On Tuesday, May 1^st, members of West Chester University Students For Liberty and Students for Sensible Drug Policy organized and participated in a panel discussion called “Perspectives of the American Drug War.” Joining the students, we had Dr. Brian O’Neill of our criminal justice department, Dr. James Brenner of health sciences, and Sgt. Matthew Paris of the WCU Police Department.  The discussion analyzed the War on Drugs from several perspectives, including liberty, economics, viewing drug addiction as a criminal or health issue, and the effects of the drug war on students, women, and minorities.

Representing the liberty position, I articulated that philosophically, the state has no justification to initiate force against an individual to prevent them from doing harm to himself – Mill’s venerable harm principle – as articulated in On Liberty: “Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.” The foundational libertarian beliefs of self-ownership and the non-aggression principle are sufficient deontological reasons to oppose an initiative such as the War on Drugs for most libertarians.

But beyond this philosophical reasoning, there are many consequentialist arguments that can demonstrably show the utter failure of the War on Drugs, as 40 years of failed policies and compounding unforeseen consequences have proven.  When viewed from an economic perspective, the basic forces of supply and demand that operate within markets clearly show how prohibition is a futile venture, as this Learn Liberty video explains.  Journalists such as Radley Balko have shown how the monetary incentives of the Drug War have shifted the focus of local police departments from solving violent crimes to receiving federal grants for increased drug convictions.  A recent Reason Magazine article confirmed what anyone familiar with public choice theory knows to be true: certain industries allied with the government have a special interest in maintaining the status quo, and the financial incentives to both these industry lobbyists and politicians serve to obscure the will of the people.

Other unforeseen consequences of the War on Drugs have devastated the lives of many individuals, particularly people of color and those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds.  Whether by design or not, many have begun to speak out against the injustice of the American justice system and the disproportionate targeting of minority youth, such as Michelle Alexander, author of The New Jim Crow.  Arguments against the Drug War are made in the name of protecting civil liberties, supporting patients’ rights, and the safety of marijuana usage compared to alcohol.  Even while drug lord Joaquin Guzman Loera credited US drug policy for making him rich and Latin American leaders ask the United States to change its policy, the drug war continues unabated.

Just recently, 24-year-old UCSD engineering major Daniel Chong’s nightmarish ordeal with the DEA has reignited the debate as once again. The consequences of the War on Drugs are on full display, and the harm that it causes to society and to individual lives is undeniable.  Yet, despite all the philosophical argumentation and empirical data, nothing seems to be changing.  As Matt Zwolinski pointed out, there is no serious argument in support of the War on Drugs to be found today, and nobody articulately holds that position.  By all objective measures, this is a debate that should be part of our past. The American cultural marketplace has done much progress on this issue, and at a time that a near-majority now favors marijuana legalization, entertainers like Snoop Dog tweet pictures and write songs in celebration of cannabis culture, Jimmy Kimmel uses his comedy to critique the hypocrisy of the current administration’s drug policy, and programs like Mad Men delve into recreational cannabis and LSD usage. While discussing drugs and prohibition’s failure becomes more normal within private society, the government continues to operate within its own vacuum, insulating its policy from critique and distancing itself from reality.  While human history informs us that there has never been a drug-free society, the central planners in Washington, DC continue to chase Utopia, running over liberty and freedom in the process.

So just where do we go from here?  How many more Daniel Chongs must come along to remind us that the War on Drugs is truly just a war on people?  How much more economic and scientific data will be needed to change the minds of legislators? The time for this irrational initiative to end has long come. The violence must cease and the suffering must stop.  The systematic preying upon of communities is destroying the fabric of our civil society and the dignity of individuals, ruining young lives and endangering civil liberties. Government spending and debts increase as American society becomes increasingly policed and militarized, and those with legitimate medical and health concerns are treated as common criminals. Enough is enough!

Drug War activists must adopt the posture of a modern-day abolitionist movement and demand justice.  No more should public policy be based upon fear and propaganda; no longer can our society afford to tolerate and value violence as a solution to problems over education and truth.  History is on our side, objectivity is on our side, ethics and morality are on our side, and in the words of 19^th century abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison, “I will be as harsh as truth, and as uncompromising as justice…urge me not to use moderation in a cause like the present.  I am in earnest — I will not equivocate — I will not excuse — I will not retreat a single inch — AND I WILL BE HEARD.”