The Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy is a democratic tour de force

To describe the accumulation of a series of events or the creation of one organic or uniform body as a tour de force simply means that it has been a success so far for all those that it seeks to represent. And even if it is not, it does not mean that the setting up of committees, like the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy for instance, is resultantly an abject failure. Call this more correctly a work in progress. Fortunately, it is a democratic work in progress.

Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy

The processes of setting up committees as democratically as possible is fortunate because it takes into account the rights and concerns of all or most of the citizens it is seeking to represent and not just a select few, as has been the case in a number of parts of the world. For instance, there have been cases where a libertarian approach to drug-taking, the taking of drugs far more harmful than regular marijuana use, under the guise of addressing a serious problem pragmatically, has backfired.

Drug users with serious drug addiction issues remain addicted and their lives are threatened through the open policy of allowing them to use their drugs freely. This was thought to be a mature approach towards addressing a very serious problem as opposed to imposing harsh punishment like a strict parent would over his children. The above-mentioned committee, as an example, is a successful approach towards addressing serious problems or mild irritants.

It is successful because it remains democratic. For instance, where the use of marijuana is concerned, still a contentious practice even at the best of times, the vested interests of minorities who choose to use the drug recreationally and/or medically is not solely addressed. Because there are indeed societal impacts, for better or for worse, the rights and concerns of the communities’ majorities are also being considered.

As it turns out, the concerns raised by those who selectively and consciously choose not to use marijuana have resulted in those who choose to being able to do so freely. But where this has not been the case and the use thereof remains a criminal offence, penalties have been drastically reduced, not for the welfare of the drug users themselves, but for the benefit of society at large. For example, taxes are now put to better use in other prioritized areas rather than being wasted on needless incarceration for however long periods of time.

The practice of democracy is not a perfect science. But it remains a far more pragmatic, fair and just and humane solution to dealing with societal issues or even severe problems than the imposition of draconian measures which, as history has shown, have never really been able to solve or address the root causes of concerns or problems. It is also the exercising of civil liberties but with a lot more mature responsibility.