Add the Economist’s voice to the chorus

~ Jason Schwartz
The Economist weighs in on drug prohibition. (Again.) Not surprising, given their Libertarian leanings.

I like that they refer to legalization as the “least bad” option. This frames the discussion in a more honest way, though their presentation of the risks/benefits are simplistic and suffer from excessive certitude. (Note that they’re advocating the legalization of ALL drugs.)

They also make the assumptions that one would expect from a publication devoted to free markets:

Prohibition has failed to prevent the proliferation of designer drugs, dreamed up in laboratories. Legalisation might encourage legitimate drug companies to try to improve the stuff that people take.

I do not share their faith that free markets would be a good thing for the drug trade.

Something is clearly happening. Chatter on the topic is growing. Let’s hope for reform, but let’s hope it’s done in a thoughtful and realistic way. The status quo is unacceptable, but the distance between the status quo and legalization is vast.

Unknown's avatar

Published by Jason Schwartz

I have been an addiction professional and social worker since 1994. I started blogging in 2005 as the Clinical Director at Dawn Farm. I currently serve as the Director of Social Work and Spiritual Care for a healthcare system. I've also served as the Director of Behavioral Health at another hospital. I'm also a lecturer at Eastern Michigan University’s School of Social Work. Views expressed here are my own. Keep in mind that the field, the contexts in which the field operates, and my views have changed over time.

One thought on “Add the Economist’s voice to the chorus”

  1. Free market drug trade? Not a good idea.It doesn’t even work with televisions.Imagine Walmart on crack, (literally). Although, in a sick way fair trade, organic, single origin, estate grown Chinese heroin whose proceeds benefit oppressed children in Gaza, sounds appealing.

    Like

Comments are closed.