Skip to main content

Not exactly Agenda 21, but now the UN weighs in on drug legalization in the US

It could be expected that the Drug Enforcement Administration would resist the legal changes in Colorado, Washington, and parts of Michigan to legalize marijuana.

It could also be expected that congressional delegations as cowardly as our own would not stand up for the majorities of citizens in those states (and around the nation, according to most polls) calling for an end not only to marijuana Prohibition, but also to the failed and destructive "war on drugs."

But I have to admit that it came as something of an Agenda 21-type surprise to find a senior UN official weighing in on what he and his organization think the correct Federal response should be:

VIENNA -- The head of the U.N. drug watchdog agency is urging U.S. federal officials to challenge ballot measures in Colorado and Washington that decriminalized possession of small amounts of marijuana for adults 21 and over. 
Raymond Yans says the approvals send "a wrong message to the rest of the nation and it sends a wrong message abroad." 
Yans heads the International Narcotics Control Board. He told The Associated Press on Tuesday he hopes Attorney General Eric Holder "will take all the necessary measures" to ensure that marijuana possession and use remains illegal throughout the U.S.
What exactly is that "wrong message," Mr. Yan?

That people in a democratic society have a right to decide for themselves what substances to put in their bodies?

That treating drug addiction issues like medical rather than criminal problems is a bad thing, because we don't have sufficient narco-terrorism due to the thriving trade in now-illegal substances?

That the US made a horrible mistake in repealing prohibition?

That the heads of state of multiple Central and South American governments who have applauded this change are both wrong and evil?

Or is it that the UN really is increasingly feeling like it should play a role in determining the internal social policies not just in the developing (read "dark-skinned") world, but also in the industrialized nations?

Comments

Delaware Watch said…
I agree that this is not the UN's business. But it is hyperbolic to compare the expression of a wish to a conspiracy theory that (if it were true and it's not) requires certain actions be taken. Wishing and acting are not synonymous.
Delaware Watch said…
My bad. I confused Agenda 21 with something else. Forget what I said.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...