>>If you’re allowing the state to give you permission to obtain a substance, you are acquiescing to the rules it sets in place governing the substance<<
Marijuana is wonderful at best, and harmless at worst. Making this plant illegal has led to an increase in violence from government agencies and cartels, and people in every state are realizing what a mistake criminalization has been. In the recent midterm elections legislation passed legalizing the plant on various levels. Florida, where I live, narrowly missed the 60% supermajority needed to add a medical marijuana amendment to the state constitution. Many were disappointed and irritated, blaming young people for not turning out to vote on this very important measure. As one of those non voting “youths” (albeit narrowly), I feel that the ire of pro-legalization voters is undeserved. You see, legalization is a trap.
There Are Anarchists in My Minarchy!
I expect outrage from minarchists, but was surprised to catch so much flak from anarchists about my inaction. An anarchist acquaintance of mine laid into me about the importance of the state recognizing that marijuana is a plant people should be allowed to smoke. It sounded an awful lot like asking permission to do something I don’t need permission for. Every day thousands of people “vote” for legalization in the privacy of their own homes, despite it being illegal most places where this civil disobedience takes place. Apparently my encouragement of civil disobedience wasn’t enough.
Now, there’s a bit of a problem here because specificity of what is being legalized needs to be taken into account if we are to make a solid argument either way. I want to examine some of the trees in the forest of legalization.
Legalization of medicinal marijuana is different from decriminalization or even legalization of recreational cannabis. Each of these categories has nuances that deserve to be explored. The amendment proposed in Florida was limited to medical marijuana specifically.
Current Cannabis Laws in Florida
States have recognized that people suffering from some medical complications benefit from certain components in cannabis, specifically the non-psychoactive CBD compound. Even Florida, notorious for its incompetence at nearly every level of governance, has a law allowing the use of pharmaceutical grade CBD oil if you attain the correct documentation. But, advocates argue this leaves out many people who could use marijuana for medicinal purposes, so they supported Amendment 2, which would have “legalized and regulated” medical marijuana. From the description of the bill:
“In addition to considering various medical marijuana provisions, the legislature was presented with legislation that would have taxed and regulated marijuana like Colorado, a public policy proposal that St. Pete’s Polls found 58.8% of Floridians support.”
Decriminalization vs. Legalization
This language is problematic to anarchists, no? Those little words “taxed” and “regulated” leave the law open to tampering, and the creation of more laws. The law does not decriminalize cannabis in any way; it’s simply re-categorizing criminality. Overturning the law that makes the substance illegal would be preferable, but let’s be real; the state won’t consider legalization of any kind unless it benefits the state apparatus. Decriminalizing cannabis provides no benefit for the state. That is why you see its boot licking cousin “legalization” instead. Legalization at the state level happens in stages once the bureaucrats figure out how they and their friends in certain industries can benefit from it.
Democrats want to tax and regulate because it will generate revenue, but what is the revenue for? In Escambia County, the poorest county in Florida, as of 2012, 49.3% of taxes went to the county sheriff’s office, whose deputies frequently harass the homeless population. When the county cops aren’t busy slashing tarps and tents, the city police are stealing their blankets. I don’t want any money going to an increasingly militarized police force, or a county sheriff’s office under investigation by the DOJ for inhumane jail conditions. Unlike Democrats, I don’t want a more efficient government, nor do I think throwing more taxpayer money at it will make it more ethical.
Militarization of the Police? Not in My Legalization!
Legalization of marijuana would strengthen these irreparably corrupt police departments, and that is something no anarchist should support. Militarizing the police with increased tax revenues (and don’t pretend that revenue wouldn’t go directly to law enforcement) is the unseen consequence of legalization.
If we look at the bigger picture, legalization has boosted revenues for local and state governments in Washington, Colorado, and California. Even the District of Criminals legalized the plant for recreational use to get in on this cash crop. Do you really think it’s because they want to reduce the amount of people in jail?
D.C. has a piss poor track record of police brutality. If we take into account that a large percentage of federal taxes go to war, how counterproductive is it to support a law that increases funding for the warfare state?
Suppose that tax revenue goes to barbaric agencies like the DEA, who will continue the drug war on the federal level. Who do you think cops use their second hand military weaponry on? The answer hardly requires imagination.
Speaking of military weaponry, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 19% of taxes went to warfare spending in 2013. That is $643 billion. An anarchist of any stripe should be against boosting the funding of the war machine. Taxes already support the spread of the massive empire, and I see no reason to encourage that kind of antisocial behavior.
Legalization Doesn’t Stop Federal Raids
Even if cannabis is legal in D.C., it’s still illegal at the federal level. Considering there’s no stopping federal agencies from raiding dispensaries where it is legal, it seems again counterproductive to lobby for legalization. Under this administration, we’ve seen raids on dispensaries increase 80%despite promises from President Obama that he would respect state’s rights. Even more disturbing, these agencies specifically target medical marijuana patients. We shouldn’t expect them to handle recreational use any different. Anarchists should especially know how detrimental it can be to give the state power in regulating anything.
Unintended Consequences
The most common argument I hear from anarchists engaging in politics is that legalization will reduce the number of people thrown in rape cages for a weed, so even if you’re an anarchist it is beneficial to at least vote on legalizing marijuana in any form. This assumes more government regulation will lead to less prison time for offenders.
We often view laws through our own biased lens, which is quite different from the lens of the state. From legislators’ perspective legalization has nothing to do with reducing victimless crimes. Anarchists should know better than to believe laws granting the state more power will result in less imprisonment. Consider what happens when medical marijuana is legal using existing laws in Florida. You have to file paperwork in a government database declaring yourself to be handicapped in some way. We can’t predict how this information will interact with other laws but I assume the worst.
So, if you declare yourself medically defective you are allowed to carry a substance illegal to others. But the language of the Florida amendment was very broad, requiring more specificity to come later. For example, they could prohibit people with a prescription from carrying firearms. If you’re allowing the state to give you permission to obtain a substance, you are acquiescing to the rules it sets in place governing the substance. Maybe that’s an extreme example, but how extreme is it that a plant is illegal in the first place? Knowing what we know about the inefficiency and maliciousness of government is it unrealistic to be suspicious of legalization? Stranger, less sensical laws have been passed.
Let’s look at a more realistic consequence. Purchase of medicinal marijuana would require a doctor’s prescription. Who decides which doctors are qualified? Hint: it’s not your reasonable, common sense oriented friends. Also, how will this change the classification? It’s likely marijuana would be reclassified the same as other more dangerous prescription medications, which carry far worse penalties than small amounts of cannabis under the current laws. If you’re caught with a large amount of cannabis without a prescription, would it be the same as getting pulled over with a large amount of other prescription medications? According to a criminal justice lawyer in Orlando:
“Possession of a controlled substance, with that substance being a prescription drug, is typically a third degree felony punishable by up to five years in prison, five years probation and/or a $5,000 fine. But the real danger with prescription drug possession is just how serious it can become with only a few pills. A few prescription drugs make the list as only a misdemeanor offense, these drugs are known as “Schedule V” drugs (but arrests for these are rare). Depending upon the brand/manufacturer, certain oxycodone pills can add up to a trafficking offense carrying three years of mandatory prison, and a mandatory $50,000 fine with as few as 7 pills. These pills have a street value of roughly $150-$200, so you’re not talking about a lot of money to catch a big case. The same sort of trafficking offense for cocaine would require $10,000 worth of cocaine, and pounds and pounds of marijuana.” (emphasis mine)
In Florida the penalties for possessing small amounts of prescription painkillers have been increasing as a result of more aggressive policing. If marijuana were reclassified in this category it would take less marijuana to throw someone without a prescription in jail than it does under prohibition. Florida has some of the harshest prisons and prison sentences. Legalization could result in more arrests–and harsher punishments–for less weed.
This may not be the case for other states. Classification varies by location, but Oregon has reclassified cannabis as a Schedule II drug; the same category as opiates. Were other states to follow that lead, you could see more imprisonments for possession of smaller quantities since this law interacts with already established laws. Let’s just say I don’t expect LexCorp Florida™ to be competent or non-malicious in their application of any law.
Legalization does nothing to help users who don’t want to fill out all the invasive paperwork. More importantly, highly sensitive client medical records and identities would be stored in insecure government databases which could expose people to identity theft. Remember these organizations are notorious for security compromises, even at the federal level, so a government database of highly sensitive medical information isn’t necessarily a good thing.
What’s Left Unsaid
My biggest beef with any legalization legislation isn’t what is said, but what is glaringly omitted. If anarchists want to use the argument that more people will be kept out of jail, that’s all well and nice, but what about the millions still imprisoned who aren’t set free by these laws? If something like legalization can be so delicately navigated by the state then why couldn’t prisoner emancipation? Why aren’t there bills to right the obvious wrong of imprisoning innocent people? If the goal is to keep people out of jail, and not to bolster state revenue, one would think this would be a huge demand from legalization advocates. It’s not. Freeing innocent people should be one of the main reasons for legalization if the argument is that it will keep more people out of jail. Now, advocates may be conceding to compromises to get more tepid legislation passed, but regarding anarchists, prisoner emancipation should be something that can’t be compromised. We’re not free as long as people are still sitting in jail for a substance which is now legal.
The Chartreuse Lining
It comes down to whether or not you can trust a government to effectively legalize cannabis with no negative consequences, and whether this effort is worth your time. For anarchists this should be a no-brainer. An anarchist rejects the utility of the state for even the most basic goods and services. Why would this change when it comes to pet issues?
All of these critiques are potential problems as we see more states jumping on the regulation bandwagon. Let’s discuss the philosophical and tactical principles at stake in this situation. I understand why minarchists support legalization, but for an anarchist to argue for political solutions is contradictory. Maybe these anarchists aren’t aware of more effective alternatives than politics to affect change. Cultural shifts have been responsible for numerous policy changes, and for cannabis legalization this is no different. You don’t have to participate in politics at all, even if your desired outcome is legalization on the political level. Society has already voted on this issue and it is just a matter of time before the laws follow, even if they are disastrously carried out.
Guess how the failed amendment affected cannabis users in Florida? It didn’t. People will still go to their dealers and buy it regardless of whether or not it is legal. If needed for dire medical reasons, CBD is still available and there are methods of procuring other types of cannabis suited to your needs. Maybe use the dark web instead, which has actually reduced violence in the drug trade, just make sure you’re not using a site run by the Feds. If reducing violence and imprisonment is the goal of legalization, using government guns to do it seems conflicting. If you want legalization, live as if it is legal, and be careful—or don’t. It is the collective disobeying of a law that invalidates it; not magical words on paper enforced by terrorist organizations.
Let’s be realistic and not assume the mafia will be fair in its newest racket. Advocating legalization in this archaic legal system is not useful philosophically or on a tactical level. It’s totally fine if you do. It is your time to spend and I can understand why many libertarians would support legalization. Just don’t call yourself an anarchist.
No comments:
Post a Comment