Wednesday, August 24, 2005
No case for legalising drugs - heroin is so passe.
From yesterday's Guardian Why can't you buy heroin at Boots?" which contained such gems as:
So even with legalisation the illegal market would still exist and would still be very large. Second, proponents of legalisation argue that "pure" heroin is OK health wise as the impurities and contaminants wouldn't exist. Well thats simply nonsense. Heroin is not a drug like alcohol or tobacco where users can function and live a life without it, heroin for the vast majority of users is all encompassing and nothing matters to the user apart from the drug. Pure, easily available and legal heroin would just multiply the problems of drug use.
In this respect having "freedoms" like easy access to legal hard drugs would not lead to people living liberated and free lives but to their enslavement, not only to the drug but to the controllers of the supply of the drug whether they be dealers or the government (like what happened with opium in China in the 1800s).
Heroin in fact used to be available on prescription in the UK. I'm not talking about pre 1950s when doctors could prescribe heroin much like any other opiate (such as morphine) but heroin on prescription as a way to deal with the problems of addiction. It was during the 60s that "recreational" drug use became a major problem and one policy used to try and tackle the rising rates of heroin addiction was through the clinical supply of heroin through medical clinics where addicts would come for treatment and get their heroin. However this programme was a total failure for a variety of reasons
. the number of addicts increased by over 100% in the 1970s when the clinics were running
. crime rates of addicts in the program were much the same as those of addicts outwith
. for addicts in the programme their death rate was about 30 times that of the general population
. most of the registered addicts in the programme continued to turn to illicit sources for more drugs
. most did not decrease their heroin dosage over time
. the black market for illegal heroin continued to thrive drawing in a disproportionate number of these new addicts who were younger than what had been using heroin before
So no legalised heroin or prescription heroin doesn't work.
What really annoys me however is that it is usually always people like Lionel Shriver or the Liberal Democrat MEP Chris Davies who are the ones advocating legalisation of hard drugs. Put simply these are not the sort of people who will have to put up with the consequences of such a decision and who will be forced to live in the communities which are already ravaged by drug abuse. It's not just the problems of crime that is there to feed the habit, it's the use of the drugs itself. It's not pleasant at all - the broken syringes laying on the ground, the users slumped in doorways and alleyways. It's the walking by the chemists or health centre in the morning with the lines of users outside waiting for their methadone. It can be extremely intimidating for staff working in these places or patients (often the most vulnerable is society like pensioners) picking up their prescriptions to have someone coming in looking for their methadone and then getting their hit - so what is it going to be like if it was the same for heroin but on a much greater scale? At least methadone is taken orally. And contrary to what Shriver may write most of these people do not want to be heroin or methadone addicts. They do not want to be junkies, they continue using however because that is the nature of addiction.
Most of us aren't heroin addicts because we don't want to be heroin addicts. Or coke heads or meth freaks. The people who do want to be junkies are junkies. Were hard drugs decriminalised, it's dubious that consumption would appreciably rise.First of all the massive increase in heroin users that would result from legalisation (and there would be a massive increase) would multiply the problems of drug abuse far more. Plus legalisation wouldn't take away the illegal market anyway (remember that the black market on cigarettes and alcohol, which are both legal of course, is worth billions of £ a year)
So even with legalisation the illegal market would still exist and would still be very large. Second, proponents of legalisation argue that "pure" heroin is OK health wise as the impurities and contaminants wouldn't exist. Well thats simply nonsense. Heroin is not a drug like alcohol or tobacco where users can function and live a life without it, heroin for the vast majority of users is all encompassing and nothing matters to the user apart from the drug. Pure, easily available and legal heroin would just multiply the problems of drug use.
In this respect having "freedoms" like easy access to legal hard drugs would not lead to people living liberated and free lives but to their enslavement, not only to the drug but to the controllers of the supply of the drug whether they be dealers or the government (like what happened with opium in China in the 1800s).
Heroin in fact used to be available on prescription in the UK. I'm not talking about pre 1950s when doctors could prescribe heroin much like any other opiate (such as morphine) but heroin on prescription as a way to deal with the problems of addiction. It was during the 60s that "recreational" drug use became a major problem and one policy used to try and tackle the rising rates of heroin addiction was through the clinical supply of heroin through medical clinics where addicts would come for treatment and get their heroin. However this programme was a total failure for a variety of reasons
. the number of addicts increased by over 100% in the 1970s when the clinics were running
. crime rates of addicts in the program were much the same as those of addicts outwith
. for addicts in the programme their death rate was about 30 times that of the general population
. most of the registered addicts in the programme continued to turn to illicit sources for more drugs
. most did not decrease their heroin dosage over time
. the black market for illegal heroin continued to thrive drawing in a disproportionate number of these new addicts who were younger than what had been using heroin before
So no legalised heroin or prescription heroin doesn't work.
What really annoys me however is that it is usually always people like Lionel Shriver or the Liberal Democrat MEP Chris Davies who are the ones advocating legalisation of hard drugs. Put simply these are not the sort of people who will have to put up with the consequences of such a decision and who will be forced to live in the communities which are already ravaged by drug abuse. It's not just the problems of crime that is there to feed the habit, it's the use of the drugs itself. It's not pleasant at all - the broken syringes laying on the ground, the users slumped in doorways and alleyways. It's the walking by the chemists or health centre in the morning with the lines of users outside waiting for their methadone. It can be extremely intimidating for staff working in these places or patients (often the most vulnerable is society like pensioners) picking up their prescriptions to have someone coming in looking for their methadone and then getting their hit - so what is it going to be like if it was the same for heroin but on a much greater scale? At least methadone is taken orally. And contrary to what Shriver may write most of these people do not want to be heroin or methadone addicts. They do not want to be junkies, they continue using however because that is the nature of addiction.
Saturday, August 20, 2005
playing politics with the dead
Menezes' family calls for justice. I can understand the anger of Jean Charles de Menezes' cousin Alessandro Pereira - indeed I agree with much of what he has said over the last few days. However there is something deeply unedifying about those who have been busy jostling to position themselves as guardians of the Menezes family interests.
On one side of Mr Periera, sat Asad Rehman (George Galloway's political assistant -which for this individual is enough said about unedifying spectacles) and on his other side sat Yasmin Khan, member of an activist group called Corporate Pirates. A group that admittedly i'd never heard of before tonight, but judging by these pictures they look like every other bunch of self satisfied and self righteous bourgeous students that make up these "zany" and "wacky" protest groups and who manage to trivilise important issues and look like twats all at once.
Furthermore, the website of The Jean Charles de Menezes Family Campaign is registered to an Alistair Alexander. I don't know if it is still the case but this Guardian article from 2003 identifies him as a member of Stop the War Coalition and he was listed on the STWC website as available for comment on the Blix report published earlier that year and appears to be involved with press relations for the STWC. Perhaps someone more knowledgable on the matter can shed some light on this.
Yes to justice for Jean Charles de Menezes. But for those who have attached themselves to the issue and who seek to drag an innocent mans body from the grave in an attempt to exploit it's political capital? Shame on you.
On one side of Mr Periera, sat Asad Rehman (George Galloway's political assistant -which for this individual is enough said about unedifying spectacles) and on his other side sat Yasmin Khan, member of an activist group called Corporate Pirates. A group that admittedly i'd never heard of before tonight, but judging by these pictures they look like every other bunch of self satisfied and self righteous bourgeous students that make up these "zany" and "wacky" protest groups and who manage to trivilise important issues and look like twats all at once.
Furthermore, the website of The Jean Charles de Menezes Family Campaign is registered to an Alistair Alexander. I don't know if it is still the case but this Guardian article from 2003 identifies him as a member of Stop the War Coalition and he was listed on the STWC website as available for comment on the Blix report published earlier that year and appears to be involved with press relations for the STWC. Perhaps someone more knowledgable on the matter can shed some light on this.
Yes to justice for Jean Charles de Menezes. But for those who have attached themselves to the issue and who seek to drag an innocent mans body from the grave in an attempt to exploit it's political capital? Shame on you.
Saturday, August 06, 2005
Robin Cook
Former Cabinet minister Robin Cook, 59, has died after collapsing while hill walking in north-west Scotland.
I didn't always agree with him, increasingly so in the last two or three years but I still had alot of respect for him. Not only as a very capable politician (his resignation speech was described by Andrew Marr as "without doubt one of the most effective, brilliant, resignation speeches in modern British politics" and I think that is a fair point. but also as one of the architects behind "Blairite" foreign policy and in particular the interventions in Kosovo/a and Sierra Leone.
RIP
I didn't always agree with him, increasingly so in the last two or three years but I still had alot of respect for him. Not only as a very capable politician (his resignation speech was described by Andrew Marr as "without doubt one of the most effective, brilliant, resignation speeches in modern British politics" and I think that is a fair point. but also as one of the architects behind "Blairite" foreign policy and in particular the interventions in Kosovo/a and Sierra Leone.
RIP
Friday, August 05, 2005
Akbar Ganji
Eight Nobel laureates call for Akbar Ganji's release
Reporters Without Borders today hailed a petition calling for the immediate and unconditional release of imprisoned Iranian journalist Akbar Ganji which was launched by Iran's 2003 Nobel peace laureate Shirin Ebadi and which has already been signed by seven other Nobel laureates.
"Iran's most senior officials must heed this very clear message from eight world figures who have made outstanding contributions to peace and science," the organisation said, going on to appeal to foreign diplomats based in Tehran to visit Ganji at Milad hospital, where he was taken on 17 July.
Until now, Iran's government and judicial authorities have refused to heed the calls for the release of Ganji, who has been imprisoned for five years and who is continuing the hunger strike he began 54 days ago.
If the international community does not react, Ganji is going to die.
The eight Nobel laureates who have already signed the petition are :
Shirin Ebadi - 2003 Nobel peace prize
John Hume - 1998 Nobel peace prize
Jody Williams - 1997 Nobel peace prize
Archbishop Desmond Tutu - 1984 Nobel peace prize
Mairead Corrigan Maguire - 1976 Nobel peace prize
Betty Williams - 1976 Nobel peace prize
Maurice Allais - 1988 Nobel prize for economics
Georges Charpak - 1992 Nobel prize for physics
The petition can be found here: Free Akbar Ganji: an appeal to Iran.
For a brief background on Ganji and his imprisonment:click here.
Ganji's Letter to Free People of the World (part 1)
Ganji's Second Letter to the Free People of the World
Reporters Without Borders today hailed a petition calling for the immediate and unconditional release of imprisoned Iranian journalist Akbar Ganji which was launched by Iran's 2003 Nobel peace laureate Shirin Ebadi and which has already been signed by seven other Nobel laureates.
"Iran's most senior officials must heed this very clear message from eight world figures who have made outstanding contributions to peace and science," the organisation said, going on to appeal to foreign diplomats based in Tehran to visit Ganji at Milad hospital, where he was taken on 17 July.
Until now, Iran's government and judicial authorities have refused to heed the calls for the release of Ganji, who has been imprisoned for five years and who is continuing the hunger strike he began 54 days ago.
If the international community does not react, Ganji is going to die.
The eight Nobel laureates who have already signed the petition are :
Shirin Ebadi - 2003 Nobel peace prize
John Hume - 1998 Nobel peace prize
Jody Williams - 1997 Nobel peace prize
Archbishop Desmond Tutu - 1984 Nobel peace prize
Mairead Corrigan Maguire - 1976 Nobel peace prize
Betty Williams - 1976 Nobel peace prize
Maurice Allais - 1988 Nobel prize for economics
Georges Charpak - 1992 Nobel prize for physics
The petition can be found here: Free Akbar Ganji: an appeal to Iran.
For a brief background on Ganji and his imprisonment:click here.
Ganji's Letter to Free People of the World (part 1)
As I have said many times before, if I die in prison, it is on the orders of Mr. Khamenei. Mortazavi [a hardline Iranian judge and General Prosecutor of Tehran who ordered the closure of over 80 pro-reform newspapers that supported Mohammad Khatami in 1999 and who is now likely to become Justice Minister in the cabinet of the President-elect Ahmadinejad] gets his orders via Mr. Hejazi directly from Mr. Khamenei. I have opposed the unelected and indefinite rule of Mr. Khamenei. I have said that life-time unaccountable absolute power is at odds with democracy. I said expressing this opinion will be faced with Mr. Khamenei's quick and harsh reaction. What took place proved me right. He does not tolerate any personal criticism. Karroubi, Moeen and Hashemi Rafsanjani all tasted Mr. Khamenei's "religious democracy" in this election. The widespread and organized interference of the Guards Corps and Basij caused the outcry of even Larijani's campaign staff and the person of Mohsen Rezaei. A sultanist system is at odds with democracy. In such a system the sultan rules supreme and everyone else is at his service. Mortazavi has told my wife: "What will happen if Ganji dies? Dozens die everyday in prisons; Ganji will be just one of them." These are Mr. Khamenei's words that are uttered through Mortazavi's lips. Ganji dies, but the demand for freedom, democracy, political justice, hope, aspirations and ideals won't. Love for others and self-sacrifice for people will always continue to live.
Ganji's Second Letter to the Free People of the World
Instead of giving up the resistance against tyrants and those who violate human rights, we should refute the pre-modern illusions of the people. We should point out that there are no saviors. All men are regular people and prone to error. Earthly human is sinful and erring.- - - We should relentlessly criticize everyone's opinions and beliefs, including those of the dissidents....It is not at all important that a person is not tolerant of criticism, neither is it important that the disciples of a political thinker or activist consider him immune to error, what is important is that criticism should be possible, so that everyone would get criticized in the public arena, and no one could deceive the people with totalitarian ideologies. Brave intellectuals and thinkers are the ones who should be building the public arena, instead of waiting for the ruling regime to build it for them.
I was reminded of Milan Kundera. In his novel "The Unbearable Lightness of Being", recounting the situation after the "Spring of Prague", Kundera writes: "Is it better to shout out and hasten our death or to keep our silence and lengthen our slow and gradual dying"- - -
This candle is about to die out. But this voice will not be silenced. This is the voice of peaceful life, tolerating the other, love for humanity, self-sacrifice for people, seeking truth, seeking freedom, demand for democracy, respecting the opponents, welcoming different lifestyles, separation of the state and the civil society, separation of the private sphere and the public sphere, separation of religion and state, equality of all humans, rationality, federalism within a democratic Iran, rejecting violence.
This candle is about to die out, but this voice will raise louder voices in its wake.
