We just finished a lecture on the libertarian case for drug legalization at the Cato.ru seminar. The discussion, led by Piotr Kaznacheev, was very lively. The negative role of the U.S. government in exporting their irrational, destructive, and counter productive “war on drugs” to Latin America, Afghanistan, and elsewhere was a helpful element of the discussion. This debate is an important one in the countries of the former USSR, which are generally producing draconian drug policies that further undermine the very fragile institutions of the rule of law.
Kakha Bendukidze, State Minister for Reforms in the Republic of Georgia, is currently leading a discussion on “Challenges of Libertarianism,” dealing with how far libertarian arguments should be taken, such as total freedom of trade, elimination of all victimless crime laws, elimination of all subsidies, elimination of state monopolies on justice and law, and so on.
Hi Tom,
On a related note, what do you think of the following argument by Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson that, while libertarians are mostly right about the arguments against drug prohibition, those who advocate drug use while it is still illegal have blood on their hands?
http://www.visandvals.org/Critiquing_the_Libertarian_Drug_Legalization_Argument.php?view_all=1
Thanks, LB. I will try to read it and think about it.
Here is Henderson’s dissent:
“Most, if not all, libertarians insist that drug usage is a victimless crime. It isn’t. In today’s world, its victims are legion. Whether they are innocent bystanders killed in gun battles between rival drug factions in American cities, or the thousands of South Americans who have been kidnapped, robbed, or murdered by the powerful drug cartels, any American who uses illegal drugs today has blood on his hands. I disagree when libertarians try to pin all the blame on Uncle Sam. Laws criminalizing drugs don’t drive drug prices into the stratosphere by themselves. The other factor is American demand for those drugs.If you want to work for the decriminalization of drugs, then do so; but until those drugs are legal, don’t tell me that you have a right to use them. If you choose to use illegal drugs, your choice is helping to kill people. This is not, and never will be, your right.”
I don’t find it persuasive. When alcohol was illegal the consequence was an enormous rise in violent crime, including murder. What was responsible for that? Yes, if everyone had stopped drinking alcohol, the effect of prohibition would have been zero. But they didn’t. So are the drinkers responsible for the violence, or the stupid laws? If Prof. Henderson would blame the drinkers for the horrors of organized criminality, I would take his claim more seriously. I doubt that he would. It was the idiotic Prohibition Act that was responsible. Blaming the whiskey drinkers or the pot smokers or heroin injectors for the criminality occasioned by prohibition is like blaming oxygen for the fires started by pyromaniacs.