Critical Analysis of a Published Article Essay

Today the number are in the war on drug is a huge failure with devastated unintended consequences, it lead to mass incarceration in the us, to corruption, to political destabilization, and violence in latin america, asia, and africa. To systemic human right abuse across the world.”-Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell

For many years, a real push has been looming on the idea of legalizing now illegal drugs. This has become a hot debate throughout nations all over the world, from all walks of life. The dispute over the idea of decriminalizing illegal drugs is and will continue on as an ongoing conflict. In 2001, Drug decriminalization in all drugs, including cocaine and heroin, became a nationwide law in Portugal (Greenwald). Ethan Nadelman, essayist of “Think again: Drugs,” states his side of the story on the continuing criminalization of hard drugs, in which he stand to oppose. Whether it is for the good of human rights or not, decriminalizing drugs may be a good head start for a new beginning.

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.

Today the number are in the war on drug is a huge failure with devastated unintended consequences, it lead to mass incarceration in the us, to corruption, to political destabilization, and violence in latin america, asia, and africa. To systemic human right abuse across the world.”-Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell

            The militarization and criminalization of drugs in Latin America has led to a precipitous increase in violence, killing thousands of people and injuring many more. Economist Jeffrey Miron of CNN writes, “Prohibition creates violence because it drives the drug market underground. This means buyers and sellers

Through my research I have found our involvement in the drug world follows the same theme that seems to recur with our government and their policies. We talk a good game that formulates a structure and a well-worded policy that appears to be in the best interest of American citizens and foreigners alike. However we also aid these countries. The problem doesn’t lie within our policies or the simple compassion from our government that drugs hurt our society. The problems occur with those that implement and enforce these policies. Cocaine and its market cannot be eradicated. The efforts of many of our political leaders have been futile because of the supply and demand of the product. In 1989, President Bush had a plan that he called, “The cheapest and safest way to eradicate narcotics” (Menzel pg.43). The result was the following,

Critics argue that legalization of certain drugs will not end the drug war and that instead, it will cause more violence and issues for the county’s well being. In the mid-1980’s the cocaine epidemic hit and a large amount of crime, deaths from overdoses and violence came with it. The result of this was laws being placed with minimum punishment for drug trafficking to attempt to control the issue. Throughout the early 1990s crime started to slowly decrease and in 2013 the amount of crime was reduced in half. One viewpoint is that once the title of being non-violent labeled drug traffickers crime started to rise anew. Some crimes included murders of innocent bystanders and more drug flow into the U.S (Cook1). William J. Bennett and John P. Walters, Boston Globe writers, complicate matters further when they write “For 25 years before President Obama, U.S policy confronted drug

He also describes how the United States views as a voice and forceful supports of prohibitionist drug controls in international policymaking. In addition, in the United States the discussion on surrounding drug control policy is one of the most extremely disputed matters of our current eras. The author mentions in the article how the strictly enforced US prohibitionist drug was unable to control the Narcotic drugs which happened to create many negative and harmful consequences for the people in the world. The negative consequences that were created when they failed to control the narcotic drugs happened to increase the violence, government dishonesty, and public seizure; therefore, these consequences to the economy growing are very harmful and dangerous. Narcotic drugs have long preserved, which has impacted many people lives in the world. A main purpose of this article is about the unaffordable drug control normally employed by the United States. The United States has spent way too much money abroad and local just thinking that they will be able to decrease the level of illegal drugs; however, they happened to fail at

It was typical hot friday afternoon in Miami, Florida where I encountered Mr. Tomas Name, a current law student, at the set rendezvous(Tijuana Flats). The good sir eager to start the interview received me with an ecstatic grin and said “let us get to it.” Of course after ordering the mega burritos, I got the tape recorder and we began the interview about the war on drugs, Mr. Tomas’ favorite subject. Immediately with a fire starter question like “what are your current thoughts on the U.S. Federal drug policy?” the gears were set into motion, without a flinch Mr. Tomas replied, “lately it's been getting slightly better, but not enough to call it a success.” He also inferred that how is cannabis a schedule 1 narcotic when the U.S. government has medicinal patents on the

Today’s world is changing at a rapid pace. Things never thought to be possible are becoming very real. One of the popular subjects of wanting change is the legalization of drugs. There has already been a small amount of change in the drug legalization process with marijuana now being legal in a few of the states. Vanessa Baird in her work “Legalize Drugs- all of them!” argues for the legalization and decriminalization of drugs. John P. Walters counters Baird’s argument for legalization in his piece “Don’t Legalize Drugs.” Both authors take an extended look into the harsh reality of the drug war and the small progress it has made since it began.

The United States has a long history of intervention in the affairs of one it’s southern neighbor, Latin America. The war on drugs has been no exception. An investigation of US relations with Latin America in the period from 1820 to 1960, reveals the war on drugs to be a convenient extension of an almost 200 year-old policy. This investigation focuses on the commercial and political objectives of the US in fighting a war on drugs in Latin America. These objectives explain why the failing drug policy persisted despite its overwhelming failure to decrease drug production or trafficking. These objectives also explain why the US has recently exchanged a war on drugs for the war on

This refers to the elimination of drug crops while they are still being grown. The U.S. has used this policy in several South American countries as a means to limit drug trafficking before it has a chance to develop. However, significantly reducing crops has not always led to decreasing drug trafficking. Reduction of drug crops in one country may lead to increased production in another. This is likely to happen when one country becomes the focus of an eradication effort, while another country can increase its production to fill in the void. If there is one thing that the world market can produce, it is its high demand of illegal drugs. The Drug Policy Alliance gives cites a specific instance verifying the problems that can be associated with eradication procedures. During the mid 1990s, “eradication efforts in Bolivia and Peru created incentives to grow coca in Columbia. While Peru experienced a 66% reduction in coca cultivation and Bolivia experienced a 53% reduction, coca cultivation in Columbia doubled. In addition, more potent strains of coca have been developed, leading to higher yielding coca crops.” This example shows the adverse effects of the policy of eradication.

The international drug trade from Latin American states is having an impact on a global scale. The trafficking of drugs along with corruptness and murder is an international conflict that is being fought daily. There are many aspects of the drug war from Mexico and other Latin American states which have effects on United States policy as well as policies from other countries that participate in the global suppression of illegal drugs.

Latin America has had a long history of drug use, which contributes to its stereotype as a drug infested region. Beginning in the 1970’s, the United States has been trying to eliminate drug cartels, trafficking, and use in Latin America (Bogota). The influence of drugs in Latin America has led to violence and death over the many years.

According to Michelle Alexander, why and how has the “war on drugs” developed over the last 40 years? What are the main political and economic factors that led to the war on drugs, and what are the main political and economic factors that shaped it as it developed over the last four decades? Draw on material from the Foner textbook chapters 25 through 28 to supplement Alexander’s discussion of the political and economic context.