Tuesday, December 01, 2009

The human cost of bans

Prohibitions
by John Meadowcroft
(Institute of Economic Affairs, 2008, 269 pages)

Looking back on the notorious gangster Al Capone, it is often hard to believe that he had to go to all that trouble just to sell some booze.  Nowadays, obtaining an responsible service of alcohol qualification is much less of a hassle than setting up an underground crime syndicate.  But in the era of alcohol prohibition, this was just what happened.

These days, nobody denies that alcohol is a potentially dangerous drug.  The science consistently demonstrates this.  Yet there are few people today advocating prohibition of alcohol.  But this argument does not seem to extend to recreational drugs.  Supporters of drug prohibition tend to use arguments that are equally valid (or invalid) with respect to alcohol, but paradoxically do not support its prohibition.

The Institute of Economic Affairs' Prohibitions covers more than just alcohol and illicit drugs.  It systematically tackles boxing, firearms, advertising, pornography, medical drugs and devices, prostitution, gambling, organ trade and alcohol, all of which have been subject to certain restrictions or prohibitions over time.

The philosophical perspective of Prohibitions is grounded in personal choice and the belief that everybody holds a property right over their own body.  As such, it is immoral for government to interfere with that right of private property.  In particular, the issue of drug use and organ trade highlight this ethical argument.

Furthermore, Prohibitions explains that even if something could be considered morally wrong by some, this does not give the do-gooders a right do impose that moral choice on others.  Take the example of boxing:  an activity where people are paid, and the sole objective of the activity is to harm another person, desirably to the point of loss of consciousness, seems morally repugnant.  And to think that the state permits this activity is, at first glance, confronting.  That is, until we examine the facts.

Fights happen, spontaneous or organised.  The commercialisation of boxing has led to dramatic increases in safety -- the increased provision of medical resources and the use of boxing gloves are two prime examples of this improvement.  And we may still consider this as not affecting the inherent morality -- the aims of boxing remain the same.  But again, this does not give legislators authority to infringe on the rights of two consenting adults engaging in an activity that they deem to be worthwhile.

Prohibitions goes a step further, highlighting several key practical arguments against prohibitions in general.

Firstly, there is the issue of the formation of black markets.  In an underground market, the rule of law does not apply.  There is no accountability, no safety and no provisions against coercive behaviour.  This is exemplified by drug markets, where extortion, murder, kidnapping and true exploitation occur.  Or the prostitution industry, where prostitutes are regularly beaten and occasionally murdered.  In these instances, individuals involved are not subject to the rule of law and have no protection.

Violence reigns supreme in the criminal underground.  A viewing of the Australian TV series Underbelly is enough to show this (provided the sale and viewing of the show is not prohibited itself!)  But contrary to most beliefs, it is not the nature of the drugs that cause the violence that we see, but the nature of prohibition.  Violence and extortion were a huge problem in the time of Al Capone and the Chicago Outfit that smuggled and sold alcohol, but since the lifting of the ban on alcohol, the trade is peaceful, beneficial and persons involved are accountable for their actions.

Another effect of the black market is that information is not able to flow freely.  While in legitimate markets, there is incentive to release information about a product (in the form of competitive advertising and awareness campaigns), a black market gives incentive to remain hidden and to conceal as much information as possible.  This means that the only people who can effectively inform the public about illegal goods are government and special interest groups.  For example, a lot of what we hear about prostitution comes from religious organisations that have a biased view on the issue and cannot be said to promote true public awareness.

The next practical implication of prohibition is that risks are increased.  The drug trade again exemplifies this issue.  The quality and makeup of drugs that are bought and sold is highly variable.  Heroin use is a highly risky activity even when makeup, adulterants and production standards are disclosed, but the underground nature of its trade means that these are not disclosed.  As such, the risks of heroin use are greatly increased by prohibition.

Another cost of prohibition is the cost in public money.  When consenting, responsible individuals are criminals under the eyes of the law, vast sums of money are expended.  This money could be diverted to other more worthwhile causes or better, returned to the taxpayer.

All of these considerations above seem trivial, however, when compared with the stark reality of prohibition -- it just doesn't work.

The chapter on gun prohibition shows this most strongly, with violent crime trends in Scotland, Australia, Canada, USA, Ireland and Jamaica remaining unaffected by restrictions and prohibitions.

Unfortunately, the book does not delve deeply into practical considerations in implementing these policies.  There are several institutions that stand in the way of legalising and liberalising many of these markets, and these are the grossly proportioned welfare system and similarly the public health system.  Prohibitions does not take these considerations into account, and as such presents more of an idealistic vision.  In an otherwise minimal state, the case against prohibition is extremely strong.

Despite this omission, the publication does mount a very strong and convincing case that has many real-world applications that could be implemented now.  Overall, Prohibitions offers a serious and considered challenge to the Nanny State that dominates so many facets of our modern life.

A raid by prohibition officers in Washington DC, 1923

No comments: