The Drug War Requires a Police State

Interesting thought experiment by Kevin Carson considering how the War on Drugs would fare in a society in which the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the US Constitution were respected according to their plain meaning and spirit. "Not well" is the short version.

Carson concludes:

If you want the Drug War, you must sacrifice the Bill of Rights and the due process rights of the accused, and submit to a police state in which you have no rights or protections whatsoever.

I would tend to put this the other way round, that the Drug War (like its antecedents, including Prohibition) exists because of its impact on due process rights: if drugs didn't exist they'd need to be invented, because the same rights that are essential to democracy are obstacles to capitalism.

Focus

Ezra Klein links to an Johann Hari's account of taking Provigil. I think some of Hari's fears are unfounded:

And if this drug becomes as popular as, say, anti-depressants or Ritalin, won’t there be a social pressure for workers to take it? Many parents feel intensely pressured by schools today to drug away their child’s disobedience; will they feel pressured by their bosses to drug away their natural fatigue?

Although he is supposedly talking about "popular" drugs like "anti-depressants [and] Ritalin," the pressure he's worried about really only applies to the latter: nobody is pressured into taking anti-depressants themselves. The case of children in school is unique because of the incredible pressure our society puts on parents. I think people who aren't bosses (but I repeat myself) would already see the immense inappropriateness of any pressure from an employer to use any medication, let alone one that impacts productivity. Also, more flippantly, what boss actually wants smarter worker drones?

For myself, I love the idea of Provigil. I sure wouldn't waste it on making myself more productive at work, though.