The War on Drugs Is “The New Jim Crow”
By Randall Holcombe • Monday January 16, 2012 9:38 AM PDT • 17 Comments
Here is some reading to celebrate Martin Luther King Day: Michelle Alexander’s book, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. I confess up front I have not read the book. I’ve just read some things about it. Here is a short write-up from the author’s interview on NPR.
The book came to my attention as I was reading Leonard Pitts’s column in the newspaper this morning. I read Pitts regularly, although not necessarily because I agree with him. Rather, reading him helps me to see things from a point of view different from mine.
Blacks are hit harder by the War on Drugs at least partly because their drugs of choice are more likely to be illegal. Tossing back a couple of shots of bourbon is an adult thing to do. Smoking a joint is a crime. I think the racial profiling argument has merit too. Despite the title of Alexander’s book, many people aren’t colorblind, and that includes people in law enforcement.
The War on Drugs has been going on for three decades, so it should be obvious by now that it can’t be won. So far, libertarian arguments against it have fallen flat. The idea that individuals should have the freedom to make their own lifestyle choices hasn’t won the day in what we call “the land of the free.” Freedom must mean the freedom to make what other people think are bad choices. What kind of freedom is it that only allows you to make what those in government think are good choices?
It seems the freedom argument against the War on Drugs stands no chance when the government even wants to tell people they can’t eat food that bureaucrats have decided is not healthy. If we can’t win the War on Food, how will we win the War on Drugs?
Politically, the argument that the War on Drugs is racist seems like more of a winner. The libertarian in me likes the “individual freedom” argument better, but for those who really want to end the War on Drugs, the “racist” argument has more political clout.
Tags: Civil Liberties, Criminal Justice, Culture, Drugs, Food, Liberalism, Morality, Nanny State, Personal Liberty, Politics, Racism, The State 
“Blacks are hit harder by the War on Drugs at least partly because their drugs of choice are more likely to be illegal. Tossing back a couple of shots of bourbon is an adult thing to do. Smoking a joint is a crime.”
It’s even far more racist than that. Blacks are not much more likely than whites to use marijuana or cocaine, but far, far more likely to be punished for it.
Anthony Gregory | Jan 16, 2012 | Reply
Great post for MLK day! Interesting idea, though one that I have been generally opposed to. While I would love to see drugs legalized for libertarian reasons, I generally dislike the sort of “ends justify the means” idea of using racism or another beside-the-point rationale to accomplish it.
I fear that I would disagree with much of this book. That said, I cannot wait to get my hands on it.
Travis | Jan 16, 2012 | Reply
So, if the war on drugs is not working...we should just abandon it? Then it’s safe to say that if the black community would stop doing illegal drugs, there wouldn’t be a problem...There are so many reasons for all people not to do the right thing, how about coming up with reasons to do the right thing instead of sitting around taking drugs? How about; get a job, start a business, play with your kids, teach your kids math, learn how to speak properly so you don’t sound so ghetto, go to church, coach kids sports...The list of decent things to do is longer than you can imagine. Doing drugs is the easy thing and falls to the lowest common denominator.
JohnnyUSA | Jan 16, 2012 | Reply
I prefer the argument you made that the War on Drugs cannot be won. It cannot be won because we are not willing to do whatever it takes to win. For example, the Chinese rid themselves of opium by executing anyone who sold, carried, used, etc. opium. We are, rightly, not willing to go that far. So, the incentives for illegal drugs remain in place.
Rick Caird | Jan 16, 2012 | Reply
JohnnyUSA, Your point is that if everyone just behaved properly there would be no drug problem. Sounds like a tautology. I’m not okay with the status quo spending $100B/year on this failed drug war.
BooManWho | Jan 16, 2012 | Reply
The principal reason to end the drug war is because it is immoral. It is immoral to put people in jail for consuming and selling drugs, just as it was immoral to do so in regard to alcohol during the 1920s.
Anthony Gregory | Jan 16, 2012 | Reply
Randall Holcombe, always the pragmatist.
I could agree with this. If you want to get things done, living in a weird ideal space where you cannot even make arguments which you do not rate as being pure is nonsense. Clearly you overrate both your ability to self-evaluate and the importance of the specific argument presented. Meanwhile the other side will employ every possible strategy to forward their agenda. Hopefully they don’t take away your freedom to feel smug, but don’t count on it.
Daniel Francis | Jan 16, 2012 | Reply
What? Are you serious? You people must live in a log cabin in Canada to believe any of this crap. A person’s race doesn’t determine the drugs they do. That’s the kind of thinking that most people look to the past thinking wtf where we thinking. So black people like weed and crack? If that’s the case white people like enslaving different races to do the work for us cause WE are lazy. Ha. You think someone is a lazy bum because they smoke weed? No. Lazy bums, cannot afford it, and live outside of gas stations and under bridges. And there is a rainbow of ethnically diverse bums. My older brother is a bum AND he is white. Do ya think his skin is gonna start getting dark!?!?! Morons.
ArronTyler | Jan 16, 2012 | Reply
Well, you know who to vote for if you want to end the drug war, right?
me | Jan 17, 2012 | Reply
By making drugs illegal, we increase the street value and make it worthwhile to deal in drugs. Drugs are themselves not that expensive to produce so the high profit margins are worth the occasional drugs bust.
If illegal drugs were available through responsible outlets/or on a prescription basis at cost-plus prices the illegal drugs trade would simply collapse by being unable to compete.
The lower cost of drugs would also mean that drug users wouldn’t need to resort to crime to make enough money to buy the inflated prices of illegal drugs. It is this kind of criminal activity (nearly all shoplifting, mugging and petty burglary is done for this purpose) then those of us who are law-abiding would not suffer nearly as much from these crimes.
Another problem caused by keeping drugs illegal is that they are very often ‘cut’ with some very unpleasant chemicals; this, and the difficulty for users to know what strength (and therefore how much) of the drug they are taking is the main cause of drug overdoses and other side effects. You had the same problem with illegal hooch during prohibition.
Whether the drug users are damaging themselves should be of no greater concern to us than those who abuse alcohol and tobacco.
John Harrison | Jan 17, 2012 | Reply
My apologies for errors in grammar and syntax in my previous, hastily written, post.
John Harrison | Jan 17, 2012 | Reply
“If illegal drugs were available through responsible outlets/or on a prescription basis at cost-plus prices the illegal drugs trade would simply collapse by being unable to compete.”
How/when would cocaine or heroin or meth be prescribed? If you restrict access much at all, won’t you create more or less the same black market? Addictive painkillers are legal (for some people) and “safe” (when used appropriately), yet they’re THE drug problem in some places.
David | Jan 17, 2012 | Reply
Just because it is not easy to defeat or arrest it’s insidious strangle hold on people does not mean it’s not the right thing to do. It is not simply a drug problem, it is a social issue that involves not only us but also generations to come.By trying to legalize it so it can be taxed and regulated is a mistaken belief that a strict regimen of government control will heal / cure a deeper illness in mankind is greatly flawed.
dale kuser | Jan 17, 2012 | Reply
Randall is 100% right:
http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/why-is-marijuana-illegal/
Also: http://www.letsgetfreethebook.com/jurorsforjustice/powertothepeople-whatisjurynullification.html
Jake Witmer | Jan 17, 2012 | Reply
Common sense, a knowledge of what a hilarious catastrophe prohibition was, and what an utter failure the “war on drugs” is is enough. You dont need to dress it up with race card frills.
Just legalize all drugs, price the cheaply manufactured stuff so that its easily affordable including a huge chunk of tax, and the addicts (who by the way will NEVER go away) can get em even if they wash toilets in a McDonalds to be able to afford em.
This way innocent people arent so likely to wind up as victims of collateral damage in the bootlegging of drugs which are priced accordingly and the drug addict becomes a tax paying citizen...just like beer drinkers and smokers have become. If I was an addict and I could find some menial job to support my habit; behaved myself and didnt beat up people for money, I could even live with mom without her getting clobbered for money or for hassling me about my habit. But no prescription needed...keep it to nothing more than buying a case of beer.
The meth labs smugglers and cartels would have to find something else to do. And oh by the way, so would a good number of law enforcement personnel and lawyers!
JoeBejma | Jan 17, 2012 | Reply
I remember reading an article in the July 2009 Socionomist, “The Coming Collapse of a Modern Prohibition”. That article mentioned how during times of positive social mood (bull markets), society has plentiful resources to try to enforce its moral preferences. During times of negative social mood (bear markets), those resources become vastly more scarce, attitudes toward vices change to see them as more benign, even a harmless way to relieve the stresses of life in very stressful times, and society has much bigger things to worry about (e.g., depressions, wars, struggles for survival) than what somebody, somewhere, is putting into his own body.
I also ran across this article:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-how-can-americas-war-on-drugs-succeed-if-their-prohibition-laws-failed-1997227.html
Putting together the article above with what the Socionomist said, what will likely bring about decriminalization, or maybe even legalization, of drugs will be a desire to stop the bloodshed brought about by government indirectly granting a monopoly on a huge market to criminals and criminal gangs that enforce their monopoly the only way they can – through intimidation and violence, combined with governments becoming desperate for tax revenue and realizing that they can get some from the market that their prohibition has given over entirely to criminals, but to get the tax money, they will have to decriminalize that market. The desire of desperate governments for new sources of tax revenue, combined with a desire to stop the bloodshed, is what will most likely end the “war on drugs”.
Robert | Jan 18, 2012 | Reply
Very interesting article on an important subject that should be brought to the forefront of the GOP debates. It’s an asinine concept to criminalize certain plants that grow naturally period. It should be obvious to the overwhelming majority that the shadow government finances their empire through nefarious drug activities. Even more alarming, they use drug profits to build up a large praetorian class to eliminate competition and intimidate the citizenry.
4204life | Jan 18, 2012 | Reply