- Counter-Currents Publishing - http://www.counter-currents.com -
Drug Legalization in the White Republic
Posted By Greg Johnson On August 25, 2010 @ 12:00 am In North American New Right | 3 Comments
French translation here 
I’d do it. I’d push the button.
If there were a button that would instantly and painlessly annihilate alcohol, nicotine, marijuana, and all other addictive recreational drugs, I would push it, simply because nothing has done more damage to the people I love, including my race as a whole.
I do not think that our enemies could have pushed the destruction of the white race to this point if we were not so prone to turn our anger inward and numb ourselves with drink and drugs. Without them, white people would be a whole lot meaner and harder to push around, and that would be a good thing.
I would push the button, even though I am not immune to the pleasures of alcohol. In fact I love it, albeit in moderation. Some of my friends call me a teetotaler and a killjoy, but that is only because they are alcoholics.
But let’s wrench ourselves away from such a utopian vision and turn our attention to Realpolitik. When a white homeland is established in North America, its founders will eventually get around to the issue of drug laws.
I think that a white ethnostate should consider junking most of America’s drug laws. I think we should consider making alcohol, nicotine, marijuana, cocaine, opiates, psychedelics, uppers, downers, and the like available for purchase without special taxes and restrictions, save two: first, to buy and use such drugs, one must be a responsible adult (18 or over and of sound mind) and second, there should be strict penalties for those who become addicted to drugs and thus cannot fulfill their familial and social responsibilities.
Why do I favor such sweeping liberties regarding drug use? Let me first make it clear that I am not a libertarian. I don’t believe that human beings have some sort of natural “rights” to the maximum amount of liberty possible, consistent with the equal liberty of others. Nor do I believe that the sole legitimate function of the state is to insure the freedom of social atoms to pursue their individual goals.
I am not an individualist, but a racial collectivist, a racial communitarian. For me, political philosophy begins with the question of what institutions, laws, and customs are necessary for the survival and flourishing of our race. It just so happens that a good deal of individual liberty makes sense in the context of a white society.
In particular, I believe that today’s drug laws just would not make sense in a healthy and homogeneous white society, simply because such a society would lack the two main reasons why present-day drug laws exist: (1) a culture that encourages selfishness, hedonism, irresponsibility, and prolonged adolescence, and (2) the presence of non-white groups with strong genetic predispositions to drug and alcohol abuse and inferior capacities to control their appetites and impulses.
Individual liberty makes sense only if people are responsible enough not to abuse it. Today’s white Americans—from the boomers on—are perhaps the most immature and irresponsible generations in our history. Liberty is not just wasted on us, it is an actual danger. So all talk of drug legalization in the present context is grossly irresponsible. It would just make a bad situation worse.
But this rampant hedonism and irresponsibility is largely artificial. It is the typical product of cultural decadence, in this case a decadence engineered by cultural aliens out to destroy us. But one does not have to go back too many generations to find white men and women who were mature and responsible enough to start businesses and begin families before today’s kids are even allowed to graduate High School.
In a White Republic, adolescence would not be prolonged, and hedonism and selfishness would not be encouraged. Men and women would be ready to assume adult responsibilities by the age of 18, including decisions about using alcohol and other recreational drugs. A White Republic would be all about empowering youth: about giving them what they need so that they can begin independent and productive lives as soon as it is biologically possible.
But what if some of them develop problems? Then society would intervene, on the grounds that individuals are not mere atoms and their problems are not merely private. Drug abuse—whether of drugs that are legal or illegal in today’s society—interferes with the ability of individuals to fulfill their responsibilities to their families, to their race, and even to themselves. Addicts would be forcibly dried out and barred from buying drugs. Repeat offenders should probably be sterilized.
But, by the same token, a society that seeks to cultivate personal responsibility should not deny everyone access to certain substances merely because some people abuse them.
Drug legalization advocates love to point out that many drug laws were racially motivated, and this is true. Laws against opiates were directed at the Chinese. Laws against marijuana and cocaine were directed at blacks.
A homogeneously white society would have no need to use drug laws to target non-white populations. There may, of course, be other reasons to ban such drugs. But at the very least, a homogeneously white society should look for good reasons rather than uncritically carry over laws that are artifacts of the multiracial societies we are struggling to leave behind.
Some people will dismiss such talk because drug legalization is “liberal” and they are “conservatives.” Of course, if one turns the clock back far enough, one will find an America without drug laws and other aspects of the nanny state. So why not conserve that America? Today’s conservatives are often just clinging to the consequences of yesterday’s liberalism.
Others simply have silly racial prejudices about drugs. Alcohol is for white men. Pot is for blacks. But if that is the case, then a society which outlaws blacks will have no need to outlaw pot as well.
Such discussions are, of course, a bit premature. But we will never get from here to there unless we have a pretty clear image of what “there” will look like. Thus there is a place for speculation about the possible laws and institutions of a White Nationalist society.
Although nobody knows how to have fun better than some White Nationalists I know, our enemies have successfully established the image of White Nationalists as dour jackbooted totalitarians. Many of our friends have helped them, truth be told. Thus it is useful to emphasize anything that conflicts with that stereotype.
I submit that there is a lot of appeal to the image of a society in which children of the sun are equipped with the independence and responsibility of adulthood in the full bloom of youth, so that they can enjoy the freedom to explore, create, and celebrate life. Jackboots optional.
That said, since alcohol is already a major problem in today’s White Nationalist movement, the last thing we need is an influx of drug enthusiasts. Thus although I favor drug legalization in the White Republic, as far as the White Nationalist movement is concerned, I am all for Harold Covington’s General Order #10: Nobody working for a white homeland may use drugs or alcohol for the duration of the struggle.
Let’s save the toasting for the white homeland, comrades. Or for Valhalla.
Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com
URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2010/08/drug-legalization-in-the-white-republic/
URLs in this post:
 Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/willem-kalf.jpg
 here: http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/11/legalisation-de-la-drogue-dans-la-republique-blanche/
 Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/vanitas.jpg
Copyright © 2011 Counter-Currents Publishing. All rights reserved.