Bud -
[[I said I was withdrawing, but I continued to read for a few days....I think I am the only voice on this thread who represents a contrary position
Guys and gals, why don't you give the legalization of street drugs a rest??? Surely there are more important "rights" issues than focusing on this seedy one...your continued focus on this issue only confirms the perception when I came to this thread, which I had hoped to dispel, that the LP was a party of pot-heads, snorters, and shooters.
Your emphasis should be on fighting the unjust laws and practices. Laws and practices that are unfairly placed on those accused of drug involvement.
I believe a heroic effort is being made in the War on Drugs per se....I do not agree with un-constitutional law enforcement however....lets keep the first, and reform the second...]]
What you are asking for is something that never was, and can never be, i.e. that human beings can be persuaded on a large scale to voluntarily refrain from abusing power to further their own interests without strong, structural built-in restraints.
Unrestrained power tends to attract the aggressive, non-intellectuals into law enforcement and the ambitious, power-seekers into the political-justice system. While this is a gross over-generalization, an ongoing selection/de-selection process produces the same final result.
We have proven beyond a doubt that the behavior and security of the prison populations cannot be effectively controlled. It is simply ludicrous to expect that the free law enforcement and political-legal populations can be effectively controlled in the absence of a general agreement of the electorate that their power MUST be restrained. This is especially true in light of the massively corrupt, incestuous relationship between the both the mass media and the government school education unions and the political power brokers.
I resent your apparent implication that libertarians are simply another special interest group interesting in using drugs or engaging in other proscribed behaviors without legal restraint. While some self-identified libertarians undoubtedly fit that description, I would hope that the majority of libertarians are more interested in living in a society and economy that allows every individual to choose and pursue his own goals, while protecting and benefitting all through the means of the free market exchange system, which is totally compatible with the best of human nature.
"...There are so many issues that you could reach out to middle America, and become a majority party....if your intent is to redress the injustices attendant to the War on Drugs...then go after that...it is a valid point, and resonates well...........if you continue to advocate drug legalization, you will be constrained to a small minority....the only problem with being a minority is that you can only talk about the problems you would like to rectify, but are politically powerless to effect them.]]
Until the education system is broken away from being a government propaganda arm, and until the mass media's stranglehold on news and communication is broken, the libertarian party has almost no chance of majority status. In fact, this is likely an unrealistic goal in any case, as libertarians, as such, are likely to be little interested in serving in political office in the absence of dire necessity.
A realistic libertarian goal is the wide distribution of its ideas on how to return to the founding ideals of America in freeing the individual from oppression and coercion. At some point, libertarians can provide the balance of power to ensure that individual freedoms are protected and valued.
Regards, Don |
