When I first became fascinated with the potential for psychoactive therapy a few years ago, I started visiting Maps.org, at which point I suddenly began noticing many references to "harm reduction." This struck me as a trifle odd, not because harm reduction is a bad thing, but merely because of the extreme emphasis placed upon that one aspect of substance use. I would regularly see notices of public get-togethers from Maps to discuss psychedelic therapy. But no sooner would I get my suitcase out of my closet when I would realize that the rendezvous in question was going to be discussing "harm reduction," almost to the exclusion of anything else. I was invited to Burning Man to meet with fellow Maps devotees, for instance; upon reading the fine print, however, it turned out that the group traveling to Nevada was going to be focusing on... you guessed it, "harm reduction." Since then I joined Twitter (God forgive me), where I hoped to find a plethora of state and local organizations devoted to ending the hateful and anti-scientific War on Drugs, but again, the only obvious "plethora" I found on that platform consisted of organizations devoted to "harm reduction."
Of course, upon mature reflection, this made a lot of sense to me. The Drug War clearly puts would-be users in harm's way, first because prohibition incentivizes the sale of unsafe and tainted product, and second because the Drug War teaches us to fear substances rather than to understand them. (When MD Golden Mortimer solicited academic insights about coca use while writing his informative book on the subject, he was told that it was immoral to publish such a book lest the existence of such unbiased information should encourage "drug use": immoral to publish unbiased information!) The natural result is that many Americans need help now, in real-time, and it's a praiseworthy thing that these groups are rising to the challenge. I understand all that.
Yet when drug law reformers focus so exclusively on harm reduction, it leaves an odd impression, at least for the layperson who is wondering what all the fuss is about.
Think of it this way: you receive a small drone for Christmas and look online for fun, useful and/or educational ways to use it, only to find out that almost all sites on the topic are about "harm reduction," that is to say, ways to keep the downsides of drone use to an absolute minimum.
It would leave you wondering: am I the only one in the world who sees the great potential for drones in mapping the scenery, filming movies, following wildlife, searching for trespassers, etc.?
Just so with "drugs": when I see such an emphasis on "harm reduction," I wonder, am I the only one who sees the benefits that they can provide humankind: how MDMA therapy could help end school shootings, how the informed use of psychedelics could obviate the need for a lifetime of expensive and demoralizing trips to the psychiatrist, how the chewing of the coca leaf could drastically reduce the cases of depression in the world, how the strategically non-addictive use of the drugs we have learned to demonize could drastically increase our appreciation of Mother Nature, and music, and our fellow human being?
This lopsided focus on harm reduction makes me feel like the Drug Warriors have achieved their anti-scientific goal: they have convinced even the clearest thinkers among us that demonized substances have -- and can have -- no positive uses whatsoever, for anyone, at any dose, at any time, in any place, ever.
That is the unscientific dogma of the Drug War. It's unscientific because there are no such substances in the world. Even cyanide and Botox have beneficial uses.
Yes, as Drug War opponents, we need to be focusing on harm reduction. The Drug War itself has seen to that by placing "users" in harm's way. But harm reduction should not be our only focus. We need to start talking about "benefit maximization" as well. Otherwise, our lopsided focus gives the impression that the substances that we demonize as "drugs" can truly cause nothing but harm, which is the very lie that Drug War propaganda has been trying to teach us ever since we were given teddy bears in grade school in exchange for just saying "no" to the boogieman called "drugs."
Ten Tweets
against the hateful war on US
The UK just legalized assisted dying. This means that you can use drugs to kill a person, but you still can't use drugs to make that person want to live.
People magazine should be fighting for justice on behalf of the thousands of American young people who are dying on the streets because of the drug war.
The UN of today is in an odd position regarding drugs: they want to praise indigenous societies while yet outlawing the drugs that helped create them.
Prohibitionists have the same M O they've had for the last 100+ years: blame drugs for everything. Being a drug warrior is never having the decency to say you're sorry -- not to Mexicans, not to inner-city crime victims, not to patients who go without adequate pain relief...
I'm going to get on the grade-school circuit, telling kids to say no to horses.
"You think you can handle horses, kids? That's what Christopher Reeves thought. The fact is, NOBODY can handle horses!!!"
Pundits have been sniffing about the "smell" of Detroit lately. Sounds racist -- especially since such comments tend to come from drug warriors, the guys who ruined Detroit in the first place (you know, with drug laws that incentivized profit-seeking violence as a means of escaping poverty).
"Abuse" is a funny term because it implies that there's a right way to use "drugs," which is something that the drug warriors deny. To the contrary, they make the anti-scientific claim that "drugs" are not good for anybody for any reason at any dose.
I just asked New York Attorney General Letitia James how much she was getting paid to play Whack-a-Mole. I pointed out that the drug war created the gangs just as liquor prohibition created the Mafia.
Scientists are not the experts on psychoactive medicines. The experts are painters and artists and spiritualists -- and anyone else who simply wants to be all they can be in life. Scientists understand nothing of such goals and aspirations.
The Partnership for a Death Free America is launching a campaign to celebrate the 50th year of Richard Nixon's War on Drugs. We need to give credit where credit's due for the mass arrest of minorities, the inner city gun violence and the civil wars that it's generated overseas.
The UK just legalized assisted dying. This means that you can use drugs to kill a person, but you still can't use drugs to make that person want to live.