Appendix L Com/220

I believe that my response is based on the way the author received her ideas on what beauty is.

In the past forty years, the United States has spent over $2.5 trillion dollars funding enforcement and prevention in the fight against drug use in America (Suddath). Despite the efforts made towards cracking down on drug smugglers, growers, and suppliers, statistics show that addiction rates have remained unchanged and the number of people using illegal drugs is increasing daily (Sledge). Regardless of attempts to stem the supply of drugs, the measure and quality of drugs goes up while the price goes down (Koebler). Now with the world’s highest incarceration rates and greatest illegal drug consumption (Sledge), the United States proves that the “war on drugs” is a war that is not being won.

In 1971, President Richard Nixon initiated the national War on Drugs, which focused on the passage of policies geared toward fighting illegal substances (Amundson, Zajicek, and Hunt, 2014). During this time, Nixon allocated two-thirds of federal dollars for treatment of drug addiction and prevention of new users and one-third of federal dollars for interdiction and enforcement (Amundson et al., 2014). After Nixon’s initial War on Drugs program, policies and programs began to shift. Under the Regan Administration, the War on Drugs became more punitive and there was a reversal of federal dollars. Under the new and subsequent regimes, two-thirds of money was spent on interdiction and enforcement and one-third was spent on treatment and prevention (Amundson et al., 2014). Under this new Administration came tougher sentencing, an increase in prison spending, and mandatory minimum sentencing for drug offenses (Amundson et al.,

What if I told you that a crusade against narcotics has resulted in an overdose epidemic? This has been exactly what the United States Drug War has done. The War on Drugs is considered to have started in 1914 with the ban on opium and cocaine. Prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s is considered to be an important chapter of the War on Drugs. But it was not until June 1971 that President Nixon officially declared a "war on drugs." He enforced this by drastically expanding federal drug control agencies and mandatory minimum sentencing for those arrested for drug crimes. Defenders of the drug war assert that zealous enforcement is the correct way of dealing with America's drug dilemma. However, it has only accomplished increasing the prison population by putting nonviolent offenders behind bars. It has also done nothing to lessen the overdose crisis. This catastrophic, failing war has to meet its end, as it is having many tragic effects such as the production of stronger, deadlier drugs, increased drug use, and has been wildly ineffectual throughout history.

President Richard Nixon coined the phrase the “war on drugs” in the 1970s after he and Congress introduced a campaign to reduce the rapidly increasing consumption, production, and distribution of psychoactive drugs, which were already deemed illegal. In the years since, many policies and laws have been created in the United States from mandatory minimum sentences to drug courts. The organization, Learn Liberty, recently put out a YouTube video pointing out that every 2016 presidential nominee has spoken about the current drug epidemic. As pointed out in the video, not all candidates agree on the method of solving the issue, yet they all agree it’s a massive issue.

The War on Drugs, like the war on Terrorism, is a war that America may not be able to afford to win. For over forty years the United States has been fighting the War on Drugs and there is no end in sight. It has turned into a war that is about politics and economics rather than about drugs and criminals. The victims of this war are numerous; but perhaps they are not as numerous as those who benefit from the war itself.

Since the mid-80s when Nancy Regan appeared with her green “Just Say No” stickers, suburban housewives and elementary school teachers have been on the front lines of the War on Drugs. The crusade against illegal drugs on the streets and in the classrooms across America has been an ongoing battle since then. Some say the fight is working; they believe stronger laws and punishment for those who break those laws are working. Others see more youths and first-time offenders receiving too much jail time than is necessary. The amount of money spent on the war is high, and few people think the end results are worth the fight.

The paper starts with multiple definitions of what beauty is defined as and moves to what the experience of beauty is.

Etcoff (1999) says although all cultures, historical and contemporary, revere the beauty ideal and “pursues it at enormous costs” (p. 233), a core reality to beauty exists amidst the cultural constructs and myths (as cited by

The War on drugs has become challenging and shouldn’t continue only because the same situation with alcohol and when it became legalized. Retired police captain Peter Christ is a co fonder of LEAP which is law enforcement against prohibition an organization formed in 2002. Prohibition doesn’t necessarily have to go away; it can be a stepping tool on legalizing drugs like a guide. The stories by the law enforcement seem to have something in common, that there are some innocent people lives ruined because of the drug law. Christ mention that they destroyed mover lives than the drugs have by incarcerating, giving felony conviction, and denying them education and jobs. Chomsky explains the savagery of imprisonment of the dangerous social classes.

The National probation on drugs dubbed “the war on drugs” is a failure in almost every sense of the imagination, as it has only led to economic problems such as increased taxes on prisons and increased police activity. It has also put a much higher demand on drugs, and as a result, has increased drug activity. As stated by economist Milton Friedman in an interview with award winning drug reporter Randy Paige, the United States alone spends tens of billions of dollars a day on minor drug arrests. Another problem with the war on drugs is that despite the heavy cost of imprisonment among citizens, people still continue to use drugs, in fact, according to Dr. Michael Lowenstein the medical

Anyone who is familiar with the science of evolution in human beings and its philosophical context in history and modern society can appropriately associate that idea with variety amongst individuals. Undeniably, there is a persistent growth in the variety of people who identify in a myriad of groups. Interestingly enough, if anyone were to take a step back and observe the variety of individuals around them, he or she would participate in abstract notion of aesthetic judgment—or an analysis of what the individual deems to be beautiful based off of differing factors, though initially based off of physical attributes. On a psychological level, this aesthetic viewpoint is a reflection of the relative perspective of people and circumstances in which they consider what is “attractive” or “repulsive”, and apply how it is universally understood-- beauty attracts while ugliness repels. Aesthetic judgment can be utilized as a mechanism to enhance survival and reproduction within a species. Thus, this overall notion of aesthetic judgment can be associated to the emerging theory of evolution and everything it encompasses. With this groundbreaking discovery, a variety of historically great modern thinkers (philosophers) managed to incorporate this scientific theory into their understanding of the world around them. Ultimately, while their perspectives may vary, these philosophers fundamentally acknowledge that this evolutionary change is ever-present and influentially active in

The first section addresses the question of whether it is possible to use measures of beauty to analyze the role of looks in the labour market. Since, it would be futile to examine the effect of beauty on employment if there is no mutual agreement on what defines beauty. Using data from

The War on Drugs is a deep rooted controversial campaign of prohibition and military aid that has been debated for years. We wonder if the war will ever come to an end, and if there’s a liable solution. The “war” will never end, and the only way to maintain balance in our society is by not letting any laws on drugs change. We can make a positive change within America as the first step. Legalization of drugs, increased taxes for military support, and more criminals on the streets are all examples of why “The War on Drugs” is affecting us. Over a period of time now, The United States has been enabling the war, by allowing legalization of Marijuana to take place in certain states. Winning the war, seems like an impossible task. But losing completely would diminish security and stability in our world. Applying more action and recognition will increase our awareness to stay away from this loss, and would better our economy as a whole. To better end “The War on Drugs” as a whole, we need to focus on winning the battle here in the United States before other countries.

The War On Drugs is one of the most explosive topics in the current American political conversation. It is heavily related with crime, discrimination, political turmoil, money, and various medical problems across the country. It is a subject of great controversy for many Americans because the campaign has not only been unsuccessful in preventing the local illegal drug trade or effecting the black market in relatively any sort of way, but it has also done close to nothing in regards to fixing the health issues surrounding America’s drug problem. Crime fighting strategies that cut away at the root and source of the problem might not seem like the most immediate, but it is the most efficient and will make the biggest difference long-term. Despite approximately $1 trillion spent by the U.S. on the “War on Drugs”, the US Department of Justice has confirmed that the usage of drugs has not changed over the past 10 years. Approximately $350 billion is spent per year on the “war on drugs”, while only $7 billion is spent on prevention programs by the federal government (Rolling Stone 1). Not only is the war on drugs costly to taxpayers, it is also ineffective at reducing trade and usage. With most of the focus placed on punishment rather than treatment for the targets, it does nothing to help those we all know plagued with addiction which is ultimately what causes the cycle to continue. I argue that the war needs to be seen from the drug users point of view, and this problem