Is Pierre Poilievre wrong about decriminalizing drugs? – Cannabis News, Lifestyle

Is Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre wrong about drug decriminalization? On May 31, 2022, he tweeted:

“Decriminalizing deadly drug use is the opposite of compassion. Those struggling with addiction need treatment and recovery. Drug dealers need strong police and tough penalties.”

Ben Perrin, UBC law professor and author of Overdose: Heartbreak and Hope in Canada’s Opioid Crisis, was quick to respond. he tweeted back,

“This is so disappointing. I used to think the same, Pierre. Then I met with people in recovery and families of people whose children died from drug overdoses. And I read the research. Everyone said criminalizing drug users made it worse. This is not a political issue.”

The reasons behind Pierre Poilievre’s view on drug decriminalization

Fans of Poilievre’s libertarian take on Canada are no doubt confused. How can Canada become “the freest nation on earth” if the federal government remains a gatekeeper over what we put into our bodies? A little ironic (or hypocritical) for someone who defies vaccination regulations and takes a pro-choice position based on the principles of personal responsibility and physical autonomy.

And then you discard all these principles based on an ideological view of drugs.

The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police also wants to change the laws. They have called for drug use to be treated as a public health problem by decriminalizing mere possession. Exactly what BC just did. As Perrin put it: “[Poilievre] wants to criminalize things the police say Canadians should be allowed to do.”

Poilievre claims to be a fan of economist Milton Friedman when he was on Jordan Peterson’s podcast. The 43-year-old explained why free markets work better than taxes and bureaucracy.

But it seems Poilievre is picking and choosing which part of Friedman’s work he likes. Milton Freidman once said, “If you look at the drug war from a purely economic perspective, government’s role is to protect the drug cartel. That is literally true.”

So what’s up? Is Poilievre playing with its social conservative base? Will he take a more libertarian position if (or if) he becomes a conservative leader?

Or is the problem more insidious? Instead of asking, “Why are conservatives like this?” we should ask about our prejudices. Is Addiction a “Public Health Problem”?

Many of us still carry the baggage of decades of drug war propaganda. And it can be seen in both Poilievre and Perrin’s tweets. There is an implicit bias whenever we talk about drugs. And it’s a completely unscientific bias.

Drugs don’t harm people.

Poilievre said, “Those struggling with addiction need treatment and recovery.”

Drug advocates and prohibitionists operate in the same paradigm. Addiction experts and Poilievre agree on this. And here both sides still fall victim to drug war propaganda.

Drugs don’t hurt people any more than guns. Guns are an approximate cause of death; The ultimate cause is the person pulling the trigger. Similar to hard drugs like opioids. An opioid can kill the brain and body, but the ultimate cause is the mind choosing to participate.

But isn’t that the point of addiction? People don’t vote? Doesn’t the word “addiction” mean that the person doesn’t make a choice?

Clinical psychologist Reaume Carrol Mulry, Ph.D., would likely disagree. As did Stanton Peele, Ph.D., and Peter Venturelli, Ph.D.

So did former problem drinkers Mark Scheeren and Michelle Dunbar, and former heroin user Steven Slate.

These people represent a small but growing community of ex-addicts and medical professionals—people who are skeptical that the concept of addiction and recovery is anything but harmful.

Addiction is a myth

Pierre Poilievre’s belief in drugs and addiction is not so far from being criticized by the so-called “addiction experts”.

Addiction is the belief that outside forces — like THC according to the government — have the power to enslave people. But even with something heavier like alcohol or heroin, how are people forced to do things they don’t want to do?

British Columbia decriminalized opioids, cocaine, methamphetamine and MDMA. Do any of these drugs have an innate power of control?

How exactly does an individual become powerless in the face of the overwhelming “lure” of these substances?

Alcohol, for example, is lifeless. It’s just a liquid. It cannot force you to drink it. You are not a meat puppet controlled by cosmic forces; Everyone has an autonomous mind that chooses.

Well, people are creatures of habit. But confusing ingrained habits with a myth called addiction is nonsense. And harmful.

Would the drug war have started if people’s ideas about drugs were different? That drugs are not “addictive” but only addictive? Chocolate cake can become a habit. Even healthy activities like running build a habit.

“Addiction” is a made-up construct that requires “recovery.” Depending on the drug, some users may require medical detoxification, but beyond that there is no lifetime recovery. People are not born addicts. There is no “addictive personality”.

Belief in addiction feeds the idea that you cannot choose to stop or moderate your behavior. It’s a self-destructive suggestion. It’s drug war propaganda, pure and simple. This belief in addiction denies you your personal responsibility by constructing a bogeyman.

Governments and busy public health bodies love this kind of narrative. It subjects the individual to external forces beyond his control. It says: “Some of your actions are involuntary; therefore we will intervene and direct your life for your own good.”

In reality, choosing to use substances is like choosing to do anything. It’s a preference. Many people prefer to escape the confines of their own mind. Cannabis is the safest alternative, but for whatever reason, prefer a different type of high. Even if it means significant health risks.

Pierre Poilievre is not afraid of drug decriminalization

Pierre Poilievre has nothing to fear when it comes to drug decriminalization other than the ongoing drug war propaganda run by so-called public health and addiction experts.

Suppose Poilievre wants to stand out on the traditional left-right spectrum. Suppose he wants to remove the gatekeepers of the conversation around drugs and their dangers. In this case, he can start sounding less like Stephen Harper and more like Steven Slate.

Slate is the lead author of The Freedom Model for Addiction: Escape the Treatment and Recovery Trap. He is also a former heroin and cocaine “addict”.

“The addiction disease model and other compulsive ideologies only distract from the fact that we do what we want to do and that we have the power to change. In my book, I argue against these models and for a realistic view of the powers of substances, so that people approach this as a choice and are happy to change rather than engage in an endless tedious struggle (“recovery”). against a bogeyman – the fictional entity called addiction.”

If Poilievre is serious about making Canada the freest nation on earth, he needs to broaden his horizons. He can start reading Slate’s book.

Canadians don’t need government control over what they can or can’t put into their bodies. And they don’t need public health and “addiction” experts doing the same.