|
(click on ads for more
details)
|
|
A Nation of Children
by Sheldon Richman
President Clinton took some flak in the closing weeks of his
administration
when he told a Rolling Stone interviewer, "I think that most small
amounts of marijuana have been decriminalized in some places and should
be."
The negative reaction was so strong that a Clinton spokesman said that the
president was not endorsing decriminalization. You figure it out. I guess
it all depends on what your definition of "should" is.
Shepherd Smith, president of the Institute for Youth Development,
responded, "Decriminalizing 'small amounts of marijuana' is simply a
euphemistic way of saying it's fine to smoke it, just don't sell it. So we
now have the president of the United States on record again saying to
young people that smoking marijuana is basically OK."
Oh really?
Let me rush to the former president's defense. Since when is it an
endorsement of an activity to say that it shouldn't be treated as a crime?
There are many things that are perfectly legal to do that would best be
avoided. Bungee jumping is the first example that springs to mind, but
there are many others. Did you ever hear anyone say, "By making
bungee jumping legal, we are sending a message to our kids that such risky
behavior is OK?" Some people enthusiastically endorse bungee jumping.
Search the World Wide Web and you'll find people who call it "the
ultimate rush."
But is it accurate to say "we" -- meaning Society or The Country
-- are telling kids that they should bungee jump? I don't think so.
Some people just don't get the point of a free society. The freedom to do
something doesn't mean you ought to do that thing. How basic can you get?
Yet we seem to want to teach our children the opposite lesson: if
something is legal, then it is OK to do it. And that leads to the view
that we should legalize only those things we want people to do. That's
just nutty.
Under what used to be known as "liberalism" (today we say
"classical
liberalism"), people were free to do anything except that which was
expressly (and justly) prohibited by the law, such as murder, robbery,
rape, and the like. On the other hand, government could do nothing except
that which was expressly (and justly) permitted to it. To use the imagery
of political philosopher Stephen Macedo, government power constituted a
few islands in a sea of liberty.
All that has changed now, thanks to the gang that appropriated the word
"liberalism" about a century ago. Today, continuing with
Macedo's analogy, liberty constitutes a few islands in a sea of government
power. We are quickly heading toward a situation in which, as someone once
put it, everything that is not forbidden is required. In other words:
total government.
The price is the liberty, self-responsibility, and dignity of the
individual. Contrary to the attitude of so many people today, that is no
small price. As Charles Murray, author of
What It Means to Be a Libertarian, says, self-responsibility
is what keeps our lives from being trivial.
Everyone pays lip service to self-responsibility. But what is so
misunderstood is that self-responsibility requires freedom. Try imagining
one without the other. It's like trying to square the circle. It cannot be
done.
The American political system has been seized by the idea that there are
areas in which individuals may not be permitted liberty and
self-responsibility. Drugs are one such area.
A hundred years ago, people were trusted with the freedom and
responsibility of self-medication. They could freely buy opiates and
marijuana; Coca-Cola contained cocaine. A small percentage of the
population harmed themselves with those substances. But there was no drug
problem. The drug problem was born the day government began passing laws
depriving people of freedom and responsibility. Those laws gave us black
markets with their attendant violence, organized crime, and
law-enforcement corruption. They did something worse -- if worse can be
imagined. They infantilized the American people. The results were
predictable. The sphere of freedom and self-responsibility sphere shrank
radically -- to a point where no one is responsible for anything anymore.
If you treat adults like children, many of them will come to believe that
that is what they are.
Sheldon Richman is senior fellow at The Future of Freedom Foundation
(www.fff.org) in Fairfax, Va., and
editor of Ideas on Liberty magazine.
|