Grass, Ass and Class

Robert once taught a course entitled "Drugs, Policy, and Society." The topics of greatest interest to the students in the course focused on the scientific evidence for addictive effects of different drugs, and the legalization of marijuana. The final oral exam required each student to make an oral argument for or against the legalization of pot. Almost all of the students were for legalization, and they insisted that the instructor (Robert) should also make the same presentation. I always took the "No" position on legalization. Why?


Robert's argument was to contrast the effects of pot, not on the science of drugs, but on the social class position of the users. The main argument was that most public support for legalization comes from the middle class and young people like those in the class. These relatively privileged people have the luxury of experimentation with drugs while in high school or college, because they will soon be moving on to their educational or work careers that will consume their interests and energies, and they will have fond memories of their experimentation with drugs, which was never a central life activity but comparable to beer parties and casual sex. If they went too far with drugs or sex, leading to dependency or pregnancy, they had family resources to help them get through a tough spot in their lives. But for young men and women without financial means who were not going anywhere, drug use can easily become "psychologically addictive" (the science is not clear on this concept) or a central feature in their daily lives. In short, the middle class casual user has a chance of "moving on" after experimentation with drugs, but not the working class youth who is not going anywhere in terms of education or employment, and where pot is more likely to become a gateway drug.


The President has spoken on this issue and his position is "soft," meaning that he wants to be on both sides as a former "user" who experienced no harm, and as a responsible adult warning that alcohol is more dangerous than pot. The President is obviously in the youthful middle class user category, and he is tone-deaf on matters of class, about which he knows little on the basis of personal experience.


So the bottom line is that the privileged American enjoys the pleasures of youthful experimentation, and the bill is paid for by working class youth. We move beyond drugs to include equally dangerous sexual experimentation because of the positive treatment of casual sex in Hollywood and the media, which may be positive for the privileged, but potential disaster for the teenage mother with no resources and no future. For those who remember Dan Quayle, who was a dim bulb on many issues, but who spoke out against the glorification of single motherhood by the media. Quayle was right on the mark on this issue, but his views had already been marginalized by his dim bulb "trope."