibitionists and the prohibition-minded. The Forum  will also showcase the in-depth testimonial videos of the "Unheard  Voices" project, which will collect interviews of those most impacted by  drug prohibition: the addicts, ex-offenders and other disenfranchised  Americans and Britons, all as part of an ongoing dialogue that focuses on crafting a saner international  drug policy.

Join us.

Charles Shaw

Charles Shaw is a writer and activist living in the Bay Area of San Francisco. He is the author of Exile Nation: Drugs, Prisons, Politics and Spirituality, and the Director of The Exile Nation Project

All articles

More in Conflict & security

See all

More from Charles Shaw

See all