Pot in America

[--Pete]

Hi,

So... If we can figure out how to do this as a society without wielding the force of government, then we will be wealthier and more free.

This sentence implies that society and government are two different (and even opposing) things. Since we live in a representative democracy, the theory, at least, is that government is the institution established by society to accomplish what is needed for the general welfare. We, as a group, recognize that sometimes we, as individuals, need to be forced to actions beneficial to society but against our individual interest.

That being said, much of the function of modern government is a throwback to the period when government and religion were tightly intertwined or even the same. Under those circumstances, the government is not just the guardian of the common good, but the dictator of common morality. Based on that historical antecedent, many of our laws are there not to protect us from enemies domestic and foreign, nor to protect us from each other, but to protect us from ourselves.

Such are the drug laws, which in their moralistic attempt to protect us from ourselves have swung wide the gates of attacks on us from enemies foreign (the drug cartels) and domestic (the local drug dealers, their gangs, and their turf wars).

Legalized drugs will need control. Control of how the drugs are made, where they are made, and how they are distributed. And these controls will have to come from the government at some level.

To me, it is not a question of how big the government is but what the government does. As long as it protects my freedoms, then I will support, both with my ballot and my wallet, as much government as is necessary. But if it capriciously interferes with those freedoms, then a single person is too much government.

--Pete