When I did my Master's thesis, I looked at Canada's early drug policy. It was interesting to find the Canadian government lobbying the League of Nations for tougher international anti-drug treaties and enforcement through Interpol. Canada was in lockstep with the Americans, who used the League even though they were not members. People we think of as icons on the Left -- the political definitions have evolved-- people like Emily Murphy, whose book "The Black Candle" can be accurately described as racist hate lterature, also pushed this. All of our original drug laws were directed at minorities and at addicted war veterans.
How strange that I have lived through 50 years of The Hundred Years’ War and never realized it. Thank you for educating me. Although it is futile, I wish the Americans responsible for creating this chaos would listen. I applaud your ability to bring so much of this history alive in plain language.
The US-led drug war really did spawn those Mexican cartels, just as Gardner describes. Canada broke from that script with cannabis legalization in 2018. I checked StatsCan. Legal sources jumped from 22 percent of consumption right after to over 70 percent by 2023. Offences dropped sharply too. Ditching prohibition actually starves the black market. See the numbers here: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/231016/dq231016c-eng.htm
The North American prohibition and law enforcement approach stands in stark contrast to a public health approach, which I believe the UK follows.
Canada could look to other models, especially now that fentanyl has turbocharged both profits and overdoses.
Of note, the Conservative govt in AB is now funnelling public funds to private rehab companies friendly to the UCP in a program called Compassionate Care (Orwell would be impressed).
This is yet another example of how illegality creates vast ecosystems of profiteers who exploit people who use drugs. Instead of using existing healthcare to actually help those who want to quit using, the UCP is setting up a lucrative parallel, nontransparent forced rehab system.
And few people understand or care that their taxes are paying for this scam.
I for one, needed that shot of reality. This article has opened up my eyes as I have been drifting away from reality of historical evidence for what happens with leaving it to governments to tell society what is right and wrong. It is our personal responsibility to keep our families friends and communities loved enough and aided enough to not want to be involved in drugs.
A couple of years back I read an article written by Richard Martineau of Le Journal De Montreal. Martineau spoke to the destructive forces and the effect that the drug trade was having not just in Montreal but all of Quebec. Martineau's solution was very simple, stop taking drugs. The article went onto say, we are the problem not the drug dealers. They are just fulfilling a need.
Thank you for that excellent overview. The logic you present also applies to a myriad of other situations. When I was posted in Cameroon Boko Haram was a significant threat in the region and particularly in Northern Cameroon and Nigeria. Its weapons and some of its fighters came to the region because of actions taken elsewhere in the world related to the war on terrorism. For example, Western action in Libya pushed some fighters and weapons south. Young men joined Boko Haram, not because of a true belief in the movement but as it seemed the only means available to earn money for themselves and their families.
At the root, our indifference in such circumstances seems to be generated by the application of a superficial morality from our peaceful and prosperous vantage point. We can look down on those involved in the drug trade arguing that they are doing something bad and therefore we are superior. Taking drugs or not taking drugs can be designated as simply a moral choice and we can write off those who made the immoral decision. They are ultimately responsible for their own position in life. And the same argument applies to those involved in the drug trade at any level. That there is complexity can be ignored and any draconian action taken supported because we feel in the right.
Right. There are stories like this all over the world. How did the Taliban outlast NATO? It wasn't religious fanaticism, or at least not that alone. They paid top wages to poor young men with no prospects. And how were they able to afford that? Primarily by tapping the illegal drug trade.
Over and over and over. The names change but the story is always the same. And no one gives a damn.
Please write a follow-up essay with your views on what the solution could be. This essay suggests that decriminalization is the way to go. If so, what evidence is there for and against it?
Even without prohibition, some suppliers might favor fentanyl over opium, for example (for the same economic reasons drug traffickers tend to favor more potent drugs). Non-prohibition of alcohol seems sensible because we know its consumption doesn’t destroy lives in “large enough” numbers, and it is thoroughly enjoyed by the vast majority of people who consume it with negligible adverse effects (it’s a trade-off we’ve decided to accept, similar to the convenience of driving versus the risk of car-crash fatalities).
But that can’t be said of hard drugs, which are obviously far more dangerous than alcohol. And there’s no strong reason to think, it seems to me, that decriminalization would largely ensure that only their mildest variants would be available, as this essay seems to imply.
Other than decriminalization, draconian measures like those in Singapore would most likely cripple, if not entirely eliminate, the drug trade. But the West would never consider anything of the sort, particularly in this era of extreme leniency toward criminals.
Thanks for continuing to inject facts and common sense into this story. The meaningful impacts need to be underscored and further understood. They do land. Eventually, maybe even on the right people.
Always bang on Dan and I remember reading your chronicles/columns/reports in the Ottawa Citizen—I sure miss newsprint and the disciplined journalism back then. Thankful that people like you are still around and publishing. Too many self published are blowing opinionated shit in the wind without a solid research background.
Excellent as usual. Concerning 'learning from history', to do so we need to teach history in the first place, which we do not do well in North America, not at home, and certainly not in schools.
Many prominent republicans understood the futility of the war on drugs - most notably George Schultz, William F. Buckley and Milton Friedman. Thank you for a great summary.
Another superb piece.
When I did my Master's thesis, I looked at Canada's early drug policy. It was interesting to find the Canadian government lobbying the League of Nations for tougher international anti-drug treaties and enforcement through Interpol. Canada was in lockstep with the Americans, who used the League even though they were not members. People we think of as icons on the Left -- the political definitions have evolved-- people like Emily Murphy, whose book "The Black Candle" can be accurately described as racist hate lterature, also pushed this. All of our original drug laws were directed at minorities and at addicted war veterans.
How strange that I have lived through 50 years of The Hundred Years’ War and never realized it. Thank you for educating me. Although it is futile, I wish the Americans responsible for creating this chaos would listen. I applaud your ability to bring so much of this history alive in plain language.
This was a very informative read, thanks. What policies do you think would actually work?
None
The same strategy as cars, which kill 3000 a year.
The US-led drug war really did spawn those Mexican cartels, just as Gardner describes. Canada broke from that script with cannabis legalization in 2018. I checked StatsCan. Legal sources jumped from 22 percent of consumption right after to over 70 percent by 2023. Offences dropped sharply too. Ditching prohibition actually starves the black market. See the numbers here: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/231016/dq231016c-eng.htm
What I find confusing is that cannabis still has 20% coming from the illicit market. Why would that not be zero?
That 20 percent illicit share sticks around for one main reason. Price drives it. The Canadian Cannabis Survey ranks it as the top factor for buyers. Legal cannabis just costs more for many. Health Canada data shows purchases from illegal dealers dropped to three percent anyway. Check the survey here: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-medication/cannabis/research-data/canadian-cannabis-survey-2024-summary.html
Thanks for this excellent history lesson.
The North American prohibition and law enforcement approach stands in stark contrast to a public health approach, which I believe the UK follows.
Canada could look to other models, especially now that fentanyl has turbocharged both profits and overdoses.
Of note, the Conservative govt in AB is now funnelling public funds to private rehab companies friendly to the UCP in a program called Compassionate Care (Orwell would be impressed).
This is yet another example of how illegality creates vast ecosystems of profiteers who exploit people who use drugs. Instead of using existing healthcare to actually help those who want to quit using, the UCP is setting up a lucrative parallel, nontransparent forced rehab system.
And few people understand or care that their taxes are paying for this scam.
Very educational and enlightening piece.
You’ve made the case that “prohibition” doesn’t work.
So what are potential solutions that could work?
BC tried “decriminalizing” and that’s been farcical.
Is the answer “legalization” like marijuana? Should the government get into the business of regulation and sale of narcotics like it is with alcohol?
I for one, needed that shot of reality. This article has opened up my eyes as I have been drifting away from reality of historical evidence for what happens with leaving it to governments to tell society what is right and wrong. It is our personal responsibility to keep our families friends and communities loved enough and aided enough to not want to be involved in drugs.
Excellent summation of the situation.
A couple of years back I read an article written by Richard Martineau of Le Journal De Montreal. Martineau spoke to the destructive forces and the effect that the drug trade was having not just in Montreal but all of Quebec. Martineau's solution was very simple, stop taking drugs. The article went onto say, we are the problem not the drug dealers. They are just fulfilling a need.
Aye, there's the rub.
It's the "stop taking drugs" that turns out to be the hard part.
Thank you for that excellent overview. The logic you present also applies to a myriad of other situations. When I was posted in Cameroon Boko Haram was a significant threat in the region and particularly in Northern Cameroon and Nigeria. Its weapons and some of its fighters came to the region because of actions taken elsewhere in the world related to the war on terrorism. For example, Western action in Libya pushed some fighters and weapons south. Young men joined Boko Haram, not because of a true belief in the movement but as it seemed the only means available to earn money for themselves and their families.
At the root, our indifference in such circumstances seems to be generated by the application of a superficial morality from our peaceful and prosperous vantage point. We can look down on those involved in the drug trade arguing that they are doing something bad and therefore we are superior. Taking drugs or not taking drugs can be designated as simply a moral choice and we can write off those who made the immoral decision. They are ultimately responsible for their own position in life. And the same argument applies to those involved in the drug trade at any level. That there is complexity can be ignored and any draconian action taken supported because we feel in the right.
Right. There are stories like this all over the world. How did the Taliban outlast NATO? It wasn't religious fanaticism, or at least not that alone. They paid top wages to poor young men with no prospects. And how were they able to afford that? Primarily by tapping the illegal drug trade.
Over and over and over. The names change but the story is always the same. And no one gives a damn.
Thanks for a very informative piece.
Please write a follow-up essay with your views on what the solution could be. This essay suggests that decriminalization is the way to go. If so, what evidence is there for and against it?
Even without prohibition, some suppliers might favor fentanyl over opium, for example (for the same economic reasons drug traffickers tend to favor more potent drugs). Non-prohibition of alcohol seems sensible because we know its consumption doesn’t destroy lives in “large enough” numbers, and it is thoroughly enjoyed by the vast majority of people who consume it with negligible adverse effects (it’s a trade-off we’ve decided to accept, similar to the convenience of driving versus the risk of car-crash fatalities).
But that can’t be said of hard drugs, which are obviously far more dangerous than alcohol. And there’s no strong reason to think, it seems to me, that decriminalization would largely ensure that only their mildest variants would be available, as this essay seems to imply.
Other than decriminalization, draconian measures like those in Singapore would most likely cripple, if not entirely eliminate, the drug trade. But the West would never consider anything of the sort, particularly in this era of extreme leniency toward criminals.
Thanks for continuing to inject facts and common sense into this story. The meaningful impacts need to be underscored and further understood. They do land. Eventually, maybe even on the right people.
Excellent article. Best, most comprehensive, analysis of the drug trade I've read.
Interesting article, but as others have said, criticising the status quo is the easy bit. What is your proposed solution?
Always bang on Dan and I remember reading your chronicles/columns/reports in the Ottawa Citizen—I sure miss newsprint and the disciplined journalism back then. Thankful that people like you are still around and publishing. Too many self published are blowing opinionated shit in the wind without a solid research background.
Excellent as usual. Concerning 'learning from history', to do so we need to teach history in the first place, which we do not do well in North America, not at home, and certainly not in schools.
Many prominent republicans understood the futility of the war on drugs - most notably George Schultz, William F. Buckley and Milton Friedman. Thank you for a great summary.