I was watching a newsreport on Afghanistan Forces while cutting down poppy plants came under fire from hostile forces...named as Taliban fighters. I saw the report on both channel 7 and sbs. They had slight differences and channel 7 focused on THEIR camera crew in the "firefight" however what caught my attention was one similarity. Both networks reported that the black market trade of poppy plants for the use in production of Heroin and opiate would benefit the Taliban forces. Somehow both news sources made a connection of illicit drug profits returning to the Taliban.
This link made me think. During the terms of government the Taliban had over Afghanistan a true zero tolerance drug agenda was enforced. That is poppy farmers had to account for their sales through a heavily regulated government department. When a discrepency, unregistered farm, or suspicious activities were found the owner/s were shot dead. That's zero tolerance. The Taliban, a (extreme) fundamentalist Islamic group, holds a great belief within their faith which affirms the removal of drugs from society, and does not allow profiteering from drugs - this includes prescription drugs. The Taliban, while in government, sought international disapproval of the 'International Drug Adminstration' policies especially in reference to their 'population testing' in Africa.
So I find it somewhat hard to believe that such a group could now be willingly recieving profits from a drug trade. Their movement, and extreme consequences of their beliefs are manifestations of their interpretation of religion. One thing you usually do not find in fundamentalism is such flagrant hypocricy.
Which then brought me to these sites...
Neonascent
BBC
Yet another telling sign of how social perspective is skewed by the formation of the dollar and profiteering. And perhaps another argument for the decriminalisation of particular recreation drugs in order to:
a) break the connection between law abiding citizens and criminal sellers of drugs.
b) regulate the supply and quality of recreational drugs
c) make a public profit from the sales of recreational drugs
On the one hand i am for the benefits excise can bring to the public domain for a common good - in the examples of alcohol and tobacco - even fuel. Yet in all three the profiteering (yes profiteering and not taxation) from social these consumerables have had a negative effect in the social consciousness and individual behaviour toward these products, leading to an excess in each.
Putting aside the social problems which are caused by the excessive use of uncategorized drugs such as alcohol and tobacco. And also putting aside the social problems that arise from the neglect of criminal activities and unregulated illicit drug use. There is an inherent problem with the resourcing and ranking of drug use within Australian society. The problem lies with the perspective of toleration that develops and the political manipulation that follows.
On the one hand there can exist a zero tolerance on drugs where individuals with small amounts of criminalised substances may be sentenced to gaol with a permanent record. Thereby developing a whole new set of irrevocable problems for said individual. There develops a social conscious toward these 'illicit drug' users - "not in my neighbourhood". Which does not stem the social problem that arises from unregulated drug use, but rather ghettoes the problem in small locations, often ending in mass governmental movement of 'drug users/homeless' to regional ares (if i could remind people of the mass exodus during the 2000 Sydney Olympics) and the resulting problems that were then faced by numerous regional communioties at large. An act which further solidifies a negative community persctive on a type of individual that now more than ever needs community support to be ostracised and made a criminal. Such leads to an increase in private security forces and the division of public police forces.
On the other hand, there exists a growing acceptance of disorderly drunken behaviour and assault. A growing sense of binge drinking, drinking to excess, and the social weekend every weekend to escape the monotonous nine to fiver. Increased target marketing, and the subliminal targeting of minors. There are political attacks upon "drink driving", anti-smoking campaigns funded by tobacco companies and the State by State restrictions upon smoking within semi-public places (such as bars and restaurants). Yet the direction and severity of these courses of action do not reflect the effects these drugs have upon society. The balance is severely overweighted and underweighted in respect to the medical, social, and criminal ramifications of specific drug use.
What ever shall we do about it?
Labels: drugs, money, taliban, terrorism, war
¶ 3:23 pm
