The Debate on Legalization and Cannabis Consumption: A Discussion on Individual Freedom and State Control

Extract

[...] It is therefore observed that cannabis consumption is a reality, a fact. From then on, it can be argued that legalization would not have the effect of encouraging an already existing consumption, but rather of controlling the quality of substances and adapting structures and institutions to promote healthier consumption. This practice is called harm reduction. Currently, it is mainly carried out in France by associations and collectives, who act with limited resources and legal framework, for example by distributing drug testing kits, or clean needles for heroin users. [...]

[...] It is true that places on the globe that have legalized recreational cannabis have seen consumption explode, to the point that Colorado is considering giving tax money back to citizens. Nevertheless, a ban has never prevented trafficking from developing and users from consuming. This argument therefore refers to the initial nature of the State, theorized in particular by Hobbes: a machine destroying certain freedoms, an oppressive but necessary system for social order. By adhering to this order, the individual submits more or less voluntarily. [...]

[...] To say that legalization would encourage cannabis consumption is a fact, but using it as an argument would be to deny the existence of a huge consumption of this substance among the population, and to refuse to implement the necessary means to control it. Ultimately, the debate around the legalization of cannabis should ideally be centered around the notion of individual freedom. One may not agree with this idea, but brandishing arguments that obscure the true nature of the issue is misleading. Should people be allowed to harm themselves, as long as they are only harming themselves? [...]

[...] In the age of social media, consumer society, and globalized liberal economy, it is becoming increasingly difficult to deny individuals their individual freedom. It would be unthinkable today to prosecute someone who attempted to commit suicide on the grounds that their act is harmful to their health. Why not apply the same reasoning to cannabis, and to certain other drugs? In truth, societies take an enormous amount of time to evolve, and even though they move faster today thanks to the internet and social media, political and judicial institutions remain machines of another time, very slow to accept change. [...]

[...] This federal State is based on a philosophy that is a bit more liberal and centered on individual freedoms than most European countries. Individual freedoms are generally placed above collective freedoms. In these cases, the answer is simple: legalization cannot encourage consumption, since encouraging consumption is not within the prerogatives of the State. Individuals decide for themselves whether or not to consume. Of course, this is not the case in all North American states, and it should not be forgotten that this country has led (and still leads) for many decades a fierce fight against drug users (the war on drugs) often racialized. [...]