The Founding Fathers’ collective vision of education in a democratic republic reflected their profound understanding of education’s essential role in ensuring the sustainability and robustness of the new nation. We were fortunate that the wealthy early leadership of the nation—Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison, and George Washington—shared a common conviction: that education was indispensable for self-government and the preservation of liberty. Jefferson and Madison insisted on the widespread diffusion of knowledge as foundational to liberty. They were acutely aware that an ignorant populace could be easily manipulated, that education was the bulwark against tyranny and mob rule.
Today in the United States, secular education is seen as a threat to religious belief by about ten percent of the population, which to a thinking person would hint at a problem with their religious beliefs. But it seems this small portion of the population instead sees the outlier status of their beliefs as a badge of honor, somehow proving they are right and everyone else is wrong. Yet while most Christian extremists rely on the science behind cell phones, modern medicine, and public health standards governing water and air quality, they suffer cognitive dissonance between their religious mythology and the realities of scientific advancement. The fear of new information is so deeply ingrained that these religionists cannot escape it. This is the kind of ‘knowledge’ and ‘faith’ that Christian extremists seek to embed in the minds of their children, and not just theirs.
The intention is to force institutional ignorance onto the entire nation. For our own good, of course. Because otherwise their loving God will condemn us all to burn in hell for eternity.
We’ve seen this before, as elaborated in the first chapter, times when religious power brokers forced a population to adhere to specific doctrines and if refused, initiated imprisonment, torture, and death for the “infidels.” Christian Nationalist ideas of proper acceptance of authority are rooted in a belief that God holds supreme authority and has delegated power to specific earthly institutions—primarily the church, family, and state—to maintain order and enforce a Christian social hierarchy.
Adherents believe that specific leaders are chosen by God to “save the country,” as demonstrated by their continuing support of presidents such as Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, George Bush, and now Donald Trump. A significant segment of Christian Nationalists and their supporters believe that Trump is a divinely ordained leader sent to save the United States, viewing him as a “warrior for Christ” tasked with restoring America to its perceived Christian roots. Because such leaders are seen as advancing a divine plan, supporters can overlook their breaches of democratic rules or norms as well as their personal immorality and perfidiousness, believing such actions are necessary to uphold a rightly ordered society.
It follows then that control over education and tax support for schools teaching these theories are a primary objective. But that was not the vision of the Founding Fathers or the visionary early 19th century government in establishing tax-support public schools. Fortunately, as science and other fields of study have advanced over the last 250 years, religious power over learning has diminished.
Leading us to this point has been the “common school,” established in the 1830s and 1840s in the new United States, comparable to today’s standardized public school. Considered the father of American education, Horace Mann envisioned common schools as institutions that were free and open to all students. In his role as Secretary of the Massachusetts State Board of Education (1837–1848), he established teacher training schools, improved school infrastructure, and raised educational standards. [1] He wanted those teachers to teach standardized curricula that instilled students with civic values. Catholic and other parochial schools in particular objected to Mann’s belief that schools should not adhere to any specific Christian sect, an argument that continues to the present day.
An obvious drawback of religious schools that is often overlooked is the inevitable assumption of such schools and their adherents that their beliefs are the only truth, that anything other than specific Christian dogma is a lie. Denial of science is the best example of this prejudice as scientific discoveries have slowly dismantled much of the institutionalized mythology enshrined by religion. As myth becomes ingrained in students of religious schools, their beliefs serve as a wedge between the people practicing that belief system and the needs of a nation to move forward in all areas such as advancing industry and the economy with new inventions based on new scientific discoveries and the acceptance of facts about human life previously not understood.
For the 68% of Americans who do not adhere or sympathize with the strict religious views of Christian extremists, the fundamentals of accepted education typically aligns with secular, pluralistic, and science-backed academic standards. These standards prioritize critical thinking and inclusivity rather than religious doctrine or rigid ideological frameworks. In fact, of the approximate 32% of Americans counted as Christian Nationalists, the actual adherents are only 11% while another 21% are considered sympathizers.[2]
The question of funding public schools boils down to what we expect our educational tax dollars to accomplish. Programs which teach narrow and exclusive religious doctrine are by definition not meant to support a cooperative relationship among persons of various cultural and religious backgrounds, but rather to hold up one belief system as the only truth. This becomes an impetus for authoritarian overreach and ultimately war, as history has long shown us.
While historically this conflict in the U.S. has been decided in favor of the constitutional standard not to mix church and state, the most compelling factor in the present day argument is that we all pay taxes and the majority of Americans do not agree that taxes should support the extreme Christian agenda. Tax support violates the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause by compelling taxpayers to fund the teaching of religious doctrines, essentially creating a government-sanctioned religion.
The slow but determined creep of Christian Nationalism shows every intention of overturning this Constitutional mandate. The camel’s nose is well under the edge of the tent. A 2024 investigation by The Washington Post found billions in tax dollars now pay tuition at private, mostly religious schools. For example, Florida’s voucher program is expected to exceed $3 billion, with over 80% of funds going to religious schools. Ohio is projected to spend nearly $1 billion, with 91% of voucher users attending religious institutions. Hundreds of thousands of students use these programs. The rise in funding is attributed to the expansion of voucher programs in Republican-led states, which now allow more or all families to qualify, shifting from programs once aimed only at low-income students.
Reduced funding for public education leads to layoffs, larger class sizes, and reduced individualized attention for students. Schools that serve the vast majority of students are forced to cut essential services, including arts, music, athletic programs, and after-school programming. There is less money for modern technology, up-to-date textbooks, and lab equipment. Meanwhile, private schools receiving public funds can exclude students based on religion, academic performance, disability, or sexual orientation, narrowing the educational options for those students. Vouchers can deepen racial and socioeconomic segregation by subsidizing tuition at private schools that often lack the diversity of public schools. Continued siphoning of funds can result in the closure of neighborhood public schools, particularly in rural areas where the school is a central community institution.
Long term erosion of financial support for public education puts the entire nation at risk, not only from prejudicial curricula in religious classrooms, but also from the inevitable schism between people educated in stringently oppositional systems. In a nation that has long pursued unity despite our different origins and beliefs, such divisive practices are a form of violence against the existing government.
The Supreme Court has said the Establishment Clause forbids, among other things, financial support of religious activity. Subsequent cases challenging the longstanding interpretation of the First Amendment have brought us to the Espinoza vs. Montana case, allowing tax dollars to flow to the parents/students of religious schools. This is by far not established law. While Espinoza reaffirmed that governments may not discriminate against beneficiaries solely on the basis of their religious character, it left open the possibility that governments might still be able to bar beneficiaries that would put public funds to religious uses.
The U.S. majority has become increasingly aware of the conflict between a religious agenda and our multicultural society. The percentage of Americans who say religion is “very important” has dropped from over 88%-95% in the 1960s to 47% in 2025. The latest Religious Landscape Study, fielded over seven months in 2023-24, finds that only 62% of U.S. adults identify as Christians. That is a decline of nine percentage points since 2014 and a 16-point drop since 2007. Within Christianity, 19% are Catholic, 3% are Mormon, Orthodox, Jehovah’s Witness, and other, and 42% are Protestant divided into Evangelical (23%), Mainline (14%),[3] and Historically Black Protestant (5%).
Projections indicate that by 2070, Christians could shrink from 64% (2020) to between 35% and 54% of Americans, while “Nones” (no religion) rise from 30% to over 50% in some scenarios. This shift drives religious zealots to push a movement which seeks to assert “dominion” over societal institutions, including government, education, and media, believing that Christian moral values should dictate law.
Growing concern within the U.S. public is slowly building into a response to Christian Nationalism, Dominionism, Christian Reconstructionism, and the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) including tracking by civil rights organizations, legal challenges, and theological counter-movements from within Christianity. These initiatives aim to counter the rising influence of these new Puritan groups. Organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) are actively documenting the spread of Dominionism,[4] profiling key leaders in the New Apostolic Reformation, and tracking associated hate groups. (This is directly connected to the Trump Administration’s May 2026 lawsuit against the SPLC in an effort to intimidate all civil rights organizations from speaking out and doing their work.)[5]
Scholars and progressive faith leaders are working to produce public-facing biblical interpretations that contradict Dominionist, coercive, and authoritarian interpretations of Scripture. Efforts are underway to inform the public and Christians about the anti-democratic nature of white Christian Nationalism and Dominionism to “inoculate” them against its appeal. The ACLU of North Dakota and other organizations actively fight against initiatives promoted by Dominionists, such as forcing religious prayer into public schools, banning books, and promoting anti-LGBTQ+ policies. Organizations like American Atheists oppose lobbying efforts to pass laws that violate the separation of church and state, such as those permitting discrimination under the guise of religious freedom. Researchers such as Dr. Matthew D. Taylor are working to expose the ties between modern charismatic prophets and the political, antidemocratic, and “spiritual warfare” approaches used to influence elections.
Defenders of the United States Constitution emphasize the importance of religious pluralism and the separation of church and state, arguing that Christian supremacy rejects these principles. Organized efforts underway to combat Christian supremacy include
A grassroots movement launched by the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty (BJC). It unites Christians across the theological spectrum to speak out against the merging of Christian and American identities.
Interfaith Alliance: A national, pro-democracy organization that mobilizes diverse faith communities to challenge Christian nationalism, protect civil rights, and uphold religious pluralism.
State Ecumenical Groups: Various regional faith networks, such as the Wisconsin Council of Churches, that host educational campaigns, study groups, and sermons to counter nationalist theology.
Americans United for Separation of Church and State: A leading organization dedicated to preserving the constitutional wall separating church and state. They actively litigate cases and advocate against policies that advance white Christian nationalism.
Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF): A prominent secular organization working to defend the constitutional principle of separation of church and state, frequently challenging religious favoritism in the public and political spheres.
Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC): Monitors far-right and extremist movements. The SPLC identifies and exposes the ideologies and groups—including Christian supremacist and Dominionist networks—that threaten democratic institutions.
Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI): While not an activist group, PRRI conducts rigorous data-driven research and polling on Christian nationalism. Their work tracks the demographics and organizations that resist these movements.
These efforts fight against the adoption of “biblical authoritarianism” and the idea that Christians are mandated to take over societal institutions.
[2] More than half of U.S. Republicans are either adherents (20%) or sympathizers (33%).
[3] a group of historically established, traditional Protestant denominations in North America, often associated with a theologically liberal, progressive, or moderate approach to Christianity
[4] Dominionism (or Dominion Theology) is the religious belief that Christians are divinely mandated to take control of secular political and cultural institutions to establish the Kingdom of God on Earth. It is smaller and more fringe than broad Christian nationalism, but it holds disproportionate sway in certain fundamentalist, charismatic, and Pentecostal factions. While closely related, Dominionism and Christian Nationalism differ in their ultimate goals, theological roots, and how they view the relationship between religion, government, and the end of the world. Apparently neither group is familiar with the writings attributed to John in 18:36 where Jesus clarifies the nature of his realm: “My kingdom is not of this world.”
Throughout our national history, conflict over education has erupted with tiring regularity. Soon after the Revolution, common schools were designed by Protestant elites to foster “Americanization,” but they used the King James Bible and Protestant curriculum. Irish Catholic immigrants in New York and Philadelphia resisted what they saw as forced indoctrination and demanded public funds for their own schools. These tensions led to riots in Philadelphia in 1844, where Catholic homes and churches were burned. This conflict cemented the shift towards non-sectarian public schools, although they often retained a general Protestant character.
Many citizens, particularly wealthier ones, were reluctant to pay taxes for other people’s children to be educated. Some workers resisted the invasiveness of compulsory education, as it kept children out of the workforce, forcing some towns to temporarily abandon or reduce public school efforts, such as in Beverly, Massachusetts, in 1860.[1] Child labor was highly widespread in the U.S. during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with over 1.75 million children aged 15 and under (roughly 18% of the workforce) reported as working in 1910. Children as young as 3 or 4 were sometimes used for small, specialized tasks, while 5 to 8-year-olds were frequently employed in hazardous textile mills, mines, and factories. Child labor was finally curbed by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.[2]
Before the Civil War, most Southern states passed laws making it illegal to teach enslaved people to read or write out of fear that they would read abolitionist literature, such as David Walker’s Appeal, and communicate, fueling organized uprisings like Nat Turner’s Rebellion of 1831. Also, literate enslaved people could read maps, forge travel passes, or write passes for themselves to escape to free states, a method used by many to escape bondage. Slaveholders believed an illiterate, ignorant enslaved person was easier to manage and obey, whereas literacy made them “disconsolate and unhappy” in their captivity. And literacy challenged the white supremacist justification that Black people were inherently inferior, unintelligent, or “less than human.”
Even in northern states, black children were largely denied access to public schools, often being forced into segregated, inferior schools, leading to early school desegregation battles, such as Roberts v. City of Boston in the 1840s. The “Slave Bible”—formally titled Select Parts of the Holy Bible for the use of the Negro Slaves—was used in the 19th-century United States, particularly in the South, though it was primarily produced in London in 1807 for British Caribbean colonies. It was a heavily redacted version of the Bible created to promote obedience and prevent slave revolts, with 90% of the Old Testament and 50% of the New Testament removed.
Following the Civil War, southern schoolhouses became battlegrounds to teach the “Lost Cause” narrative—a false interpretation of history that portrayed slavery in a positive light and argued the war was over states’ rights, not slavery. School officials strictly monitored textbooks to ensure they did not challenge Confederate interpretations of history. This led through coming decades to culminate in Brown v. Board of Education (1954) in which the Supreme Court ruled that separate schools were “inherently unequal.” Decades of “massive resistance” from Southern states ensued. In the 1970s, court-ordered busing forced integration in schools resulting in violent protests, most notably in Boston in 1974, and contributed to “white flight” to suburban schools. In response to integration orders, numerous private, segregated religious schools were established, particularly in the South, to circumvent desegregation.
Concurrently, the Scopes “Monkey” Trial in 1925 was a landmark confrontation between traditionalists (conservatives) and modernists (progressives), focusing on a Tennessee law prohibiting the teaching of evolution in public schools, effectively curbing the teaching of science for several decades.
School prayer remains a hot topic for both religionists as well as those defending the Constitution, with two lawsuits serving to define the subject. Engel v. Vitale (1962) and Abington School District v. Schempp (1963) declared that state-sponsored Bible reading and prayer in public schools were unconstitutional, fueling long-term debates over the secularization of public education. The fact is that public school children have always been able to pray when and wherever they pleased. What upsets religionists is that children in public schools cannot be led in prayer by adults—not teachers, not parents, not the principal. The desire to inculcate all children through prayer voicing religious doctrine drives this falsehood.
The later part of the century was marked by “curriculum wars” over the inclusion of diverse, non-European perspectives in history and literature curricula, which opponents claimed was a political attack on traditional national identity. Like the prayer argument, the textbook/curriculum battles continue unabated today, with most book content decided by heavily-conservative boards. [3]
“Given the high concentration of students in Texas and California, textbook makers know…they need to create books that are going to be approved by those large states.” said Dr. Max Altman, director of research and policy at the Southern Education Foundation. Altman said that requests for changes and outright rejections based on the inclusion of certain concepts are what make California, Florida and Texas so influential.
“This small group of people who approve textbooks within a couple of states have a very, very large effect on what students across the bottom of the United States and really across the country as a whole are able to learn,” he said.
[This 2022 article reports that] …[i]n April, the Florida Department of Education initially rejected 41% of all K-12 mathematics textbooks submitted for state adoption approval — the most in Florida’s history. The dismissal of the 54 textbooks — including 71% of K-5 math materials — stems from several claims: references to Critical Race Theory (CRT), inclusions of Common Core and “unsolicited” inclusions of Social Emotional Learning.
The public push to provide evidential examples of the above reasons for rejection made national headlines, as the state’s Department of Education did not initially release any specifics. Later, it published four visual examples from the rejected textbooks.
Experts suggest that overseeing public school curricula in a small number of highly populated states has an outsized influence on what children are learning throughout the country. Because publishers often create uniform national editions, major state adoption boards, particularly in Texas (conservative-leaning) and California (liberal-leaning), exert outsized influence on nationwide content. Texas, one of the largest purchasers of textbooks, often pushes to emphasize “positive aspects” of American history, de-emphasize the role of slavery, increase the influence of Christianity, and promote gun rights. Conservative, evangelical, or religious viewpoints have often driven content to prioritize patriotism and limit topics like climate science or critical race theory.
California often pushes for inclusive, multicultural narratives, ensuring that textbooks feature stories of LGBTQ+ individuals, marginalized groups, and a more critical view of historical events. Due to this, publishers often create different regional versions or compromise by including, for instance, both more critical and more patriotic interpretations of events, creating a “whitewashed” or highly contentious final product.
Textbook selection and other elements of public schools are the task of school boards, both local and state level. While curricula are determined by state boards of education, there are no educational standards required of state board members. Eligibility for state boards of education typically requires candidates to be residents of the state, registered voters, and often residents of the specific district they aim to represent.
Not requiring a college degree for state boards of education is part of a broader, bipartisan shift towards skills-based governance and a move away from formal credential requirements, which are increasingly seen as unnecessary barriers to entry. While education policymakers need expertise, proponents of this shift argue that a degree is not a guarantee of competence, effective leadership, or relevant experience.
On the other hand, without a deep background in subject matter and education policy, board members may rely on ideological rather than research-based solutions to solve problems like low student achievement, leading to increased political polarization in schools. Members may struggle to evaluate curriculum standards, assessment tools, and learning theories, potentially leading to decisions that do not align with evidence-based practices. More concerning is that without the experience of the wide array of college coursework, members may focus on short-term political issues or “quick fixes” rather than the long-term, systemic changes needed to improve student outcomes.
State boards typically adopt standards (e.g., in reading, math) that outline skills students must master, hopefully informed by state law, national benchmarks, and expert input. State-level entities create frameworks, which may act as official requirements or recommended guidelines for local curriculum. State laws often mandate specific topics (e.g., specific subjects, or in some cases, restricting approaches) that schools must adopt. The degree of control varies by state; some states have highly centralized, mandatory curriculum lists, while others allow local districts greater flexibility. Boards often adopt standards at public meetings, occasionally with guidance from curriculum committees and teacher panels.
Local level textbook adoption policy leaves decisions to a local education agency (i.e. school district). State level textbook adoption policy leaves decisions to a state agency (i.e. state board of education) California has a statewide adoption policy at the elementary level. Secondary textbooks are chosen by local governing boards. The state of Hawaii comprises a single school district. Map: Emily Schmidt, APM Research Lab Source: Education Commission of the States
Curricula
There are no federally mandated national education standards in the United States, as education is primarily managed by states and local districts. However, the nation utilizes voluntary, state-led standards like the Common Core State Standards, adopted in June 2010 by most states to ensure consistent math and English learning goals. Not adopting the standards are Alaska, Nebraska, Texas, Virginia, and Oklahoma. The reasons for common standards for curricula include the obvious, that children of a family moving from one state to another meet the same basic education as at their previous location. Also obvious is the need for all Americans to share the same understanding of national history, the operations of government, and fundamentals of reading, writing, and mathematics, as well as science.
School boards and districts have been empowered to make curriculum decisions in order to prepare future citizens. State constitutions require the operation of systems of education, and we elect school boards to make important decisions for community schools, including those related to materials and instruction. In some cases, parents object to these decisions, arguing that their constitutional rights have been violated. For example, in the [2008] federal appeals case of Parker v. Hurley, parents objected to their children being presented with books depicting diverse families, including families with parents of the same gender. The district refused to grant the children an exemption from the instruction. The parents argued that the refusal of an exemption amounted to an infringement on their constitutional rights as parents and their free exercise of religion rights under the First Amendment. The court disagreed, citing a long line of cases establishing that while parents have a constitutional right to raise their children, there is no right to direct how a public school teaches those children. [4]
The New Puritans at Work
The overarching religious education agenda is not a single project but rather a continuous political tug-of-war for the control of educational narratives. The division between these two fundamentals of education has led, in part, to today’s division in American society.
We can identify the ways that the Puritan ethic drives Christian Nationalism. The Puritans sought to build a “city on a hill” defined by severe piety, communal surveillance, and strict adherence to moral codes, rather than by religious freedom. Christian Nationalists interpret the “city on a hill” phrase, derived from John Winthrop’s 1630 sermon,[5] as a divine mandate that the United States is a uniquely ordained, Christian nation meant to act as a moral, religious beacon to the world. This vision, often championed by President Ronald Reagan, blends national identity with biblical prophecy, suggesting America holds a special, providential covenant to embody Christian principles enforced by the government.
Puritan men held public office, imposing religious law to govern social and legal life. Only adult male church members (“the elect”) could vote in elections and participate in town government. Laws were based on Old Testament teachings. Today, many within the Christian Nationalist movement believe that men are specifically ordained by God to lead in government, politics, and the public sphere. This ideology is rooted in a belief in “biblical patriarchy” or complementarianism, which argues that God established distinct roles for men and women, where men are designed to lead and protect while women are called to support and submit.
Puritan leaders were intolerant of dissenting religious views, which were seen as dangerous to the community’s mission. Christian Nationalists generally believe that America was founded as a Christian nation and that its laws and public life should reflect Christian, specifically Protestant, values. Other religions are viewed as subordinate, threats to national identity, or demonic, with many proponents supporting the restriction of non-Christian practices.
Puritan households were strictly hierarchical, with the father as the head. Women were viewed as “helpmeets” for their husbands with fewer rights, though they held significant responsibility in managing the home, raising children, and tending the gardens. Likewise, many proponents of Christian Nationalism believe that women should prioritize staying at home, focusing on raising children and submitting to their husbands’ leadership.
During the early Puritan period, the “Old Deluder Law” required every town of fifty or more families to pay for a teacher, and they founded Harvard College in 1636 for training ministers. They believed in the active presence of the devil and witches, leading to the Salem witch trials in 1692, which occurred when religious political control was waning. Christian Nationalists view public education as a vital, yet currently hostile, battlefield for the nation’s cultural and spiritual direction. They generally aim to dismantle the traditional secular public school system by promoting school choice vouchers to fund private religious education, instilling conservative Christian values, banning certain books, and reversing LGBTQ+ inclusion.
The Trump administration (2017-2021 and 2025-2028) has adopted key elements of the Christian Nationalist agenda by prioritizing policies that blur the line between church and state, fostering religious exemptions for conservative Christians, and appointing individuals aligned with this ideology to high-ranking positions. Trump has appointed conservative Christian judges, including three Supreme Court justices (Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett), who have delivered rulings expanding religious exemptions. They joined John Roberts and Samuel Alito, both appointed by evangelical adherent George W. Bush; Clarence Thomas, the sixth conservative on the nine-member court, was appointed by Bush’s father, George H. W. Bush.
At the prompting of his Christian Nationalist backers, Trump initiatives aim to review federal actions for “anti-Christian” sentiment and protect “religious freedom,” defined by Christian nationalists not as the separation of church and state, but as the right to embed a specific, conservative Christian worldview into government, law, and public life including the use of taxpayer dollars in support of religious education and eliminating government support for advancing educational effectiveness.
Based on 2026 budget proposals and actions, we see that the Trump administration has sought to cut or eliminate over $8.5 billion in K-12 education programs and $2.7 billion in higher education, while targeting programs like TRIO (outreach and student services initiatives funded by the U.S. Department of Education to help low-income, first-generation college students, and individuals with disabilities succeed in education, ranging from middle school through adult education), GEAR UP (a federal discretionary grant program designed to increase the number of low-income, underserved, or first-generation students who are prepared to enter and succeed in postsecondary education), and Federal Work-Study for elimination or massive reductions. (Initiated in 1964, the program provides part-time jobs for undergraduate and graduate students with financial need, allowing them to earn money for education expenses.)
The Trump administration’s cuts to K-12 education focus on slashing, consolidating, or eliminating programs like after-school, summer, and mental health grants. More than 760 in-progress grants, worth over $2 billion, were discontinued in 2025, including cuts to college prep ($300m+), civics ($35m), and racial integration ($26m). Other cuts target teacher training ($2.2 billion) and English learner services ($890 million). The administration also proposed the “Make Education Great Again” block grant, which would overhaul K-12 education by consolidating federal funding, cut federal oversight, and shift control to states. It prioritizes school choice, patriotic education, and literacy/math, while reducing the Department of Education’s role. This would cut existing program funding by 70%.
Trump’s cuts aren’t the first to take the U.S. educational efforts backwards despite extensive research showing the benefits of programs now being eliminated. This has been an ongoing effort by Christian Nationalists over the last fifty years. During the 1980s, Ronald Reagan campaigned on abolishing the Department of Education, with his 1981 budget reducing spending and consolidating grants.
This despite findings on the effectiveness of public education funding showing that increased spending per pupil yields significant social returns, especially in high-poverty districts. State cutbacks to K–12 spending, the rise of voucher programs, and Trump’s attacks on the federal Department of Education threaten to rob the majority of U.S. children of an adequate education.[6] The vast majority of our youth (90%) are in our public school system. Approximately 49-50 million K-12 students attend public schools in the U.S., while roughly 4.7 to 5.5 million (9%-11%) students are enrolled in private schools, based on 2021-2022 data.
Despite Trump’s claim that such cuts are necessary to reduce the outrageous federal deficit, the numbers prove him wrong. The U.S. national debt increased by approximately $1.78 trillion to $2.25 trillion since January 2025, pushing the total gross national debt past $38 trillion. The debt stood at roughly $36.22 trillion around Jan. 20, 2025, and reached $38 trillion by late October 2025. By March/April 2026, total debt crossed $39 trillion.
As for national security and a sound economy, inadequate education is a root cause of significant social issues, primarily driving cycles of poverty, high unemployment rates, and increased crime. It limits economic mobility, reduces workforce productivity, and fosters gender inequality, while also contributing to poor health outcomes, political instability, and social unrest.
Finally, in studies comparing the racial and ethnic composition of charter schools to public schools, researchers generally find that charter schools preserve or intensify racial and economic segregation, and/or facilitate white flight from public schools. Furthermore, studies that compare individual students’ demographic characteristics to the schools they are leaving (public schools) and the schools they are switching to (charter schools) generally demonstrate that students “leave more diverse public schools and enroll in less diverse charter schools.”[7]
Hardly the path toward a unified nation.
[1] Vinovskis, Maris A. “The Politics of Educational Reform in Nineteenth-Century Massachusetts: The Controversy Over the Beverly High School in 1860. Final Report,” Institute of Education Sciences, Aug 15, 1980. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED200495
[2] Indiana, Iowa, West Virginia, Idaho, and Arkansas have passed legislation loosening these protections, with Arkansas eliminating work permits and age verification requirements for children under sixteen.
With the onslaught of massive data centers heating up the climate and burning precious resources, we stand on the threshold of a new age ruled by a handful of Big Tech leaders. Risk analysts view AI’s threat as a 10 to 100 times greater risk than current social media due to its capacity for permanence and existential risk to our mental health, democratic discourse, and social cohesion. The core difference in predicted magnitude levels lies in the potential for complete, irreversible ruin. This booklet explores the many arenas where such ruin could play out.
Like the slow spread of a fatal disease, certain interest groups within the United States have been working to undermine the nation’s education system. Their goal, as so clearly outlined in the 900 pages of Project 2025, is to change our democratic republic into plutocratic theocracy. Ruling from the top, the wealthiest citizens (U.S. Peerage) will enjoy virtually no restrictions on their profits or the damage caused by their industries, while ruling from the bottom, the Christian Nationalists and other religious extremists (New Puritans) will ensure the population lives by Christian rules.
This is not a theory. This is the fact of the current situation as recent Supreme Court decisions have opened the door for unregulated homeschooling and religious private schools to receive our tax dollars in support of their operations. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution’s First Amendment, which specifically prohibits any government support for any religion.
This workaround has been steadily advancing since colonial days but has increased significantly since the 1940s when the “Red Scare” brought a fresh level of religious fanaticism to the public arena. The result? Today, billions of our tax dollars flow into religious school coffers while public schools suffer for inadequate funding even though 90% of K-12 students attend public schools. Perhaps more damaging than the financial costs are the lessons learned under religious instruction: that the Earth is only 6,000 years old; that vaccinations are harmful; that men are superior to women. These are the seeds of a modern nation’s destruction.
What will happen to them, these lovers of Trump, the men and women who act as if he is the next risen Christ, or at least the best man possible to lead the United States of America? Who even now cling to their fantasy in the face of his utter perfidy—starting a war, abandoning the American economy, exposed as a defiler of children. What will happen when the inexorable turn of the wheels of justice—or perhaps death—finally finally grind him into the ground? Will they weep? Yes. Will their anger grow exponentially to the point of ignition? Yes.
When the inevitable happens—and yes, I believe in the Constitution and our system of laws which have steered this nation through war and despair for over 200 years—when Trump is finally held accountable for all his lies and frauds and empty promises that continue to spill from his deteriorating mind, mouthed in nonsensical phrases and welcomed with open arms into the aisles of churches and homes of the True Believers, I believe that the witnesses and the attorneys and the juries and judges will do their duty, that he will be convicted of his crimes against the people and the nation, that he will at some point have to face the truth about himself.
Nothing could be more terrifying for a man like Trump than to face the truth, that his life was wasted in harming his fellow man, that he was a liar, thief, an adulterer and a rapist, that he could produce nothing of value in this world. That he had every advantage and he squandered that gift in his ignorance, in his greed and desperation for his life to have some meaning but never did.
What will these people do who hold him up before themselves and now will find him cast down into the depths of human failure, deceit, corruption? When the proof of his amoral guilt opens their eyes with blinding light, will they refuse to believe the truth? Will they take up arms and storm the courthouses and prison, or stand in line to honor his corpse, cry out demanding a new day still grasping for that promise, that fable of his greatness?
They believed. They tied their lifeboats to his ship, that great phantasm of belief that he was the strong man, the savior of our times, that their lives could be made meaningful and fruitful under his leadership, that their hatreds and prejudices would be vindicated. As the seas toss and roll, tossing his ship into wreckage, will their lives also capsize, splinter into driftwood to drift back to the littered beaches over the coming months and years?
Somewhere deep inside, most of the True Believers sense the truth, that Trump is a fool, an emperor without clothes. They know in that secret room of themselves that they have followed a lie. But for many of them, the truth is too painful, too terrifying, and their solution is to justify war, believe they will emerge triumphant in a new white Christian America led by God Almighty with Trump seated on His right hand.
These are the fantasies of those who have never understood their purpose in life. They mouth the words of the Bible without comprehending their personal duty to act on those words. They labor under the belief that their primary duty is to follow a person like Trump because he says what they want to hear, that they are the chosen ones. In their glorious imaginings of redeeming the nation, the radical right imagines the fight as taking down the figureheads of ‘liberal’ democracy without realizing the liberal agenda aligns with the teachings of Christ.
Will justice for Trump open the door to insight, even epiphany, for his True Believers? Will they be able to accept the truth of his malfeasance or the rectitude of the courts’ judgements? Some will. Some already have. But many will not, reliant on media that supports their viewpoint, reinforcing their perception of Trump. Many of them align with his fight against “the system” over specific policy successes or moral scrutinies and focus on the broader, long-term impact they expect from his policies. We probably should feel compassion for their loss of a dream, of a self-made parody of a god who misled them, made promises he couldn’t keep, presented himself in a fictional persona simply to aggrandize himself no matter the price to be paid.
The private, personal cost will be great for those True Believers unable to let go of the fantasy, that they alone stood by a true hero. They will not be treated kindly by history.
The greater cost to the rest of us, and to our nation, is incalculable.
For the record, I predict that Trump is in the last stages of destroying the goals of his Enablers—Evangelical extremists and their Zionist fantasies, Christian Nationalists, oligarchs, racists, misogynists, and the rest. By the time they wake up to the damage he is doing in his ignorant, ham-fisted effort to implement their objectives, it will be too late to undo it. The end result will be a complete destruction of those Enabler goals and their power in U.S. society.
Make no mistake. In the process already well underway, these morons including Trump will have significantly damaged our nation and each of us individually. Any respect or trust felt toward the United States by other nations will have been destroyed. Our military will have squandered its strategic reserves as well as uncounted lives in a war initiated on a whim without any strategic preparation. Our standing in the world will be trashed.
Our privacy in Social Security, tax, and medical records is lost as the DOGE boys walk off with that information on flash drives. Our natural treasures from forests to wetlands to wildlife is being sold off to the highest bidder, and our hope of stopping global warming will be utterly destroyed. Hard-working men and women, along with their families, who dared to attempt citizenship in this country are being lost to the gulags of foreign countries while our crops rot in the fields. Gas prices are skyrocketing in Trump’s little war, not to decrease for untold months as our fate rests in the hands of the nation Trump attacked.
The end of the Enabler wet dream is near. While the draft dodger plays war games from the Oval Office, his Gestapo/ICE is killing U.S. citizens. Thanks to the SCOTUS, his tariff wet dream is over, with only his remaining grab lasting until July. Invading Venezuela pushed the envelope, and invading Greenland was too much to allow. We have yet to discover the full truth of his submission to Russia, but the irrefutable evidence is mounting.
There’s only so much Trump can do to avoid the consequences of his party time with Epstein, and he’s up to his neck in doing it. But his grab bag of distractions is slowly emptying, and one way or the other, the truth will out.
And there’s only so much the Enablers can do to keep him awake and walking before dear old Mother Nature cuts him off for good.
The Enablers chose to elevate him to the presidency because he is easily manipulated. He pretends to be Christian, enough for the Evangelical and Zionist Enablers to claim he was sent by God as a “flawed vessel,” an imperfect man guided by God’s own hand to lead a nation away from its wanderings; they seek to ensure Israel’s dominance in the Middle East in order to usher in the Second Coming. Why, he could lead the nation back to its Christian roots, its Manifest Destiny to claim this land from its former residents (those heathen tribes) and turn it to God’s plan for a white Christian patriarchy just like the Bible promised!
The Oligarch Enablers touted his financial experience, claiming he was a billionaire who knew the business world. They promoted his reputation of wealth and ignored the common knowledge that in his stomping grounds of New York, Donald Trump was viewed by many, particularly in the 1980s and 1990s, as a “slippery” real estate developer and a “laughing stock” who was “wildly tacky,” according to reports. He was often described in NY as a “con man” or a “shyster” in the context of being a negotiator who would use any means, including “spurious” lawsuits and “scurrilous” tactics, to get his way. But he was malleable, which is all the billionaires needed, claiming that with his financial skills, he could turn the economy around to benefit all people. They knew he had failed at all his financial projects, but believed he would be successful in shifting onerous taxes away from the superrich, which was their true objective.
Then there were White Supremacist Enablers’ concerns about all the non-white immigrants (even those who were citizens) slowly shifting the population away from whiteness. Oh my, what will happen when the browns outnumber the whites?! Could it be that browns will treat whites the way whites have treated browns? After all, whites are by far superior, inventing “everything,” as Trump announced at the 2025 DAVOS meeting. Well, he said the United States was the ‘inventor of everything,’ but to him, in that setting of Western European whites, he meant white. In his garbaged brain, he has no inkling of all the important inventions made by brown people. His personal racism was inherited from his father and grandfather in the tradition of paternal relatives living in Germany in a culture that embraced Hitler’s vision of a white Christian Europe. This all made Trump a great candidate to implement the Enablers’ vision.
The White Racists overlap with the ChristoFascists, whose entire existence seems riveted to the idea that their ticket to heaven lies in convincing everyone to believe what they believe. Already their ‘gospel’ of greed, hate, and selfishness is being effectively repudiated by people who understand and follow the teachings of Christ, not that those teachings differ much from those of basic human morality.
Then, women. For crying out loud, the WOMEN! How dare they stand alongside men as ‘equals’ instead of being barefoot and pregnant in men’s kitchens?! Didn’t God Himself ordain that woman were men’s helpers? But God of the Jews didn’t ordain women as ‘less.’ That idea came from the Romans who by around 400 AD had managed to edit the early Christian writings down to what they deemed appropriate in their patriarchal society: “In Roman culture, a paterfamilias could legally kill a wife or daughter primarily for adultery (violating sexual purity). Other actions, such as drinking wine or other perceived transgressions, were historically punished with death in early Roman history.” (See Council of Nicaea, “…The primary purpose of the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, convened by Emperor Constantine, was to unify the Christian Church by resolving the Arian controversy over the divine nature of Jesus Christ and establish core doctrines, leading to the creation of the Nicene Creed and decisions on Easter dates.”)
Those pesky early Christian writings revealed, in the Gospel of Mary, a path to faith without churches or hierarchy, “a radical interpretation of Jesus’ teachings as a path to inner spiritual knowledge; it rejects His suffering and death as the path to eternal life; it exposes the erroneous view that Mary of Magdala was a prostitute for what it is—a piece of theological fiction; it presents the most straightforward and convincing argument in any early Christian writing for the legitimacy of women’s leadership; it offers a sharp critique of illegitimate power and a utopian vision of spiritual perfection; it challenges our rather romantic views about the harmony and unanimity of the first Christians; and it asks us to rethink the basis for church authority.”
But I digress.
Trump is a figurehead, uninterested and incapable of “running” the United States of America. Instead, he does what his Enablers direct him to do, which is to appoint sycophants to do this administration’s various jobs. Stephen Miller is the force behind Homeland Security, ICE, and all the other ugly, criminal activities currently underway in our Democratic cities. Perhaps criminally insane, Miller is thrilled that brown people are being killed and dispossessed but most of all he enjoys seeing people and their families being terrorized. The terror for the rest of us is just so much collateral damage.
The Enablers have a plan, Project 2025. Destroying the federal government ranks high on the list, with only a few to be saved from the Musk/DOGE destruction which not only eliminated 260,000 to 308,000 federal jobs but also stole a “dataset of more than 300 million Americans’ sensitive information into a virtual database without following required security protocols.”
That information can be used in several damaging ways to:
• Copy data to use for unauthorized purposes
• Deny access to public services, benefits, and opportunities such as: medical care, housing, food or student financial assistance, veteran or military benefits, public contracts, and more.
• “Doxx” (share personal information online)
• Provide or sell data to foreign governments, data brokers, and/or private companies
The Enablers don’t feel personally at risk from these data thefts and have specific methods of using such data to their own financial advantage.
Evangelical Extremists won’t turn away from Trump because their religious beliefs fix them in unquestioning support of the Flawed Vessel. Likewise, few Racists will never be able to overcome their inbred fear and hatred of brown people.
I predict it will be the Oligarchs who finally draw the line and end Trump. It will be interesting to see what finally flips their switch and ends him. Sadly, unless Republicans in Congress stand up and impeach with the Constitution’s Article 2, Section 4 (President, Vice President, and “civil Officers of the United States” including cabinet secretaries and federal judges) to rid us of the entire Trump circus, we’ll be saddled with the vice president who is already groomed by oligarch Peter Thiel for the job.
We can’t count on patriotism to motivate any Enabler to take action. One group has traded its moral judgment for what they believe is God’s favor. Another group has lost their humanity in fear and hatred for brown people. The Oligarchs see nothing wrong with skewing the tax scales in their favor, since their concept of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” means dog-eat-dog capitalism. But now with the losses of war in the Middle East and the stranglehold on oil supply, how much longer will the Oligarchs wait?
Laws against drug use do not stop drug use or abuse. Instead, such laws and their enforcement exacerbate conditions in individuals which have led to their substance abuse. Current drug policy feeds a system of violence by funneling drug traffic to underground markets which in turn finance gangs and cartels. This violence escalates as community law enforcement shifts toward militarized weaponry and strategies, which leads to violations of individual, constitutionally-guaranteed rights. Meanwhile, taxpayers fund ever increasing costs for failed policies.
The Money $$
Incarcerating drug offenders costs U.S. taxpayers over $10 billion annually for over 485,000 prisoners. The federal government spends approximately one million dollars per day just on drug-related incarcerations, with state governments spending billions more. The average annual cost to incarcerate a single person is roughly $40,000 to over $65,000, far exceeding the cost of treatment.[1]
Imprisonment: $10 billion
Beyond incarceration, the total cost for police, prosecution, and adjudication of drug law violations are estimated at over $47 billion per year. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) budget for 2021 (last available year) was $3.28 billion.
Enforcement: $47 billion.
When including the societal costs of substance abuse (health care, criminal justice, lost productivity), the total impact is estimated at over $500 billion annually for substance abusers. Then there’s the cost of social services for families of persons convicted for drug crimes. An average of nearly $4,200 annually is paid by families to support their incarcerated loved ones, with a cumulative financial burden on families estimated at approximately $350 billion per year nationwide. Federal prison populations average 42.9% drug prisoners, costing tax payers $150 billion in social services for their dependents, while state prisons contain an average of 20% for drug crimes adding another $70 billion for social services, a total of $220 billion.[2][3]
Society: $720 billion.
The total societal cost for individuals with substance abuse problems, including lost productivity and health consequences, is much higher, with estimates exceeding $820 billion annually. For illegal drugs, the cost is estimated at $193 billion.
The United States military spends roughly $1 billion annually directly on drug interdiction and counter-drug activities, with over $8 billion in surplus equipment transferred to law enforcement agencies since 1990. This spending involves the Department of Defense (DoD) supporting federal, state, and local agencies through intelligence, surveillance, and equipment transfers, particularly through the 1033 program.[5]
Military: $9 billion
Total estimated dollar cost of the U.S. drug war: $979 billion ANNUALLY.
The Human Cost
Roughly 75% of illegal drug users are self-medicating.[6] Research has shown that people with conditions like depression, anxiety disorders, bipolar disorder, PTSD, and ADHD may use illegal drugs to temporarily alleviate symptoms. For example, a person struggling with alcoholism through most of the fifty years of his life seeks therapy and discovers that he was bi-polar. Once appropriately medicated for bi-polar disorder, he no longer cared to drink. Many patients misusing drugs and alcohol have chronic pain and use these substances (such as marijuana and heroin, which have pain-relieving properties) to cope. Finally, in the absence of emotional support, individuals may use drugs to deal with increased stress, trauma, or a recent loss.
In a nation eager to spend billions of dollars to punish intoxication, far less energy and money is expended to provide physical and mental health care for persons in need. Illegal street drugs are less expensive than medical care. Even subsidized medical care often fails to fully address mental health or nutritional needs. For a chronically depressed person, for example, methamphetamine can elevate that person’s mood. Opiates can also seem the perfect answer, i.e. escape from reality.
Enforcement of prohibition laws further harms a person using illegal drugs. Humiliation, disenfranchisement, and poverty are collateral damage intentionally inflicted by arrest and prosecution. An arrest or conviction record can lead to eviction or denial of housing, particularly in public housing, with formerly incarcerated people being ten times more likely to experience homelessness. Interactions with the legal system can trigger child welfare investigations, potentially leading to family separation and foster care placement, adding to generational damage. Consequences can include the loss of voting rights, firearm privileges, and driver’s license suspension. Individuals may lose access to student loans, public benefits (like TANF or SNAP), and face significant financial burdens. These deleterious effects of prohibition laws only exacerbate an individual’s underlying problems.
There were approximately 105,000 to 108,000 annual drug overdose deaths reported in 2022 and 2023, with provisional data for 2024 indicating a significant decrease to around 80,000–81,700 deaths. The vast majority of these deaths involve illicit drugs, specifically synthetic opioids like illegally-made fentanyl, the primary driver of the overdose crisis in the United States, responsible for approximately 72,000 to 73,000 deaths annuallyas of 2023. These synthetic opioids account for nearly 70% of all illegal drug-related deaths.
Between 2001 and 2018, deaths from drug and alcohol intoxications in prisons and jails rose 600% and 400%, respectively. Factors in these surprising numbers include limited access to evidence-based treatment, such as Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) (e.g., methadone, buprenorphine), and high-turnover, high-stress environments. Additionally, researchers suggest that the true number of intoxication-related deaths is likely higher, as many are often miscoded on death certificates as “illness” or “unknown” causes, particularly when they occur shortly after booking. Treatment or medications for substance use disorder are rarely available behind bars.[7]
What makes the news are deaths from fentanyl, over 80,000 annually as noted above. But compared to drug deaths, deaths from legal alcohol use are estimated at 178,000 annually. Additionally, another 13,000 deaths (average) per year result from drunk driving. Excessive alcohol use remains a leading preventable cause of death, with estimates frequently exceeding 100,000 annual deaths attributable to chronic health conditions and acute events like accidents.[8]
Death from illegal drugs:
2024 (Provisional): Approximately 79,384 drug overdose deaths were reported, representing a substantial, nearly 24% decrease from 2023.
2023: Approximately 105,007 people died from drug overdoses, which was a slight decrease (about 3%) from the 107,941 deaths reported in 2022.
2022: A total of 107,941 drug overdose deaths occurred.
2021: A total of 106,699 drug overdose deaths
In comparison, deaths due to excessive alcohol use increased from 30,722 in 2014 to 54,258 in 2020-21 to 46,796 in 2024. These are direct results while alcohol-related causes totaled 178,000 deaths “in an average year.”[9] Polling shows that 54% of adults say that someone in their household has struggled with an alcohol use disorder.[10]
As we should have learned from efforts to eliminate alcohol use/abuse with the 1920 passage of the Volstead Act (repealed in 1933), prohibition laws open a vast underground market where criminals earn huge profits by supplying prohibited substances to the public. While there is no single definitive figure for the total size of the underground alcohol market between 1920 and 1933, the federal government lost an estimated $11 billion in tax revenue during Prohibition and spent another estimated $300 million in enforcement. Meanwhile, organized crime syndicates flourished, with major figures like Al Capone generating up to $100 million annually. Deaths attributed to alcohol poisoning during the thirteen years of prohibition are estimated at 50,000, i.e. slightly less than 4,000 per year.[11] This total is separate from other alcohol-related deaths including drunk driving and alcohol-related diseases such as cirrhosis of the liver.
Worse than the dollar cost for the current prohibition laws on certain drugs, however, is the human cost and the cost to our democracy.
Prohibition was—and is—a powerful political tool heralded by countless public office hopefuls who don’t hesitate to proclaim their support for prohibition laws. Notably, President Donald Trump has used drug trafficking to justify the outright murder of (so far) over 130 individuals by claiming they were carrying drugs in their boats—no judge, no jury.[12] Keep in mind that over 100,000 people die each year from prescribed drugs. Legal drugs. These include psychostimulants, cocaine, prescription opioids, benzodiazepines, heroin, antidepressants.
Data shows us that 27.9 million people, 9.7% of the population, will suffer an alcohol use disorder, while 28.2 million (9.8%) will suffer a drug use disorder. Equally noteworthy is that 21.2 million people had both a mental health disorder and a substance use disorder.[13] Other evidence is found to support the idea that at least half of persons with a substance abuse problem are self-medicating an underlying problem. Contributing factors include early use (before age 15 compared to those who wait until age 21 or later) and/or a family history of problem drinking. Altogether, nearly 20%–one in five people—face substance abuse problems.
The cost to our democracy is not just the extra-judicial murder of people in boats. It is the ridiculous idea that the government has the right and capability to monitor individual lives. To this end, government has armed community police departments with military-grade weapons and the development of SWAT teams in order to carry out the ‘war’ on our citizens. Yes, this is a response to wealthy street gangs protecting their turf against competing gangs as well as against law enforcement, but prohibition policies created this war that can never be won. People will continue to recreate and self-medicate. Police will continue to try to enforce the laws, failed as they are. Such laws open the way to selective enforcement, wherein persons of color or low income become easy targets. Black people are significantly more likely to be arrested for drug violations, with studies showing they are 3.6 times more likely than white people to be arrested for marijuana possession. Black and Latino people make up the majority of those in state and federal prisons for drug offenses. The imprisonment rate for Black adults for drug charges is nearly six times that of white adults. Almost never does law enforcement act against the wealthy or other ‘elites’ who most certainly can access effective legal advice before ever entering a jail cell.
These shameful outcomes in a so-called free society are due to the fact that drug laws are fundamentally unenforceable. Government cannot surveil private activity in the homes of American citizens, so traffic stops for spurious reasons lead to police sniffing the air rolling out of the car window to justify acceleration of their ‘investigation.’
This ouroboros of ill-considered public policy not only destroys our communities, it infects the entire nation with violence and lost opportunities.
Cost of Appropriate Care for Persons with Substance Abuse Disorder
Experts emphasize that substance abuse is often both a cause and a consequence of homelessness. While addiction can contribute to housing loss, many individuals also experience substance use as a form of “self-medication” to cope with the trauma and physical pain of living without stable housing, as previously discussed.
Walk-in, free community health clinics that focus on addiction treatment should include excellent nutrition, mental health diagnosis and treatment, and healing exercise (T’ai chi, mindful meditation, low impact exercises, walking, swimming). Such clinics must be established in every community where homeless populations are found and, subsequently, in every community of 25,000 or fewer or equivalent parts of larger communities. Each person must be linked with a counselor who advises not only on treatment options, but also on what social services are available and recommended, to include physical (including dental) and mental health care, educational options, job training programs, counseling on matters of family, personal relationships, and living conditions. Referral to housing with follow-up oversight requires that housing be available.
Housing for unsheltered persons is an important element in addressing addiction and mental health issues. Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) is the gold standard for individuals experiencing chronic homelessness who have diagnosed disabilities. It combines long-term, stable housing with intensive, voluntary supportive services (such as mental health care, addiction treatment, and case management) to ensure long-term success. Cost: $12,000–$20,000 range, with some specialized cases involving higher service needs costing more. Rapid Re-Housing (RRH), often in the form of tiny home villages, is best suited for those experiencing non-chronic homelessness. This model focuses on getting individuals into their own apartments as quickly as possible. It provides short-term financial assistance (rent/utilities) and time-limited support services to help people stabilize and gain independence. RRH is lower-cost, short-to-medium-term assistance, estimated at roughly $8,500 annually.
Many experts argue that the high cost of homelessness—driven by public spending on emergency rooms, jails, hospitals, and crisis services—often exceeds the cost of providing stable, permanent housing.
National Alliance to End Homelessness:
We calculated the additional Housing First placements needed to provide assistance for every household who experienced sheltered homelessness in 2022. Table 2 applies financial cost estimates (in 2022 dollars) to this expansion in placements. At an annual cost of $8,486 and $20,115 per adult household for each placement in Rapid Re-Housing and supportive housing, respectively, it would cost an additional $8.2 billion to rehouse all adult households who stayed in shelter in 2022.
The comparatively smaller number of families experiencing homelessness, almost all of whom are temporarily homeless, would mean that all sheltered homeless families could be rehoused using Rapid Re-Housing at an additional annual cost of $1 billion. The highly successful veterans Housing First placements can be expanded to cover all sheltered homeless veterans at an additional annual cost of $442 million. At an estimated total additional cost of $9.6 billion, all households that used shelter in 2022 could have been provided with a Housing First program.
Between 2001 and 2018, deaths from drug and alcohol intoxications in prisons and jails rose 600% and 400%, respectively. Treatment or medications for substance use disorder are rarely available behind bars.[14]
Estimated number of homeless persons in the United States (2024) is 772,000. For this number, high end estimated cost for PSH would total $15.4 billion.
Subtracted from the savings found in ending the drug war, providing housing for the homeless would leave$963.6 billion for other uses.
Lost Potential Income
The global illegal drug industry is estimated to be worth between $426 billion and $652 billion per year. The United States illegal drug industry is estimated to be worth between $200 billion and $750 billion per year. If you believe the people profiting from this income flow will hesitate to spend some of their ill-gotten wealth to lobby legislators at any hint of drug policy reform, I have a bridge to sell you.
If currently illegal drugs were legalized in the United States, regulated like alcohol for purity and dosage strength, and taxed, the income from those taxes would range between $7.5 billion and $225 billion per year. This 3% approximation is based on the rate used on alcohol in Arkansas. Alcohol tax differs from state to state, in addition to federal tax per ounce of pure alcoholic content. For spirits, wine, and beer, the federal rate is 21 cents, 6 cents, and 9 cents, respectively, leaving no easy method of comparing alcohol tax rates to potential tax on currently illegal drugs. No doubt a modest tax rate on what is currently sold on the black market would be substantial. Potential tax income from legalized drug tax: $7.5 to $225 billion.
Also profiting the nation would be new income for farmers, processors, and retailers providing drugs to the public. For comparison, consider the Arkansas medical marijuana market. Since its 2019 launch, the Arkansas medical marijuana industry has exceeded $1.1 billion in total sales. In February and March 2024 combined, the state’s 38 dispensaries sold nearly $45 million in products. As of March 2, 2026, the average annual pay for a Cannabis Grower in Arkansas is $51,905 ($24.95/hour), with most salaries ranging from $31,100 to $66,500. Top earners (90th percentile) in the Arkansas cannabis cultivation sector can make up to $81,841 annually. Broader roles within the Arkansas cannabis industry average around $118,867 a year ($57.15/hour). Of key note, Arkansas has collected over $127 million in state tax revenue from medical marijuana in the last five years.
Imagine these numbers amplified if production and sales weren’t limited to people certified as medical use! Instead, current policies are supporting various actors in this international underground drug trade, including:
Transnational Criminal Organizations (Cartels): These “international logistics companies” manage the large-scale trafficking and distribution. Leaders (“kingpins”) can accumulate immense personal fortunes, often running into billions of dollars, though the majority of revenue is distributed among lower-level participants in destination countries.
Wholesalers and Distributors: Individuals in destination countries like the US and the UK who break down large shipments and distribute them to local dealers capture an estimated 70% to 80% of the total revenue, primarily due to the high retail price and significant risks involved at this stage of the supply chain.
Street-level Dealers: While often making modest incomes (sometimes compared to minimum wage, though still a living wage for many), these individuals are numerous and collectively account for a large portion of the market’s revenue. Their earnings are often used for everyday living expenses.
Farmers and Producers: At the very beginning of the supply chain, farmers in producer countries (e.g., Afghanistan for poppy, Colombia for coca) earn very little compared to the final street value of the drugs.
Corrupt Officials: Bribes and payoffs supplement the incomes of government officials, police, and border control agents at various levels, enabling the flow of drugs and money.
Professionals involved in Money Laundering: Individuals such as lawyers and accountants are involved in creating shell companies, using offshore accounts, and running cash-intensive businesses (like bars, salons, or construction companies) to disguise illicit funds as legitimate income.
Legitimate Businesses: Drug money is often laundered by investing it in the legitimate economy, including the stock market, real estate, and various small businesses, which in turn profits from these cash infusions.
For example, a DEA memo, part of a recent (early 2026) release of Justice Department files, shows that the agency opened an investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and others in December 2010. The investigation was still pending as of 2015, the date of the memo. The document specifically noted that Epstein was suspected of transferring more than $5.6 million for the purpose of acquiring narcotics.
Ultimately, illegal profits sustain the operations of the entire criminal network and fund related illicit activities such as human trafficking and arms trafficking.
Farmers would be one of the primary beneficiaries of legalized drugs, capable of producing not only crops of marijuana, but also opium poppies and coca bush. The two latter agricultural products are well established outside the continental U.S., as are harvesting and processing methods. Populations which have traditionally produced opium are primarily Afghanistan and parts of the North-West Frontier Province (now Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan). Coca production and processing are traditionally in Peru, Bolivia, Colombia, and Ecuador. These areas would greatly benefit from legalizing their farming of these substances.
Clearly, ending the U.S. drug war would create tremendous benefits around the world.
The Drug War’s Role in Illegal Immigration
In particular, legalized drugs would remove the U.S. boot from the necks of Central and South American nations whose drug cartels currently exercise a combination of extreme violence, territorial control, corruption, and diversification into other criminal and legitimate economic activities in their home nations. Drug cartels exert a profound, direct, and increasingly violent influence on immigration into the United States by controlling, taxing, and facilitating the movement of people across the U.S.-Mexico border. They have transformed migrant smuggling into a multi-billion dollar business that often works in tandem with drug trafficking, turning the border into a “pay-to-pass” system.
But that is only part of the drug war benefit to cartels in the immigration arena. Violence, including that stemming from drug trafficking, gang activity (maras), and extortion, is a primary driver of emigration from Central America, with studies suggesting it acts as a, or the, main catalyst for 39% to over 60% of migrants, particularly from the “Northern Triangle” (El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala). The violence associated with the drug trade damages local economies, reduces investment, and destroys jobs. Research indicates that this “economic channel” is the dominant force behind migration, as people flee not just the immediate threat of violence, but the loss of livelihood. Gangs frequently target youth for forced recruitment, leading many families to send their children to the U.S. for safety, resulting in surges of unaccompanied minors.
The immigration problem for the U.S. is not limited to Central America. Even further south from our borders are people desperate to leave South America. The majority of South American immigrants to the southern border of the United States are from Colombia, Venezuela, Brazil, Ecuador, and Peru.
As of early 2026, the political-economic situation regarding the drug war in Venezuela is defined by a deeply entrenched, state-involved narco-trafficking infrastructure that functions amid a severe economic, humanitarian crisis, and intense pressure from the United States. The government is largely seen as a “gangster state” where, under the Maduro regime, the military and security apparatus became reliant on illicit revenue streams to maintain power, particularly through the “Cartel of the Suns”. Roughly 49% to over 72% of Venezuelan migrants to the U.S. have cited insecurity and violence as a reason for leaving their country.
As of early 2025, over 400,000 Ecuadorians had left the country since 2021, with a significant and growing percentage driven by drug war violence and, in some cases, forced recruitment. The political and economic situation regarding the drug war in Ecuador is characterized by a “new phase” of intense, US-backed military operations against “narco-terrorist” gangs, which have largely taken over criminal control of the country’s Pacific ports. Despite President Daniel Noboa’s “iron fist” policies—declaring an internal armed conflict and deploying the military—homicides reached record-highs in 2025, with over 9,000 violent deaths, making it one of the most violent nations in the world.
The political and economic situation regarding the drug war in Colombia in early 2026 is characterized by heightened tensions with the United States, record-high cocaine production, and a contentious shift in strategy under President Gustavo Petro. Cocaine trafficking is a massive, parallel economy in Colombia, generating an estimated $15.3 billion annually, equivalent to roughly 4.2% of the country’s GDP. Petro has moved away from forced eradication toward voluntary substitution and “total peace” negotiations with armed groups, a policy that has struggled to show results and has antagonized the Trump administration.
In Brazil, the highest rates of homicide, often linked to drug trafficking disputes, are concentrated in the North and Northeast regions, prompting migration from these areas. Brazil struggles with high rates of homicide (roughly 23.8 per 100,000 residents), gang violence, and robbery, largely driven by the illegal drug trade.
In Peru’s rural, coca-growing regions like the VRAEM (Valley of the Apurímac, Ene, and Mantaro Rivers), violence, extortion, and illegal mining have forced many to leave. Drug traffickers have increased violence against indigenous communities, causing displacement. The reduction of USAID funding, particularly under the Trump administration, has created uncertainty regarding the continuation of alternative development programs that were designed to encourage farmers to switch from coca to legal crops.
Overall, immigration enforcement and border security costs have reached record highs in the U.S., with proposed and approved funding for FY2025–2026 exceeding $100 billion over four years, including a roughly $10 billion annual budget for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and nearly $20 billion for U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in 2024. Recent legislation has significantly boosted these figures, allocating $45 billion for detention, $30 billion for removals, and $46 billion for border walls, creating a massive “deportation-industrial complex.”
Obviously, ending the drug war would destroy the cartels, thereby allowing for a return to normalcy in these Central and South American nations. Granted, this won’t occur overnight. The damage has occurred over decades. Still, if such an improvement came to pass, we could estimate at the very least a 50% reduction in this budget, from $100 billion to $50 billion, and probably significantly more.
Dispensing Drugs in a No-Prohibition Nation
Almost 300 million people are estimated to consume illicit drugs regularly, with the three most popular being cannabis (228 million users), opioids (60 million) and cocaine (23 million). But that is a drop in the bucket to the actual drug consumption. Nearly 260 million Americans use over-the-counter (OTC) medications, purchasing them an average of 26 times per year. In 2024, OTC medication sales in the U.S. were estimated at $44.3 billion. Studies show that 81% of U.S. adults used at least one OTC medication, prescription medication, or dietary supplement in the past week. Further, approximately 6.3 billion prescriptions were filled in the U.S. in 2020 alone. Nearly two-thirds of U.S. adults (about 64.8%) report taking at least one prescription medication annually, treating conditions such as Type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, and high cholesterol.
The mean cost of developing a new drug from 2000 to 2018 was $172.7 million (2018 dollars) but increased to $515.8 million when cost of failures was included and to $879.3 million when both drug development failure and capital costs were included. Clearly pharmaceutical companies are betting on a return, with profits. According to the healthcare intelligence company IQVIA, the U.S. alone accounted for nearly half of all worldwide prescription drug sales in 2024, generating almost $800 billion in revenue, within a global pharma market estimated at $1.7 trillion. Pharmaceutical companies spend over $10 billion annually on direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising in the U.S., with the top 10 drugs accounting for over one-third of that total. TV ads represent about half of this, totaling over $5 billion. Total marketing and sales spending for some major companies, such as AbbVie and Johnson & Johnson, frequently exceeds their research and development (R&D) budgets.[15]
Face it. Drugs are everywhere. Large signs declare “DRUGSTORE.” Television offers drug advertisements up to 16 hours of drug ads per year, with some studies suggesting even higher exposure of over 30 hours, exceeding the average time spent with a primary care physician. The pharmaceutical industry spends billions on direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising, with $6.58 billion spent in 2020 alone. The U.S. is one of only two countries—along with New Zealand—that allows direct-to-consumer drug advertising on TV. As the population ages and chronic disease rates rise, pharmaceutical companies have responded by increasing their ad spend to promote new and patented drugs directly to consumers.
According to the FDA’s Office of Prescription Drug Promotion, these are the most common issues found in today’s drug commercials: Omitting or downplaying of risk; Overstating the drug’s benefits; Failing to present a “fair balance” of risk and benefit information; Omitting material facts about the drug; Making claims that are not appropriately supported; Misrepresenting data from studies; Making misleading drug comparisons; and Misbranding an investigational drug.[16] Not mentioned is the unstated theme that every human problem can be solved with medication. Ads show the medicated person suddenly surrounded by happy dancing people reveling in sunny vistas of idyllic surroundings.
Direct-to-consumer advertising has contributed to a rise in overall prescription drug use among Americans, from 39% (1988-1994) to nearly 50% (2017-2020), fostering a culture that seeks pharmaceutical solutions for various conditions. The most direct parallel occurred in the late 1990s, when pharmaceutical companies aggressively marketed opioids (like OxyContin). The deluge of marketing fueled over-prescription, leading to widespread addiction, and as legal restrictions increased, many users shifted to cheaper illegal alternatives like heroin and fentanyl, according to experts.[17]
Drugs, like alcohol, are also useful for recreation, a way to quickly switch one’s mood and energy from the caffeine-fueled drive to complete tasks to the relaxed kick-back mode when enjoying music, movies, alone time, or other people. While a beer or mixed drink serves that role for many, many others may prefer marijuana which doesn’t leave a hangover or, for alcoholics, trigger a lapse.
Marijuana
Names include ‘hemp’ (for industrial, low-THC types, use is primarily of plant stalks) and cannabis strains such as Cannabis sativa, indica, and ruderalis. Active ingredients area found primarily in flower buds, isolated from male plants by growers who force females to keep producing flowers instead of seeds.
There are no recorded, verifiable cases of a fatal human overdose from marijuana alone. Cannabis (marijuana) produces various physical and mental effects by acting on brain receptors, commonly causing euphoria, relaxation, and heightened sensory awareness. Short-term, it can impair memory, motor skills, and judgment, with risks including anxiety, panic, or psychotic symptoms. Long-term effects may include respiratory issues, cardiovascular strain, and dependence.
Despite fluctuations, marijuana use rose from 10.17% in the 1990s to 17.81% from 2010-2017. A 2021 study using U.S. data found that in some states (e.g., Colorado), legal recreational cannabis was associated with a 13% average monthly decrease in the purchase of all alcohol products, with wine sales showing a 6% decrease. A 2024 survey indicated that 36% of U.S. cannabis users reported drinking less alcohol. Legalization, particularly of medical marijuana, has been linked to a 15% decrease in monthly alcohol sales, specifically beer and wine, in legalizing counties compared to control counties. Some studies show that legal cannabis access is associated with a decrease in alcohol-related traffic fatalities. Recent 2025 research indicates that following the opening of retail cannabis stores, alcohol use declined among young adults (18–29), and binge drinking frequency decreased among adults aged 50–59. Some studies suggest that since alcohol is a common factor in violent crime, the substitution of cannabis for alcohol may contribute to a reduction in violent crime rates.
Cannabis cannabinoids (like THC and CBD) bind to the same natural, endogenous cannabinoid receptors CB1 and CB2 that exist naturally in the human body. There are natural cannabinoids our bodies naturally use to regulate functions like mood, memory, sleep, and pain. These receptors are part of the endocannabinoid system (ECS), which is widespread throughout the brain and body.
Coca
Erythroxylum coca var. coca
Coca leaves, traditionally used in the Andes to combat hunger, thirst, and fatigue, act as a mild stimulant similar to strong coffee. They are rich in nutrients, aid with altitude sickness, and are used for cultural/religious purposes. While generally safe in traditional, low-dose, unprocessed forms, they can still cause positive drug tests. There are no data on possible deaths due to coca leaf use. Although the leaves are used to treat common ailments and boost energy every single day, it has been found that regular use is nothing but a cultural habit, and is not addictive, harmful or mind-altering, unlike cocaine.
Indigenous peoples of South America have used coca leaves for at least 8,000 to 10,000 years. Archaeological evidence, including findings in Peru’s Nanchoc Valley, confirms that early Andean societies integrated coca into their cultures for medicinal, religious, nutritional, and social purposes long before the rise of the Inca Empire. Cocaine was first isolated from coca leaves in 1855 by German chemist Friedrich Gaedcke, who named it “erythroxyline.” It was later purified in 1859-1860 by Albert Niemann, who gave it the name “cocaine.”
Cocaine is a powerful, highly addictive stimulant drug that acts on the central nervous system to produce intense, short-lived feelings of euphoria, high energy, and mental alertness. It works by causing a massive buildup of dopamine in the brain’s reward circuits, while also constricting blood vessels and increasing heart rate. The effects are generally divided into immediate (short-term) and long-term consequences, both of which carry significant health risks. Before the widespread influx of illicitly manufactured fentanyl (roughly prior to 2013-2015), the cocaine-involved overdose death rate in the U.S. was significantly lower and relatively stable, often fluctuating between 1.3 and 2.5 deaths per 100,000 population. As fentanyl entered the market, the rate began rising by about 27% annually starting in 2013, surpassing the 2006 peak by 2016 and reaching 7.3 per 100,000 by 2021. Approximately 79% of cocaine-involved overdose deaths also involve opioids, mainly synthetic opioids like fentanyl, which is the primary driver of the increased death rate. Legalizing cocaine with requirements for product purity, the cocaine death rate would once again drop to its low baseline of pre-2013.
At the extreme end of the stimulants, methamphetamine (meth, also called crystal, chalk or ice) is an addictive stimulant that can be administered orally, smoked, snorted or injected. Smoking or intravenous injection delivers meth to the brain rapidly, resulting in immediate and intense euphoria. Meth use is associated with severe neurological and physical consequences (e.g. paranoia, violent behavior, psychosis, anxiety and depression) and has become a serious public health problem worldwide. The age-adjusted rate was 8.5 deaths per 100,000 population.[18]
In the family of synthetic stimulants:
Methamphetamine (Crystal Meth): Often considered more powerful and addictive than cocaine, methamphetamine releases significantly more dopamine in the brain and has a much longer-lasting high (12–14 hours compared to 1 hour for cocaine). It is generally considered the strongest stimulant available, providing a longer, more intense, and faster-acting addictive effect.
Desoxypipradrol: Research indicates this compound, found in some “legal highs” is more potent than cocaine in causing dopamine release and slowing dopamine re-uptake, with studies suggesting a sevenfold increase in dopamine levels compared to three times for cocaine.
MDPV (“Bath Salts”): MDPV acts similarly to cocaine by inhibiting dopamine re-uptake but is reported to be nearly 10 times more potent, providing a much stronger, uncontrollable high. “Bath salts” is a slang term for this dangerous, lab-made synthetic cathinone (a naturally-occurring stimulant monoamine alkaloid found in the khat shrub (Catha edulis), chemically similar to amphetamines and ephedrine) and are central nervous system stimulants designed to mimic the effects of illegal drugs like cocaine and methamphetamine.
Opiates
Opium poppy Papaver somniferum
The poppy’s offering for human use began as early as 5000 BCE in the Neolithic age, with the oldest archaeological evidence found in the Mediterranean region. Seeds from this era suggest it was used for food, rituals, and early medicinal purposes. It was later documented in ancient Egyptian, Greek, and Roman medical texts. The plant’s chemistry has moved from the most basic form of flower pod gum named opium (dried latex obtained from the seed pods of the opium poppy) to morphine, developed in 1804 through a process involving harvesting raw opium, followed by chemical extraction and purification to isolate morphine from other alkaloids like codeine, which was developed in 1832 and touted as a ‘cure’ for morphine addiction.
Heroin was first synthesized in 1874 by C. R. Alder Wright from morphine. It was later commercialized by the Bayer pharmaceutical company in 1898 as a cough suppressant and pain reliever, widely marketed as a non-addictive alternative to morphine before its addictive nature was fully understood, leading to its eventual strict regulation. Thereafter, numerous semi-synthetic and synthetic opioids were developed, largely in the 20th century, to provide pain relief with the hope of reducing addiction potential. Key opioids developed after heroin include:
Methadone (1930s-1940s): Developed in Germany, this synthetic opioid is used for pain management and to treat opioid use disorder.
Meperidine (Demerol) (1930s): The first synthetic opioid, designed to be a safer alternative to morphine.
Oxycodone (OxyContin/Percocet) (1916): While synthesized shortly after heroin, it gained widespread prominence in the late 20th century, particularly with the 1996 release of OxyContin.
Hydrocodone (Vicodin) (1920s): A semi-synthetic opioid created from codeine.
Buprenorphine (1960s): Developed as a partial agonist for pain and later approved in 2002 for the treatment of opioid addiction.
Fentanyl (1960): A highly potent synthetic opioid, roughly 50 to 100 times more potent than morphine, developed for surgical anesthesia and pain management. Its extreme potency makes the risk of fatal overdose significantly higher than that of cocaine, especially since it is often found as a contaminant in other illicit substances. It is less expensive than natural opioids because it is made from synthetic substances whereas natural opioids depend on poppy production.
Opiates exert their main effects on the brain and spinal cord. Their principal action is to relieve or suppress pain. Like all opiates, opium causes a pleasant, drowsy state, in which all cares are forgotten and there is a decreased sense of pain (analgesia). Immediately after injection, the feelings are most intense. This feeling is described as similar to a sexual orgasm. The drugs also alleviate anxiety; induce relaxation, drowsiness, and sedation; and may impart a state of euphoria or other enhanced mood. In the body, opiates also have important physiological effects; they slow respiration and heartbeat, suppress the cough reflex, and relax the smooth muscles of the gastrointestinal tract. Opiates are addictive drugs–i.e., they produce a physical dependence (and withdrawal symptoms) that can only be assuaged by continued use of the drug.
Long-term opium use is associated with a significantly increased risk of death from nonmalignant respiratory diseases (such as COPD, asthma, and pneumonia) and cardiovascular disease. In one study, opium consumption was significantly associated with increased risks of deaths from several causes including circulatory diseases (hazard ratio 1.81) and cancer (1.61). The strongest associations were seen with deaths from asthma, tuberculosis, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (11.0, 6.22, and 5.44, respectively).[19]
The most powerful synthetic opiate invented so far is fentanyl. Similar to other opioid analgesics, fentanyl produces effects such as: relaxation, euphoria, pain relief, sedation, confusion, drowsiness, dizziness, nausea and vomiting, urinary retention, pupillary constriction, and respiratory depression. Death rates for fentanyl are 14.3 deaths per 100,000 standard population in 2024, marking a significant 35.6% decrease from the 2023 rate of 22.2. Despite this recent decline, fentanyl remains the dominant driver of fatal overdoses in the U.S., involved in roughly 60% to 70% of all drug overdose deaths.
Hallucinogens
The most potent species ofPsilocybe are members of genus Psilocybe, such as P. azurescens, P. semilanceata, and P. cyanescens. Above, Psilocybe semilanceata
Not mentioned so far are the hallucinogens, primarily LSD, peyote/mescaline, psilocybin, salvia, and DMT/Ayahuasca. Considered sacramental to many, use of these drugs can lead to spiritual insights, so-called “mystical” experiences such as the sense of “pure” being, the sense of unity with one’s surroundings, the sense that what one experienced was real, and the sense of sacredness. There are similarities between psychedelic experiences and non-ordinary forms of consciousness experienced in meditation and near-death experiences. The phenomenon of ego dissolution is often described as a key feature of the psychedelic experience.
Peyote cactus Lophophora williamsii
Ancient religions used various plant-based hallucinogens (entheogens) for rituals, including Soma in Vedic Hinduism circa 1500 BCE, psilocybin mushrooms and morning glory among the Maya/Aztecs circa 3000 BCE, Tabernanthe iboga in African Bwiti, and Datura by Mississippian cultures. These substances were used to achieve ecstatic states, connect with deities, and induce prophetic visions. Some scholars argue that early Christian, Roman-Egyptian, and Greek rites used psychoactive substances in their sacraments.[20]
Users typically reportseeing colors, patterns, and shapes that are not real, such as complex, moving geometric patterns (fractals), or trails/tracers behind moving objects. Other effects range from Sensory Confusion (Synesthesia),acommon experience where senses blend, such as “hearing colors” or “seeing sounds”; Time and Space Distortion: Perception of time can slow down significantly, speed up, or seem to stop; and Self-Identity Alteration: Users may experience “ego dissolution,” where the boundary between self and the external environment becomes blurred, sometimes leading to a feeling of becoming one with their surroundings.
Multiple studies suggest psilocybin can produce rapid, substantial, and long-lasting antidepressant effects, sometimes for as long as six months to a year after just one or two doses. The FDA has granted “breakthrough therapy” designation to psilocybin for both conditions to expedite research and development. Psilocybin has shown efficacy in reducing anxiety and distress in patients with life-threatening conditions, such as cancer, promoting improved quality of life and well-being. Pilot studies for alcohol use disorder and tobacco addiction have demonstrated promising success rates, with some participants achieving long-term abstinence. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) is funding a multi-site study on its effectiveness for tobacco addiction. Research is also exploring its potential for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and cluster headaches, with encouraging initial results in small studies.
LSD molecule
First time users of hallucinogens are best served by exploring the experience in the company of an experienced user. Best results with hallucinogens would occur when the user is not under the influence of alcohol or any other drug. He/she should remain for the duration in a safe, comfortable space with no unexpected interruptions. Since the effects of LSD, for example, take at least 1-2 hours to gradually come into force, then continue to rise for 3-4 hours, then linger for up to another six hours, the user should pay attention to periodic refreshment with water. Generally the user will experience no appetite for food. The experience can be unsettling if the subject is trying to interact with the public or large crowds, or if the experience is initiated when the subject is already tired or not feeling well. These nuances of the psychedelic experience with any particular drug are why first time users benefit from being accompanied by a trusted, experienced user.
Tobacco and Alcohol
Tobacco is the common name of several plants in the genus Nicotiana of the family Solanaceae, and the general term for any product prepared from the cured leaves of these plants. Seventy-nine species of tobacco are known, but the chief commercial crop is N. tabacum. The more potent variant N. rustica is also used in some countries
Not mentioned in the discussion so far are tobacco products. Known to be carcinogenic, tobacco is credited with 490,000 deaths per year in the United States. This is more than all illegal drugs and alcohol combined at total of 278,000—80,000 to 100,000 per year from currently illegal drugs and 178,000 from legal alcohol use. However, there is evidence that pesticides and other chemicals contribute to tobacco-related deaths, both for smokers and for agricultural workers who are directly exposed during farming.[22] However, no research to date is found showing less harm from organic tobacco.
Different policy approaches to these various substances is a combination of tradition and risk of collateral damage in those who abuse the substance. For example, tobacco has been popular in its various forms of usage for over 600 years in Western cultures, although indigenous peoples have used it over 10,000 years. Aside from the real damage caused by second-hand smoke, there is no perceived risk to others from its use.
Nicotiana tabacum was used traditionally for wide range of disorders, it administered externally for bites of poisonous reptiles and insects, pain, neuralgia, gout, to enhance hair growth, in the treatment of ringworm, ulcers, wounds, and as respiratory stimulant. It is the nicotine that causes smokers to become addicted to tobacco, and the chemical itself is lethal in small doses. When tobacco smoke is inhaled, the nicotine passes quickly to every organ of the body. The brain and nervous system are stimulated by small doses and depressed by larger ones.
Alcohol use, on the other hand, with the earliest chemically confirmed, recorded use dating to approximately 7,000–6,600 BCE in Jiahu, a Neolithic village in China’s Yellow River Valley, has several legitimate, modern medical uses, primarily as a topical antiseptic-disinfectant (hand sanitizer, skin prep), an ingredient in pharmaceuticals, and an agent in specialized procedures like nerve ablation or cyst sclerotherapy. Historically used for pain and sedation, it is not recommended for systemic consumption and been linked to liver disease, heart problems, and certain cancers. Alcohol can cause brain damage, especially with chronic use.
Alcohol adversely affects behavior in some users, leading to problems like drunk driving and negative behavior including:
Intimate Partner and Family Violence: Alcohol is present in a significant percentage of domestic violence incidents, often increasing the severity of the abuse.
Assault and Battery: Impaired judgment and increased aggression frequently lead to physical altercations, including aggravated assault.
Sexual Assault: Alcohol use by both perpetrators and victims is frequently observed in sexual assault cases, where it can suppress inhibitions or affect risk perception.
Homicide: Alcohol is highly correlated with violent crimes, including homicides.
Property Crimes: Impulsive decision-making and reduced consequences-awareness can lead to crimes such as robbery, theft, and vandalism.
Alcohol is highly addictive because it acts on multiple neurotransmitters, slowing down the nervous system while releasing a surge of dopamine. Alcohol addiction withdrawal can be fatal, requiring professional, medical supervision. But modern medications like Xanax and Valium, designed to treat anxiety, also are highly addictive, causing severe physical dependence and dangerous withdrawal symptoms. Considered a behavioral “addiction,” gambling stimulates the same reward circuits in the brain as drugs, driven by the anticipation of reward and risk. Addictions to high-sugar or high-fat foods can trigger intense cravings similar to drug addictions. Most recently, technology (Internet/Social Media) has been determined to be addictive, characterized by compulsive use driven by dopamine hits from social interaction and instant gratification.
But What About the People?
In order to fulfill the promise offered by the end of prohibition, we as a society must accept that each individual is responsible for his/her own well-being. The state is not a parent who must watch over and discipline its children. By declaring drugs, drug dealers, or Satan, or any other phantom as the ‘reason’ someone uses drugs, we take away that individual’s agency as a human being while assigning responsibility to an invisible non-entity that no one controls. By taking away a person’s direct responsibility for his or her problems, we render them helpless. This is, sadly, a mantra for Alcoholics Anonymous, which states “We admitted we were powerless over alcohol — that our lives had become unmanageable.”
This mindset is criticized by many for the following reasons:
Undermining Self-Efficacy and Agency: Critics argue that constantly reminding individuals that they are fundamentally powerless can damage their belief in their own ability to change. This loss of self-efficacy—the belief in one’s capacity to succeed—can lead to a fear of attempting to change behaviors independently.
Encouraging a “Victim” Mindset: By emphasizing that the individual is powerless against a disease, it may become easier for them to deflect blame for their actions, leading to a mindset of helplessness.
Self-Fulfilling Prophecy of Failure: The belief that “I am powerless” can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Critics contend that this mindset, combined with an “all-or-nothing” approach to sobriety, can cause individuals to abandon recovery entirely after a single relapse or slip-up.
Disempowerment vs. Empowerment: Instead of promoting empowerment, some argue that the focus on powerlessness can be psychologically damaging, negatively impacting self-esteem by forcing individuals to define themselves as broken or lacking control.
Discounting Personal Responsibility: A major criticism is that the focus on powerlessness can lessen the urgency to take personal responsibility for one’s actions, which many believe is a cornerstone of behavioral change.
Potential for Shame and Despair: The requirement to admit total defeat, or “hit rock bottom,” can plunge individuals into intense shame, guilt, and despair rather than providing an immediate sense of hope.
Other programs that adhere to this 12-step concept are Narcotics Anonymous (NA), Cocaine Anonymous (CA), Crystal Meth Anonymous (CMA), Marijuana Anonymous (MA), Gamblers Anonymous (GA), Overeaters Anonymous (OA), Sexaholics Anonymous (SA), plus Al-Anon and Nar-Anon, programs for families and friends. (Clearly addictive behavior is not limited to illegal drugs) Success data for these programs is not encouraging: Long-Term Abstinence: 5% to 10% of participants achieve long-term, sustained sobriety. Some studies have shown that 50% to 70% of those who attend weekly or near-weekly meetings maintain abstinence. AA’s own surveys have indicated that approximately 35% of members have been sober for more than five years. Evidence-based treatments like Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and medication-assisted treatment (MAT) often yield higher success rates, with some studies showing 60% abstinence after one year of therapy.
In a 2011 study, the cumulative probability estimate of transition to dependence was 67.5% for nicotine users, 22.7% for alcohol users, 20.9% for cocaine users, and 8.9% for cannabis users. Half of the cases of dependence on nicotine, alcohol, cannabis and cocaine were observed approximately 27, 13, 5 and 4 years after use onset, respectively.[23] In comparison, approximately 14% to 20% of U.S. adults are estimated to have an addiction to highly processed foods. This condition, which involves compulsive eating behaviors similar to substance abuse, is higher in specific groups, including up to 28% of adults with obesity and roughly 13% of adults aged 50–80. Roughly 3% to 11% of the U.S. population may experience issues related to pornography addiction, with studies indicating a higher prevalence among men. Approximately 3% to 5% of Americans experience some form of gambling-related harm. Estimates suggest that approximately 3% to 6% of the U.S. population may suffer from sex addiction or compulsive sexual behavior, affecting roughly 10-20 million people. Some research indicates this figure may be as high as 8.6% to 10%, with men being more frequently affected than women.
Pricing Legalized Drugs
Upon purging U.S. policies of the drug war, prices for legalized natural intoxicants (marijuana, coca leaf, opium gum) should be substantially lower than for legalized refined products like cocaine or opium derivatives such as morphine and codeine. This type of pricing reflects the relatively less harmful effects of the naturally-occurring material. Currently, forty states (80%) have legalized marijuana for medical use and twenty four states (48%) have legalized for recreational use. As of early 2026, the price range for a gram of recreational marijuana typically falls between $3 and $20, with the national average often hovering around $10–$15. The price varies significantly based on state, quality (budget vs. premium), and market maturity. In states where marijuana remains illegal, the price per gram in early 2026 typically ranges from $10 to $20, with some premium or highly restricted areas seeing prices reach up to $50 per gram. In current commercial grades of marijuana, THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) can range from less than 10% up to 30%. One time dose for 20% THC content, with one puff delivered either from a “joint” or in a pipe and containing .32 gram, will be felt almost immediately and last 1-3 hours.[24]
Oregon (2020) and Colorado (2022) have legalized or decriminalized the supervised use of psilocybin. In those states, a 1-2 hour micro-dosing session may cost around $500. A complete psilocybin-assisted therapy session, which can last up to six hours and includes pre- and post-session consultations, typically costs between $1,000 and $3,000, and sometimes more. Multi-day, immersive experiences offered by some companies can cost between $4,000 and over $7,700. Street prices for psilocybin mushrooms range from one gram for $5 – $12, one-eight ounce (3.5 grams) $32 – $35, and half ounce (14 grams) for $100 – $120. Two to three grams is considered an average dose. Dried mushrooms taken at doses between 2.5 grams to 5 grams will induce classic psychedelic experiences with kaleidoscope visuals whether eyes are closed or open, sensory and perceptual changes, synesthesia (like hearing colors or tasting sounds), cognitive changes, and ego dissolution.
That pricing policy would put the least harmful drugs in the most available price range for persons self-medicating or for recreational use. A level higher in concentration and cost for opium derivatives would be one or more of hydrocodone, hydromorphone, oxycodone, oxymorphone, nalbuphine, naloxone, naltrexone, buprenorphine, and etorphine. Similarly, cocaine’s further refinement is crack cocaine. Pricing should reflect the risk.
By making currently illegal substances available in the same type of setting as alcohol or tobacco, each person is left to choose what/how much of a substance they will obtain, if any. That individual is then directly in charge of his/her life in the most meaningful way. Instead of being treated like a child with permanent governmental parents, he/she is treated as an autonomous adult who faces life with full awareness that choices made are his/her responsibility. With this level of autonomy, an individual must decide if he/she is ready to face death as a possible result of his/her choices. We as a society absolutely must grant each person this responsibility and accept that some will die.
But will 100,000 die from abuse of these substances, as are currently? Possibly. Possibly not. Since fentanyl is responsible for up to 80% of current overdose deaths, regulated drugs sales with product testing for purity would eliminate most of these deaths since it is the adulteration of popular drugs like cocaine and other drugs with cheap fentanyl that causes most overdoses. Illegal dealers add fentanyl because it is cheaper to produce and easier to smuggle than traditional drugs, allowing traffickers to significantly increase their profit margins. Because fentanyl is roughly 50 times more potent than heroin and 100 times more potent than morphine, small, easily hidden amounts can mimic the effects of larger quantities of other substances. Other potentially adulterated drugs are methamphetamine; pills sold illegally and made to look like legitimate medications (such as oxycodone, alprazolam, or amphetamine salts); and substances like MDMA and illicitly-obtained benzodiazepines.
All we can do in a just and empathetic nation is provide options. The choice must be made by each person. No one can claim that current policies are working. Clearly the drug war has failed. Illegal drug use has shifted from a primarily recreational, counterculture phenomenon in the 1970s to a more dangerous, high-potency, and widespread crisis today, characterized by a massive increase in synthetic drug prevalence and overdose deaths. While past-month illicit drug use among Americans age twelve or older increased from 25.4 million in 1979 to 47.7 million by 2023, the nature of these drugs also has changed, leading to a six-fold increase in drug-related deaths over the past two decades. Mortality from drug overdoses has grown exponentially since 1979. Between 1980 and 1995, adult drug arrests increased by 173% and juvenile arrests by 73%.
As to lethality of illegal drugs, keep in mind that deaths due to drugs bought and sold in high-risk environments without any assurance of dose strength or purity equal half the deaths from legal alcohol and a quarter of deaths from legal tobacco.
Moral Failing?
Instead of taking a punitive approach to potentially harmful behaviors, whether drug abuse, alcoholism or overeating, why shouldn’t we try a more loving approach? Centuries of religious judgment have deemed addictions a moral failing, yet modern research has shown that measurable physical, emotional, and mental elements drive addiction. Addiction in no longer considered a moral issue, but rather a medical ‘disorder’—specifically a chronic, relapsing brain disorder—because it involves functional, long-lasting changes to brain circuits responsible for reward, stress, and self-control. It is classified as a medical condition because, like heart disease or diabetes, it disrupts the normal, healthy functioning of an organ (the brain), has serious harmful effects, and is preventable and treatable.
Yes, persons under the influence of certain drugs, primarily alcohol and stimulants like meth, can exhibit disruptive behavior. For alcohol, such behaviors can include aggression and hostility where individuals may become argumentative, confrontational, and misinterpret social cues, perceiving innocent actions as provocations. Drunkenness can cause extreme mood swings, ranging from intense, irrational anger to profound sadness, depression, or loneliness. Impaired decision-making leads to dangerous actions, such as driving while intoxicated, risky sexual behavior, or initiating fights.
For persons using meth, users may display erratic, violent, or aggressive behavior, including rage and temper tantrums. Methamphetamine is strongly associated with a wide range of criminal behaviors, acting as a catalyst for violence, property crimes, and drug-related offenses. The drug’s effects—including intense paranoia, hallucinations, insomnia, and aggression—often lead users to commit crimes, while its high addiction potential drives theft and trafficking to fund the habit. The primary reason for meth use (or other stimulants) is the powerful, immediate rush of euphoria and sense of well-being that meth provides. Users may seek increased energy, alertness, concentration, and confidence to perform better at work, school, or in social situations. It is also sometimes used to enhance sexual performance and stamina during “sexual marathons.” Meth is relatively inexpensive and easy to produce (illicitly), making it readily available in many communities, particularly compared to other stimulants like cocaine.
Unlike stimulants, benzodiazepine drugs and opiates of all stripes create a sense of pleasure. This effect is largely due to these drugs trigger the brain’s powerful reward centers and release endorphins. As a powerful opioid, fentanyl can produce strong feelings of euphoria, happiness, and relaxation.
How We Got Here
The U. S. National Institute on Drug Abuse gave the following reasons for substance use: To Feel Good (Hedonism)—to produce intense feelings of pleasure, euphoria, relaxation, or to get ‘high’; To Feel Better (Self-Medication): Individuals may use substances to cope with stress, anxiety, depression, trauma, or emotional pain. It is a common, though temporary, way to manage mental health conditions or escape life’s problems; To Do Better (Performance Enhancement): Some use stimulants (like Adderall or cocaine) to improve focus in school or at work, increase alertness, boost energy, or enhance athletic performance; To Fit In (Social Pressure): Particularly common among teenagers, individuals may use substances to conform to a peer group, feel accepted, or out of curiosity; Because of Addiction (Compulsion): Individuals may continue to use drugs to manage dependence, avoid withdrawal symptoms, or “get through the day”; Specific Needs: Sleep: To help fall asleep or treat insomnia; Weight Loss: To reduce appetite; Pain Relief: To manage physical pain.
But is that all? Or even the real issue? Yes, some of these reasons seem valid. But all of the answers fail to mention a major underlying cause: the modern age. These substances have been around for thousands of years and were used by cultures as far-flung as India and the (now) American Southwest. Historically, cannabis was first cultivated around 12,000 years ago in East Asia during the early Neolithic period. While evidence of its use dates back to 8800–6500 BCE (Before Current Era), the oldest written record is from Greek historian Herodotus (c. 440 BCE), who described Scythians using cannabis in steam baths. A 3rd millennium BCE text mentions its use in China, and a 2459-2203 BCE grave in the Netherlands contained cannabis pollen, suggesting use as a painkiller. It was used in the Indian subcontinent since the Vedic period, roughly 1500–2500 BCE.
Or consider opium, potentially far more risky than cannabis. The earliest reference to opium growth and use is found on 8,000 year-old hardened Sumerian clay-tablets where prescriptions of opium are recorded. Records are found from 3,400 BCE when the opium poppy was cultivated in lower Mesopotamia. The Sumerians referred to it as Hul Gil, the “joy plant.” The Sumerians soon passed it on to the Assyrians, who in turn passed it on to the Egyptians. Ancient Greeks, Indians, Chinese, Egyptians, Romans, Arabs, people in middle ages, Europeans from Renaissance to now, knew opium as an ever-approved next-door medicine—a panacea for all maladies. References in the Odyssey and the Bible, and use by known leaders and minds like Homer, Franklin, Napoleon, Coleridge, Poe, Shelly, Quincy, Hitler and many more, have removed the label of immorality from its use.
Why, then, are these substances now considered a plague, with medical warnings that opiates cause fatal respiratory depression, have a high potential for addiction, and can lead to severe, long-term health complications? Why is the public advised cannabis is considered harmful due to risks of addiction, impaired brain function, and serious physical health issues? That regular use can lead to cardiovascular problems like heart attacks and strokes, respiratory issues, and mental health conditions such as anxiety, depression, and psychosis?
Clearly some recent development in human existence is involved. Yes, some of the problem can be laid at the feet of ‘modern science,’ who never met a natural substance that science couldn’t make stronger, purer, and more profitable. Most people could grow a few marijuana plants in their back yard, but the potent hybrids now widely marketed are proprietary. Plus over-the-counter sales of aspirin and other pain killers would be impacted by that free availability. Worse than the chemical manipulation of marijuana, however, scientists have, in the last century, given us opium clones up to 100 times stronger than opium, not even reliant on the poppy, with which to addict and kill thousands. In medical settings, fentanyl is often chosen over morphine for superior acute pain management due to its rapid onset of action (2–3 minutes vs. 15–30+ minutes for morphine). It is preferred for causing less hypotension (no histamine release) and having fewer side effects like constipation and nausea, making it ideal for rapid, severe pain relief in emergency settings.
But the more fundamental problem isn’t drug purity or strength increasing the risk for users. It’s modern culture itself.
The historical correlation between industrialization and drug abuse is rooted in the social, economic, and technological upheavals of the 18th to 20th centuries, which shifted substance use from traditional, localized consumption to mass-marketed, addictive, and often, harmful patterns. Industrialization created a high-stress environment that fostered addiction while simultaneously increasing the availability of substances like alcohol, opium, and later, pharmaceuticals. In the early 1800s, the push for a sober, efficient workforce drove the initial, often slow, regulation of alcohol. Increased grain production and industrial farming made distilled alcohol (especially whiskey) cheaper and more accessible. Urbanization and the grueling, rigid nature of factory work created intense stress. Alcohol became a common coping mechanism for the working class. Opium and its derivatives (morphine) were widely marketed as “miracle cures” for various ailments, leading to widespread, unintended addiction.
Technological advancements allowed for the refinement of stronger substances like cocaine, morphine, and heroin. The emerging pharmaceutical industry began mass-producing drugs by cloning the biochemistry of natural drugs, facilitating widespread, unregulated access to addictive substances. The industrial capacity to produce and market substances on a mass scale directly fueled addiction rates. Rapid urban migration and the loss of traditional community structures increased the reliance on pharmacological, rather than social, support. Industrialists in some contexts, such as in the U.S. South, supplied cocaine to Black laborers to boost productivity, a practice that later fueled “drug scare” propaganda when the drug was associated with minority populations. The social harms caused by increased alcohol and drug consumption during industrialization fueled major backlash, leading to the Temperance Movement and Prohibition in the U.S. (1920–1933) and similar actions in Russia, Norway, and Finland.
During World War II, governments and industries promoted amphetamines to enhance worker and military productivity. Increased global trade and transportation, essential to the industrial model, facilitated the growth of international drug trafficking. By the late 20th century, while early industrialization caused addiction through high-stress production, modern deindustrialization (the decline of manufacturing) has been linked to the recent opioid epidemic. Studies indicate that areas with high unemployment, poverty, and the loss of manufacturing jobs (“rust belts”) have experienced higher rates of addiction and overdose deaths. The erosion of middle-wage jobs has spurred economic anxiety, which is directly correlated with increased substance use disorders.
No matter what drug of abuse under discussion, the relatively recent rise in computer, internet, and smartphone use over the last two decades has occurred in tandem with increasing rates of both substance abuse and behavioral addictions (such as internet gaming or social media addiction). Research indicates that for every 10% increase in high-speed internet use, there was a corresponding 1% rise in treatment admissions for prescription drug abuse. The internet has served as a pipeline for narcotics, with increased online access correlating to higher rates of abuse for prescription opioids, sedatives, and stimulants. Digital addiction and substance addiction often activate the same brain reward pathways (nucleus accumbens/ventral striatum), with digital media providing “dopamine hits” similar to drugs. High levels of social media use (3+ hours per day) are associated with a 1.99 times higher risk of drinking and increased vaping/cannabis use among adolescents. The proliferation of screens (7+ hours daily for teens) has been linked to higher rates of anxiety, depression, and substance experimentation. There is a strong, positive correlation between the risk of internet addiction and substance use, with those using technology excessively being more likely to also engage in substance abuse.
Pre-industrial life, characterized by agrarian subsistence and localized, artisan-based economies, offered experiences now lost to modern industrialization. These pre-industrial lifestyles include extreme reliance on daylight hours, intense connection to seasonal cycles, close proximity to livestock, and deep, often isolating ties to a small, local community. Daily life was dictated by the sun and seasons, with work, food availability, and even safety, determined by nature. Most individuals lived in small, rural settlements, rarely traveling far from their birthplace, with communication limited to their immediate surroundings. For warmth and survival, people often shared living quarters or homes with farm animals, especially during cold winters. Families worked together as a unit on farms, and communities relied on localized barter systems for goods and services. Goods were hand-made by skilled craftspeople rather than mass-produced in factories, which enabled the worker to see a project through from start to finish. In most modern production, workers only see a small part of the process.
This cultural shift is the instinctive motivation behind efforts such as “Make America Great Again,” the idea that things were better “back then.” A driving force is the often mythical belief that America was superior in the past and has declined due to foreign influence and internal changes. Adherents to MAGA, as well as right-leaning conservatism around the world, point to changes such as advancements in women’s rights, immigration, increased acceptance of homosexuality, or people they see as unlike themselves (skin color, physical features) as the reasons for their outrage. But in looking back to, say, 1870, American life not only operated under white-male dominance, prison and/or death for outed homosexuals, and entrenched racism but also was a time when most families were working long hours every day to produce and preserve food for their tables and the greatest skills required were successful seed saving, animal husbandry, and fishing/hunting wildlife.
Before agriculture, the hunter-gatherer lifestyle was even less complicated as people wandered over their known habitat gathering lean meats, fish, wild fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, and tubers. Slowly, as the idea of agriculture spread and people gained the advantage of permanent settlements, some may have felt a distant longing for roaming to find food instead of laboring to plant and harvest. There’s comfort found in a pastoral life pattern that has been practiced for 12,000 years. With agriculture, a person knew what to expect as seasons changed and dictated the week’s agenda. But by the late 19th century, only a few in mainstream societies followed the primeval lifestyle.
As formalized in the mid-20th century rise of a philosophy of existentialism, existential dread, or existential anxiety, has created a profound, overwhelming sense of fear, anxiety, or unease regarding the meaning, purpose, and value of human existence. Often triggered by contemplating death, isolation, freedom, or the apparent lack of inherent meaning in life, it manifests as deep anxiety about one’s place in the universe. Four alienations suffered by modern mankind are tenets of this philosophy:
Alienation from the Product of Labor: The worker creates products they do not own, which then exist as a hostile, independent power.
Alienation from the Act of Production: Work is not fulfilling or creative but coerced, monotonous, and merely a means of survival.
Alienation from Species-Being (Human Nature): Humans are separated from their intrinsic creative potential and consciousness, reduced to animal-like functions.
Alienation from Other Humans/Society: Social relations are reduced to competitive, transactional interactions, breaking down community and cooperation.
Similarly, Paul Tillich (German and American Christian existentialist philosopher, religious socialist, and Lutheran theologian) conceptualized these alienations as:
Separation of Man from the Ground of Being (Alienation from God): This is the fundamental, ontological, and religious alienation. It is the loss of the essential union between human existence and the “Ground of Being” (God), resulting in a loss of ultimate meaning.
Separation of Man from Himself (Self-Estrangement): This involves the loss of personal center and self-actualization. Humans are split within themselves, failing to become what they essentially are, leading to existential anxiety and despair.
Separation of Man from Others (Alienation in Social Relationships): A separation between individual lives, characterized by a lack of true community, high levels of distance or isolation, and conflicts that make mutual understanding impossible.
Separation of Man from the World of Nature: A further consequence of estrangement, where humanity is detached from the natural world, often resulting in a desire to exploit or dominate nature rather than participate in.
Tillich’s work, particularly in The Courage to Be, provides a framework for understanding addiction as an attempt to fill the “void” of meaninglessness.
Jean Paul Sartre, another mid-20th century existentialist, famously stated, “Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself”. An addict, in this view, is constantly choosing to be an addict through their actions. His work explores the anxiety (angst) of existence, with some interpreting the “bohemian” lifestyle of intense substance use (tobacco, alcohol, amphetamines) as a way to cope with this existential weight. To maintain a rigorous, high-speed, 10-hour-a-day writing schedule, Sartre heavily used Corydrane, a mixture of amphetamine and aspirin. He reportedly took up to 20 pills a day. According to Annie Cohen-Solal, who wrote a biography of Sartre, his daily drug consumption was thus: two packs of cigarettes, several tobacco pipes, over a quart of alcohol (wine, beer, vodka, whisky etc.), two hundred milligrams of amphetamines, fifteen grams of aspirin, a boat load of barbiturates, some coffee, tea, and a few “heavy” meals (whatever those might have been).
Other 20th century notables who abused substances include Hunter S. Thompson, who was famously known for a daily, high-octane consumption of drugs and alcohol that powered his “Gonzo” journalism. His routine notoriously included cocaine, marijuana, LSD, and large quantities of Chivas Regal, Heineken, and Dunhill cigarettes, often beginning in the afternoon and continuing through the night.
Aldous Huxley (1894–1963), author of fifty books including Brave New World, was a prominent proponent of using psychedelic drugs for consciousness expansion, most famously documenting his 1953 mescaline experience in The Doors of Perception. He believed these substances provided mystical experiences and enhanced creativity, later exploring LSD and advising early researchers like Timothy Leary.
Numerous popular artists of the mid-20th century were known for their abuse of drugs and alcohol, including Elvis Presley, Marilyn Monroe, Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison, Frank Sinatra, Judy Garland, John Belushi, Billie Holiday, Truman Capote, Dylan Thomas, Philip K. Dick, Tennessee Williams, John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Howard Hughes, Adolf Hitler, Jackson Pollock, Bill Wilson, and Timothy Leary.
Industrialization most severely impacted the U.S. population between 1880 and 1920, marked by rapid urbanization, massive immigration, and harsh factory conditions. During this “Second Industrial Revolution,” the population shifted from primarily rural to urban, with cities becoming overcrowded, leading to significant social and economic inequities. During that period, the United States experienced a significant, unregulated, and largely unrecognized drug epidemic, with addiction rates for opiates and cocaine comparable to, or in some estimates exceeding, modern levels. It is estimated that up to 5% of the U.S. population was dependent on drugs, with a high concentration of opiate addiction.
Fast forward to 2020 when the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), estimated that 13.5% of people aged 12 or older (37.3 million people) used an illicit drug in the past month. Not surprisingly, the digital age in the United States most severely impacted the population through a combination of rapid, transformative shifts between 1995 and 2010, with the most intense, widespread disruption occurring around the introduction of the smartphone (2007) and the subsequent rise of social media. This era shifted technology from a professional tool to an immersive, always-on part of daily life.
We all feel the weight now inherent upon us in the cultures of the modern day. In the United States, the greatest incidence of suicide in recent history occurred in 2022, with nearly 50,000 deaths, marking the highest rate since 1941. While suicide rates spiked in 2018, the 2021-2022 period (COVID epidemic) showed the largest increases, with the highest daily averages occurring during spring and summer. Drug overdoses have killed over 1 million people in the U.S. alone since 1999. The global mortality rate due to drug use increased by 31% between 1990 and 2021.
Today, the highest risk group for substance abuse is young men. Data shows that approximately 19.1% of males have used illegal drugs or misused prescription drugs in the past month, compared to 14.6% of females. They are facing a crisis of despair driven by a combination of economic insecurity, shrinking social connections, and a profound lack of purpose. Many are struggling with the transition to adulthood, often living with parents longer, delaying marriage, and facing higher rates of loneliness. This ‘depths of despair’ phenomenon is aggravated by declining academic/career prospects and a perceived lack of societal value. It would easy for blame this fall on women, who are slowly carving out a place for themselves in the world of business and politics, among others. But a powerful factor in the young male despair is the lack of new frontiers.
We have colonized the world—no more new continents, no more undiscovered caches of gold nuggets in rushing streams. As traditional markers of masculinity, such as being a primary provider or explorer, have faded or are criticized, many young men feel adrift, leading to, “depths of despair” (suicide and drug overdoses) and a retreat into the digital world. In the 21st century, new frontiers are considered to be redefining masculinity through emotional intelligence, mental health advocacy, and navigating digital economies, alongside pursuing high-demand, tech-forward skilled trades. These opportunities emphasize finding purpose through, rather than in opposition to, community, mentorship, and creative digital entrepreneurship. Missing from this scenario are ancient primitive motivations such as vistas of towering mountains and dense forests teeming with wildlife, the likelihood of finding treasure in the ground waiting for the taking, a world of possibilities to prove manhood. It is no longer possible to saddle a horse and ride off toward the horizon with every necessity packed in saddle bags and a bedroll and a plan to keep moving west where a homestead on a forty-acre claim of federal land awaits.
Women enjoy more freedom today to choose work outside the home, but may wish to find the right man and make babies. Many women expect some ideal of having both, which leads to the expectation that their man be a co-parent, helps with household duties, and otherwise provides support that was inconceivable even fifty years ago. Babies or not, women look for kindness, emotional safety, and consistent, clear communication, often valuing these traits over physical attraction. They desire a partner who is trustworthy, supportive of their personal growth, and who makes them feel cherished through both affection and active listening. These qualities are not traditional for men.
Circa 1900, women could largely expect men to be the primary financial providers, heads of households, and protectors. Men were expected to be hardworking, responsible, and capable of supporting a family, while acting as the public face of the domestic unit. They were also expected to show chivalry and respect towards women, despite the era’s patriarchal “separate spheres” social structure which divided social life into two distinct, gendered domains: the public ‘masculine’ sphere of work, politics, and commerce, and the private ‘feminine’ sphere of home, childcare, and morality.
These massive social changes have occurred over only four generations.
While we may reflect on the effects of these changes, short of a major cataclysm, there’s no going back. Few of us would wish to give up running water, telephones, antibiotics, or electricity, but as a society, we obviously have some problems adjusting to the new ways of things. Understanding this, we should stop punishing our struggling fellow man/woman for their efforts to accommodate difficult changes and embrace the best possible means of helping everyone evolve to the next level. Improved education plays an important role in this future, not the private/religious school agenda of clinging to outdated beliefs and behaviors. Most important will be programs that offer free post-secondary education either in academics or vocations like carpentry, electrical, plumbing, HVAC, dental assistant, nursing assistant, automotive repair, information technology support, culinary arts, or welding. The construction trades will always be needed despite any acceleration of AI. Further remaining viable careers will be professions involving complex problem-solving, high-level strategy, and creativity, such as managers, CEOs, artists, and writers, as well as teachers, instructors, and administrators.
It’s also instructive to consider the strong trend toward ‘simple’ lifestyles which hearken back to earlier times. About one million Americans engaged in the “back to the land” movement that peaked around 1970, of which about 70% were college educated. Key accomplishments of this movement were creating alternative, eco-friendly lifestyles, building community, reducing environmental impact, and fostering personal autonomy through skills like farming and building. Today, significant portions of the population likewise are shifting toward simpler, more intentional, or minimalist lifestyles, with surveys indicating that over 60% of Americans have changed their definition of a happy life to prioritize simplicity. While only about 10% to 11% of U.S. adults currently identify as strict minimalists, roughly 26% to 50% are actively seeking to adopt simpler, less consumer-driven lifestyles.
In all these arenas lie potential for an individual to face challenges that offer the same opportunity for growth and accomplishment as what was found in earlier times even if the noise and lure of bright shiny new things continue to expand. Adopting a simpler, more structured lifestyle significantly helps reduce and manage addiction by minimizing triggers, reducing stress, and fostering stability. Simplifying daily life through routine, healthy habits, and removing environmental cues for substance abuse allows addicts to regain control and focus on recovery. Or avoid addiction altogether while making use of what intoxicants have to offer.
[1] This and much of the following data gathered via Google AI
[5] The 1033 Program, managed by the Defense Logistics Agency’s Law Enforcement Support Office (LESO), transfers excess Department of Defense (DoD) equipment—including armored vehicles, aircraft, and weapons—to local law enforcement agencies (LEAs) for authorized, bona fide law enforcement purposes, particularly counter-drug and counter-terrorism. Since 1997, over eight billion in military-grade equipment has been transferred, aiding in SWAT operations and specialized, non-violent equipment needs, while sparking debate over police militarization.
[11] Starting in 1926, the U.S. government ordered the poisoning of industrial alcohol (used in paints and solvents) with methanol and other chemicals to prevent bootleggers from stealing and redistilling it into drinkable liquor. Despite knowing this, bootleggers sold it anyway, leading to thousands of deaths, blindness, and paralysis.
[14] U. S. Department of Justice, U.S Department of Justice with a Housing First program.
[15] The federal agency responsible for regulating human and veterinary drugs, vaccines, medical devices, the food supply, cosmetics, and tobacco, the FDA approves new medications, inspects manufacturing facilities, and manages product recalls. 47% of Food and Drug Administration funding comes from big pharmaceutical companies.
[24] Marijuana contains over 480 known distinct chemical compounds. Of these, more than 100 are cannabinoids (such as THC and CBD) that produce pharmacological effects, along with over 100 terpenes that contribute to aroma and flavor. THC has been cloned into “Marinol” prescribed for nausea but is considered more problematic than natural cannabis, perhaps due to the balancing effects of the other compounds. The human body contains natural
Regarding rampant sex crimes against children aka Epstein associates, arrest and prosecute every culpable molester/rapist no matter how rich or powerful they may be.
Ongoing genocide in Palestine and threat of war in Iran:
Stop all funding and other support to Israel.
Return Israel’s boundaries to the 56% of Palestine established in 1948
Ukraine. Give full-fledged U.S. military support to Ukraine. Impose additional restrictions on Russia including a full maritime services ban on oil, prohibiting LNG transshipments, banning additional IT/industrial software, targeting more financial institutions, and further restricting third-country intermediary trade. Expose and prosecute embedded Russian operatives in the U. S. government. Give currently impounded Russian funds of $300 billion to Ukraine for rebuilding.
Provide a public accounting of all U.S. military operations and presence around the world, with justification/purpose and cost. No more secret agendas.
Terminate the Mars Exploration Project until such time as our government is no longer in budget deficit. Cut back on other space exploration projects.
Take over any and all U.S. government projects that pay Elon Musk or his companies and make them nonprofit government programs, primarily SpaceX, for aerospace services, satellite communications, and electric vehicle incentives, totaling billions in contracts, loans, and tax credits over the past two decades. Major shifts include launch of military satellites, NASA missions, and purchasing Starlink services.
Restore U.S. partnerships with international agencies including 66 organizations, conventions, and treaties, including major entities like the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Also the World Health Organization (WHO), the Paris Agreement on climate change, and various arms control agreements.
Reverse all Trump actions exposing/selling national parks, forests, wildlife refuges, watersheds, national monuments, and other previously protected areas.
Restore water protection gutted by Trump including efforts to change the Clean Water Act, the 2020 Navigable Waters Protection Rule which stripped federal safeguards from over 50% of wetlands and 18% of streams. He also reduced protections for ephemeral streams, narrowing the definition of Waters of the United States (WOTUS), and rolling back regulations on toxic coal ash disposal.
Hazardous chemicals regulation must be restored immediately.
EPA’s 2009 Endangerment Finding
PFAS (“Forever Chemicals”): The Trump administration failed to designate per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as hazardous substances, delayed setting drinking water standards for them, and allowed new, potentially toxic PFAS chemicals to enter the market with minimal review. In 2025, the EPA was reported to be weakening earlier, more stringent PFAS limits.
Air Toxics (Mercury, Benzene, Ethylene Oxide): In 2025, the administration invoked emergency provisions of the Clean Air Act to grant two-year exemptions to chemical manufacturers, medical sterilizers, and coal plants, allowing them to release toxic chemicals like mercury and ethylene oxide into the air. This included reversing a 2024 rule aimed at reducing ethylene oxide—a known carcinogen—by 90%.
Pesticides (Chlorpyrifos): Trump’s EPA reversed a proposed ban on chlorpyrifos, a neurotoxic pesticide linked to brain damage in children, allowing it to remain on the market.
Asbestos and Industrial Chemicals: The administration delayed or weakened proposed bans on trichloroethylene (TCE) and methylene chloride, which are known carcinogens and toxic to workers. They also initially moved to weaken regulations on asbestos, a mineral that causes mesothelioma.
Chemical Safety at Plants: Rules designed to prevent accidents and explosions at chemical manufacturing plants were delayed or weakened, even in the wake of chemical plant accidents, such as those that occurred after Hurricane Harvey.
“Corporate Self-Policing”: The EPA under Trump often shifted to relying on industry-provided data, and, as of 2025, removed requirements for scientific review of certain chemical risks.
Reverse/mitigate data removal by Trump and/or DOGE included topics related to DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion), long COVID, HIV/AIDS, vaccines, transgender and gender identity-related topics, foreign aid, environmental justice, emergency management, employment, and the January 6 United States Capitol attack.
Trump’s unvetted DOGE coders put the personal info of millions of Americans in jeopardy. Serious reconstruction of privacy must be undertaken immediately.
Tariffs imposed by Trump must be eliminated immediately.
Remove Trump’s name on national monuments and organizations.
Restore effective manpower levels in all federal agencies.
IRS and other agencies must be realigned so that there is no influence of church/religion upon government functions. This is of special importance in education. Re-establish separation of church and state by eliminating federal and state tax dollars provided to private/religious schools. Nationwide educational standards must be restored and enforced even for homeschooled children. No exceptions.
Congress must immediately:
legalize abortion nationwide.
resurrect the 2024 Bipartisan Border Bill (S.4361) and pass it.
abolish the Electoral College
establish national referendums on issues of national importance/interest
remove unnecessary/partisan restrictions on voting
demand a thorough review/return of any illegally-taken persons kidnapped and deported and/or imprisoned under Trump’s immigration actions.
require the return of money Trump coerced from media, universities, and other entities.
reverse any government actions meant to implement Project 2025
develop legal means to require stiffer ethical standards for the president and vice president and SCOTUS members as currently required for elected officials (primary federal conflict-of-interest statute (18 U.S.C. § 208) including ban on stock trading for Congress and executive branch. Strengthen the Emoluments Clause with clearly defined penalties and methods of enforcement.
Please feel free to comment with your additions to this list, or edits you think are needed. It will take all of us. Step up.
The United States is supposed to be an effort toward a more evolved culture. No kings. No one above the law. That’s the ideal—freedom of speech, of the press, of religion, a country for all of us to be equal. Thousands have fought and died for this.
How did this vision get perverted into a front for rapacious capitalism? Or was it that way all along?
Time and again we have confronted waves of greed and division, but we have pulled ourselves up from those depths.
It is painful to see the bad guys win, to slide in with their buddies and cover stories to start raping and plundering through every government department and every principle, abandon all integrity and honor and holding no one responsible.
Will this disgrace on our nation’s promise bring about a renewal of all we stand for? Will common sense and the common good rise up in November to put the Trump regime to an end?
The absurdity is overwhelming. Here we are as Americans, all party to the White House’s illegal murder of over eighty (so far) men in boats on the premise they are bringing drugs to the United States. As well remarked elsewhere, there is no evidence these boats are carrying drugs and no credibility in the idea these small vessels with a fuel range of 100-200 miles are embarking on a thousand mile journey to the U.S.
But even more insane is the idea that a nation under any government can stamp out drug use/abuse by ‘interdicting’ drugs enroute to this country. We can’t even stamp out drugs manufactured in within the borders of this country. Anyone who believes such nonsense needs to have these words tattooed onto their forehead: Supply-Demand. If people want a product, no matter how potentially dangerous, there will ALWAYS be a supplier. Basic economic fact. Reducing supply only results in higher prices for said product, i.e. better profits, more incentive to supply.
So let’s get real about illegal drugs. First, “drug users” include people who depend on caffeine in their morning coffee, iced tea at lunch or other caffeinated beverages, persons who ‘must have’ their cigarettes or other tobacco products, and persons prescribed any of a multitude of pharmaceuticals which address any of a multitude of human conditions from depression to headache to cancer. Secondly, there is an enormous difference between the use of and the abuse of any drug. Prohibitionists prefer to consider all illegal drug use as ‘abuse’ in order to justify draconian laws punishing users. We must keep in mind the blurred line dividing legal and illegal drugs is primarily based on their regulatory status and whether their production, sale, and use are permitted by law. Theoretically, this status is determined by government authorities based on factors like medical utility, potential for abuse, and perceived harm to the individual and society. In other words, there is no truly ‘illegal’ drug.
This theory supporting the prohibition of certain drugs has been shown to be a fabrication serving other less savory objectives. The drug war is a tool used by government to carry out activities which are illegal. For example, one might wonder about the president’s single-minded assault on alleged drug smugglers from Venezuela when coca leaf is grown in three other Latin American countries: Peru, Bolivia and Colombia. Surely the fact that Venezuela possesses the world’s largest oil reserves has nothing to do with it. Surely.
Never mind the fact that cocaine is hardly relevant in drug abuse circles since fentanyl hit the streets. In 2023, there were approximately 72,776 overdose deaths involving fentanyl (synthetic opioids other than methadone) compared to about 29,449 deaths involving cocaine.
Postcard showing an underground opium den in San Francisco, pre-1906 earthquake. By 1896, there were around 300 opium dens in San Francisco, mostly in Chinatown. In the 19th century and the early 20th century, opium smoking was common worldwide, especially in Asia, which was one of the sources of the opium poppy.
In order to better understand this absurdity, let’s go back more than a century to the country’s first ‘drug war’. The San Francisco Opium Den Ordinance of 1875 made it a misdemeanor to maintain or visit places where people smoked opium. These places were mainly in Chinese immigrant neighborhoods. Similar racially inflammatory state laws emerged. Soon after came the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which barred Chinese laborers from entering the U.S., a ban expanded to all Chinese people in 1902 and not fully repealed until 1943. The first federal drug law, the 1909 Smoking Opium Exclusion Act, prohibited importing and using opium. It wasn’t that the government suddenly became concerned about opium use. In a nutshell, it was that the railroads powering the economic growth of that period were now built, and thousands of Chinese who had been welcomed to this country to do the backbreaking work of carving tunnels out of rock and laying steel track were no longer of use. Even worse, these immigrants, the primary users of opium, were inviting relatives to immigrate and their jobs were seen as threats to white workers.[1]
Then there was alcohol. After nearly a century of growing religious fervor stemming from massive evangelical movements, especially the “Second Great Awakening,” characterized by fiery camp meetings, frontier revivalism, and emotionally charged preaching, a rising cry against alcohol resulted in ‘prohibition,’ enacted on a federal basis in 1920 but in individual states as early as the 1880s.
Carrie Nation became famous for her attacks on alcohol-serving establishments, using rocks, bricks, and her signature hatchet to destroy liquor bottles, mirrors, and bar fixtures. Before resorting to violence, she would kneel outside saloons, sing hymns, and deliver strong sermons to patrons and owners, sometimes calling herself the “Destroyer of Men’s Souls”.
“A wide coalition of mostly Protestants, prohibitionists first attempted to end the trade in alcoholic drinks during the 19th century. They aimed to heal what they saw as an ill society beset by alcohol-related problems such as alcoholism, domestic violence, and saloon-based political corruption.”[2]
Alcohol prohibition led to massive increases in organized crime (bootlegging, speakeasies), rampant corruption of officials, dangerous unregulated alcohol leading to sickness/death, huge losses in government tax revenue, and a general disrespect for the law, with little measurable public health benefit, ultimately proving a costly failure. Ultimately, prohibition led to the development of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), significantly expanding the role and authority of the FBI’s predecessor, the Bureau of Investigation (BOI), making it central to federal law enforcement by creating massive new criminal enterprises (bootlegging) that required federal intervention, strained resources, spurred corruption, and ultimately led to bigger federal crime-fighting roles and the rise of modern organized crime, impacting federal investigations for decades.
This powerful new agency could have drifted into irrelevance when alcohol was once again legal in 1932, but instead there is evidence that the federal official who spearheaded cannabis prohibition saw it as a way to maintain his department’s relevance and budget. Harry Anslinger, the head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN), needed a new focus for his agency after alcohol prohibition was repealed. He launched a public campaign against cannabis (often using the “marihuana” spelling to associate it with Mexican immigrants), portraying it as a dangerous substance to justify his department’s continued existence. Anslinger’s rhetoric carried strong undercurrents of racial prejudice and xenophobia, targeting Mexican immigrants and Black jazz musicians.
Then as the ‘60s ended with massive marches in support of equal rights for minorities and women, against the Vietnam war, and in support of gay rights, President Richard Nixon officially launched the “War on Drugs” in the early 1970s, declaring drug abuse a public enemy and enacting significant federal legislation like the Controlled Substances Act to combat drug production, distribution, and use, though policies intensified under subsequent administrations.
One of Richard Nixon’s top advisers and a key figure in the Watergate scandal said the war on drugs was created as a political tool to fight blacks and hippies, according to a 22-year-old interview recently published in Harper’s Magazine.
“The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people,” former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman told Harper’s writer Dan Baum for the April cover story published Tuesday.
“You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities,” Ehrlichman said. “We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”[3]
A 2017 study showed that police forces which received military equipment were more likely to have violent encounters with the public, regardless of local crime rates. A 2018 study found that militarized police units in the United States were more frequently deployed to communities with large shares of African-Americans, even after controlling for local crime rates. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militarization_of_police#cite_ref-17
In the next administration, First Lady Nancy Reagan famously addressed the drug “problem” with her “Just Say No.” advice, unwittingly illustrating the parental role now assumed by government over the private, consensual behavior of drug users. Reagan’s successor, George H.W. Bush, took it a step further. He promoted the 1033 Program (Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Disposition Services) in the early 1990s to transfer surplus military gear to local law enforcement for the “War on Drugs.” Nowhere in this rush to judgement did anyone point out that M16/AR-15 rifles, grenade launchers, armored vehicles (APCs, MRAPs), night vision, tactical robots, and “less-lethal” gear (beanbag/pepperball guns, flashbangs) have absolutely no effect on drugs. These weapons and the “war” in which they are being used are against PEOPLE—American citizens, most of whom simply preferered to toke a joint after work rather than drink an alcoholic beverage.
This despite the fact that in the 1970s and ‘80s, marijuana was by far the most widely used of illegal drugs, was found in multiple studies not to be addictive and also found not to be a ‘gateway’ to harder drugs, as so often alleged in government reports. Even today, with drugs like cocaine and even fentanyl in the headlines, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) World Drug Report 2024, the estimated number of people who used various drugs at least once in the prior twelve months was: Cannabis (Marijuana): 228 million users; Opioids: 60 million users; Amphetamines: 30 million users; Cocaine: 23 million users; Ecstasy: 20 million users.
All the while, the drug war of those decades provided cover for illegal U.S. government operations in Central and South America as those nations began to resist colonization by American corporations seeking to exploit natural resources like oil, minerals, and agricultural opportunities. Fertile land and cheap labor could produce crops such as coffee, bananas, and other foods requiring year-round growing seasons.
According to Tim Weiner, the Central Intelligence Agency “has been accused of forming alliances of convenience with drug traffickers around the world in the name of anti-Communism” since its creation in 1947.[4] The CIA has a long, controversial history in South America, primarily during the Cold War, involving covert operations like coups, political destabilization, and support for right-wing regimes (e.g., Operation Condor) to counter perceived communist influence, leading to significant human rights abuses and democratic declines, with operations continuing into recent times, such as those in Venezuela. Key actions included overthrowing governments (Chile, Ecuador, Brazil), supporting anti-communist forces (Contras in Nicaragua, a major scandal where in U.S. operatives sold guns to Iran between 1981 and 1986, facilitated by senior officials of the Ronald Reagan administration. The administration hoped to use the proceeds of the arms sale to fund the Contras, an anti-Sandinista rebel group in Nicaragua.), and involvement in conflicts like the Salvadoran Civil War, with consequences like suppressed democracy and economic impacts.
This kind of interference in the affairs of other nations more or less permeates American history. In the early 20th century, during the “Banana Republic” era of Latin American history, the U.S. launched several interventions and invasions in the region (known as the Banana Wars) in order to promote American business interests. During the Cold War (1950s-1980s), the CIA carried out coordinated campaigns to install South American dictatorships (Argentina, Chile, Brazil, etc.) to track, kidnap, torture, and kill left-wing dissidents, with CIA support and intelligence sharing. In Guatemala (1954), the CIA overthrew the democratically elected President Jacobo Árbenz, linking to U.S. corporate interests, using exile forces and propaganda. In Chile (1970s), CIA efforts undermined President Salvador Allende, paving the way for a military coup. Same idea for Brazil (1964): Supported a coup against President João Goulart, leading to a military dictatorship. Nicaragua (1980s): Funded and trained the right-wing Contra rebels fighting the socialist Sandinista government, with alleged links to cocaine trafficking. El Salvador (1980s): Trained and equipped military units involved in massacres during the civil war.
CIA interventions often resulted in the collapse of democratic institutions, reduced civil liberties, and economic hardship, despite justifications of promoting democracy or fighting communism, according to research. The support ‘troops’ for these political objectives has become de facto occupation of these nations with armed agents of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, with 87 foreign offices in 67 countries. For example, in the so-called “Southern Cone,” (Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay), are considered to be transit zones for the movement of cocaine base, cocaine HCL, and heroin being shipped from Colombia and Peru to markets in the U.S. and Europe, or producers of coca leaves. The end result of these often violent interventions in the affairs of our neighbors is the current and ongoing flood of desperate people arriving at our borders.
Not only are drug laws used outside our nation’s borders as cover for extra-judicial interference in international relations, they also serve domestically to selectively target specific individuals and politically inconvenient groups or based on racism or other prejudices, most recently undocumented immigrants. This is a useful tool for xenophobes determined to turn the United States into a white patriarchal “Christian” nation. The current administration manipulates this demographic by playing up the drug war.
Public support for prohibition policies relies on judgments of morality, that becoming intoxicated is immoral, an echo of the early 1800s temperance movement which reached its zenith with alcohol prohibition, the Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This same moral judgment about private consensual activity remains a strong current in the United States where prostitution, gambling, and drug use (other than legal drugs) fall under strong government control. While government cannot (yet) spy on the living rooms and bedrooms of its citizens, government agents find such laws useful in targeting specific types of people, as previously illustrated.
“Today, police make more than 1.5 million drug arrests each year, and about 550,000 of those are for cannabis offenses alone. Almost 500,000 people are incarcerated for nothing more than a drug law violation, and Black and brown people are disproportionately impacted by drug enforcement and sentencing practices. Rates of drug use and sales are similar across racial and ethnic lines, but Black and Latinx people are far more likely than white people to be stopped, searched, arrested, convicted, harshly sentenced, and saddled with a lifelong criminal record.
“The wide-ranging consequences of a drug law violation aren’t limited to senseless incarceration: people with low incomes are denied food stamps and public assistance for past drug convictions; states including Texas and Florida suspend driver’s licenses for drug offenses totally unrelated to driving; and numerous other policies deny child custody, voting rights, employment, loans, and financial aid to people with criminal records.”[5]
Despite apparent national political resolve to deal with the drug problem, inherent contradictions regularly appear between U.S. anti-drug policy and other national policy goals and concerns. Pursuit of drug control policies can sometimes affect foreign policy interests and bring political instability and economic dislocation to countries where narcotics production has become entrenched economically and socially. Drug supply interdiction programs and U.S. systems to facilitate the international movement of goods, people, and wealth are often at odds.[6]
“We are still in the midst of the most devastating drug epidemic in U.S. history,” according to Vanda Felbab-Brown, senior fellow at the Center for Security, Strategy, and Technology at Brookings Institution. In 2020, overdose deaths in the United States exceeded 90,000, compared with 70,630 in 2019, according to research from the Commonwealth Fund. Yet, the federal government is spending more money than ever to enforce drug policies. In 1981, the federal budget for drug abuse prevention and control was just over a billion dollars. By 2020, that number had grown to $34.6 billion. When adjusted for inflation, CNBC found that it translates to a 1,090% increase in just 39 years.[7]
What if that money had instead been applied to individuals and programs that support individual ambitions and needs—tiny homes for the homeless, for example? What if the costs of our interference in foreign nations had instead been directed toward helping the people of those nations deal with loss of farmland to multinational corporations, climate-change induced drought and hurricane damage, and support for social programs, education, and entrepreneurship, thereby reducing the urgency of people in those countries to flood to U.S. borders in hope of better lives?
Without hot button issues like women’s reproductory rights and drugs, politicians would have to gain votes based on performance rather than propaganda. Stepping away from “government as nannies” and the idea of controlling private behavior would allow taxpayer dollars to support programs that help deter substance abuse in the same way that public education has helped reduce the use of cigarettes. No one knows better than addicts that they, individually, are the only ones who can control their addiction. Ultimately, as free people, we must claim the fundamental right to kill ourselves if we wish it. Most importantly, awareness of draconian drug policies as a cover for illegal objectives both in and outside our nation’s borders would forever eliminate travesties such as the murdering of likely-innocent people in boats leaving Venezuela.
And, in the case of the current administration, understanding the real agenda of the drug war could rightfully turn the public attention fully to the president’s dirty Epstein laundry.
denelecampbell 