 |
Montana, Meth, and the War on Drugs |
 |
Montana has won a battle against drugs, partly by changing some of its underlying logic. But they - and we - are still losing the war.
Since 2005, Montana has experienced what the Christian Science Monitor calls "a dramatic example of success in America's war on drugs."
Instead of struggling with America's fifth-worst meth problem, the state now ranks 39th. Teen use has declined 45 percent; adult use is down 70 percent.
A large part of the success, we hear, owes to the Montana Meth Project and its campaign of "reverse marketing," designed to highlight the repellent features of meth as a product. But the ads they've released aren't your daddy's "this is your brain on drugs" commercials (WARNING: some may find these ads disturbing):
I don't necessarily have a problem with the Montana Meth Project's approach. It's more the enforcement strategies surrounding it that give me pause.
Another reason for Montana's success in fighting meth, apparently, is that law enforcement has embraced what I would call a slightly more progressive strategy: targeting supply chains instead of individuals. This has its disadvantages, though. According to CSM, prices have doubled almost overnight, which could provoke violence and greater desperation among addicts.
That may be only one example of the way in which Montana is winning the battle but losing the war. Even enthusiasts seem pessimistic:
"The bottom line is that the war on drugs continues," says David Crane, a professor at Syracuse University College of Law in New York. But "it's like grabbing onto water. Every time we grab onto it, it goes right through our fingers or diverts and goes somewhere else."
For example, the same Quest report that showed a nationwide decline in meth and cocaine use also found a 5 percent rise in amphetamine use, which could indicate that some users are switching to milder drugs.
I think these quotes are worth thinking about. The article goes on to warn that budget cuts coming from the Bush administration may undercut enforcement efforts, but it's more than that: it's that we have to approach America's drug problems with imagination and compassion. No matter how disturbing the ads get, and no matter how tight the supply line gets, the war on drugs is doomed to fail because the whole mindset is still wrong. We have to admit that there is a strong demand for drugs in America, and not just some "bad people" corrupting our youth. Unless we're addressing root causes of drug use (and that will involve some pretty honest national conversations about why we as a nation use so many drugs, including prescription medicines), and providing real help to users, I believe we're stuck. Sure, a strong social stigma against meth use can prevent people from trying it for the first time - but it can also make addicts less likely to seek help. We have to bolster enforcement efforts with more effective treatment programs, or we'll be leaving a lot of people out in the cold.
The war on drugs won't be won until it stops being a "war" and starts being a conversation. "War" implies that we're fighting our own people; conversation implies that we're solving a problem together, using critical thinking instead of tough-guy posturing.
And don't get me wrong - it seems like the Montana Meth Project has done some really good work. And it seems that their founder is on the same page as I am about treatment and prevention. I just worry that without fixing the other pieces of the puzzle, their success will soon evaporate.
With a new politics on the horizon in America, we should have this conversation on a national scale. It's been a long time coming.
You think Clorox and Windex are happy about this?
These national conversations will have to be more honest than the business and government would prefer as they would entail admission by all parties that the US is deep into addictions - not just drugs, but food, porn, shopping, etc - precisely because people are unhappy with their lives.
And the people are unhappy with their lives because of the business and government environment - people are overworked and underpaid, lied to, deceived, misled in all directions by all parties for personal gain at a public loss. People are oppressed, voiceless, abused and exploited at work and without representation in their government. People are on drugs and engage in other addiction because their lives suck, and they don't have any other ways out.
That's a little too honest a discussion for the government and major businesses to admit, accept, or engage in, as it would entail owning up to their own responsibilities for oppressing and exploiting the average American - and on top of that, it would require an entire class of uber-wealthy free-riders to step off our backs and start pulling their own weight. Until the balance tips far enough to force that hand, don't expect much conversation on this issue.
"And the people are unhappy with their lives because of the business and government environment - people are overworked and underpaid, lied to, deceived, misled in all directions by all parties for personal gain at a public loss."
Extremely shallow. Last time I checked I could go do any type of job in any type of field I wanted to, I just have to want to do it. I can move anywhere, including out of the country, if I want to do so. If you are unhappy, the problem is not with others or with businesses, the problem is with yourself.
If you don't like what the job you are doing, quit. Do something else. Don't like what you are getting paid, start your own business making or selling whatever widgets you are currently making or selling.
Regardless of what you do, your happiness is yours and is dependant upon you, not someone or something else.
I applaud you that you have the intelligence, capability, and finances to go anywhere and do anything. You must be a God among men, because very very few people have that sort of flexibility.
A huge portion of Americans, I'd say the majority, have obligations like mortgages, car payments, spouses, children, family, and other such that keep them in place and where they are.
Your vision of a fully liquid employment market is a dream. Live in reality. Most people don't have the kind of options you describe, and are dependent upon what is possible in their immediate vicinity with the skill set they have. And thanks to the public education system and the incredible expense of secondary education, they don't have the opportunity to supplement that skill set.
I agree that happiness is an internal quality, but a person's environment makes that quality elusive when they are undereducated, oppressed at work, ignored by the government, don't make enough money to live without financial worries, etc etc. No matter how motivated you are internally to be happy, if at your every turn you are braced and buffeted by other parties; by costs, problems, limitations, inabilities, shortcomings, and in every way cut off from options, only a saint can maintain that internal peace.
In short - YOUR analysis is shallow, as it only accounts for your own personal experience, whereas mine recognizes the inherent limitations that others, who have not been as privileged as you, suffer under.
"In short - YOUR analysis is shallow, as it only accounts for your own personal experience, whereas mine recognizes the inherent limitations that others, who have not been as privileged as you, suffer under."
You don't know me and therefore my past or current situation. The only limitation you have is what you have placed on yourself.
Your view - I don't like my life, guess I'll do drugs.
My view - I don't like the way things are, I going to do something to make them change.
Your view- stick my head in the sand - hopelessness
My view - I can overcome - hope
If ever there was a place where YOU make your own destiny, America is it. Too many people have come from bad situations to become great people for me to think the way you do.
Yeah, I've got family, house, ect., just like most everyone else. I've got a boss, too. So what if I get laid off. I'll find another job. I could go to any of the major cities in the right now and have at least a 50% increase in salary if money meant everything. I don't run scared. Never have, never will.
Personally, I don't think the drug use should be illegal. Too many laws already restrict our freedoms. However, I don't think drug use is the smartest thing in the world to be doing. But then again, I think it should be each individual' choice.
Sit around, whine, cry, bitch, and complain. I'd hate to see you try to make it in a 3rd world country.
I agree, mostly. I also think there are some perfectly happy people who use drugs recreationally. And that's ok…they don't suffer ill effects. As part of this conversation, we need to distinguish those who use drugs to the detriment of themselves and others and those who don't. We need to stop saying all drug use is bad and start seeing the nuance.
Exactly. Moderation in all things. Absolute dependence is as extreme as absolute avoidance. Neither drunks nor AA are the solution - the solution lies in the middle, in moderation.