by Brad Nelson 1/5/14
The quest for a new base for the Republican Party (which wants to eschew conservative, let alone Republican, principles) continues. One of the vehicles for that is National Review Online.
Rush Limbaugh is of the mind that the party wants a new base. The thought is that the party is tired of being embarrassed by Christians and others who delve into those sticky “social issues” such as abortion, drugs, and gay marriage. The thought is, if the Republicans can dispense with this crowd, they can build a winning coalition.
That begs the question: Win what? For Republicans, winning means simply being in the majority, holding the committee chairmanships, raking in the cash, etc. It means having one’s hand on the tiller of Leviathan, but certainly not doing anything as impolite as reducing it.
National Review’s shift continues with “the editors” penning an article praising the legalization of pot. In it, you will find all the straw-men and lazy arguments of libertarians. I’ll leave it to Mr. Kung or Nahalkides to unpack that gibberish if they find the time. A more sensible discussion of this issue can be found in Peter Hitchens’ article, The Right’s Reefer Madness. Another good one by Hitchens is High and Violent.
Here’s a quote from that first article:
But what about this argument that drug legalization is a road to liberty, and that the individual’s right to fry his brains in his own home is equivalent to his freedom of speech, thought, or assembly (or even his freedom to bear arms)?
I find it odd that this claim should be made for a drug that tends to make its users passive and acquiescent, not to mention incoherent in speech.
My argument against the legalization of pot is based on the straightforward idea that a self-governing people cannot do so if they are stoned out of their minds. We don’t need more legalized drugs. We don’t need more disengagement from reality.
And the larger argument, or context, is one of which “the editors” are either ignorant, or are blinded from seeing by their disdain for “social” causes and the moral element itself: Pot is mostly a guy issue. And it is no secret that guys (I won’t use the word “men”) have been marginalized by “Progressive” society. Masculinity is demonized — even something that needs to be anesthetized with drugs — while the female traits are held up as the standard.
There are two choices in the face of this: Acquiesce and just get stoned, or push back. It’s sad to see that the male choice is more and more to just get stoned, to tune out of the vital questions of the day, to extend one’s adolescence, to anesthetize oneself with the modern equivalent of Soma.
Another quote from Hitchens makes this point in reference to Aldous Huxley’s novel, “Brave New World”:
Yet these same people ignore, or even defend, a development in modern societies that is far more of an immediate menace to human freedom. It is the thing that Huxley warned against most particularly and wanted us to learn from Brave New World—the danger that we would come to embrace our own servitude. More specifically, it was his prediction that we would voluntarily drug ourselves into conformist contentment and artificial joy, so losing our curiosity and our free spirit.
Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (5409 views)