Pubdate: Sat, 26 Mar 2016 Source: Times-Picayune, The (New Orleans, LA) Copyright: 2016 The Times-Picayune Contact: http://www.nola.com/t-p/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/848 Author: Jarvis DeBerry THE WAR ON DRUGS: NOT JUST EFFECTIVELY RACIST BUT DELIBERATELY SO In a series of speeches in 1971 President Richard Nixon called drug abuse "America's public enemy number one in the United States." In remarks from the White House on June 17, 1971, Nixon said, "In order to fight and defeat this enemy, it is necessary to wage a new, all-out offensive." This, as best anybody can tell, is the opening salvo in America's War on Drugs. You'd think that if something really were public enemy number one that people would know to be afraid of it without prompting. But not in this case. Opinion polls from the 1970s indicate that drug abuse was either low, super low or not even on the totem pole of Americans' worries. In "Making Crime Pay: Law and Order in Contemporary American Politics," Katherine Beckett writes that "the percentage of poll respondents identifying drug abuse as the nation's most important problem had dropped from 20% in 1973 to 2% in 1974 and hovered between 0% and 2% until 1982." So there we have it: a public enemy number one that next to nobody ranked as a top concern. So why did Nixon say what he said? In an essay in Harper's Magazine that argues for the legalization of drugs, journalist Dan Baum says one of Nixon's most notorious lieutenants answered that question. Baum says he interviewed John Ehrlichman, Nixon's domestic affairs advisor and Watergate co-conspirator, in 1994. Baum says Ehrlichman waved off his "earnest" and "wonky" questions about Nixon's drug policy and said, "You want to know what this was really all about?" Nixon, Ehrlichman said, "had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. 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. 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." Ehrlichman's statement can't be surprising to anybody familiar with Michelle Alexander's book "The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration In the Age of Colorblidness." The "law and order" agenda pushed by so many conservatives, Alexander writes, was, at its core, a push back against the civil rights movement. For example, in his 1963 "Letter From a Birmingham Jail" Martin Luther King Jr. writes of the "moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." In 1966 when Nixon was vice president, he wrote an essay for U.S. News and World Report called "If Mob Rule Takes Hold in the U.S." Increased crime, he insisted, "can be traced directly to the spread of the corrosive doctrine that every citizen possess an inherent right to decide for himself which laws to obey and when to disobey them." Alexander uses the aforementioned public-opinion polls to make her case that the United States government manufactured outrage over drug abuse. But such outrage could not have happened without the media's complicity. According to The American Presidency Project, a database that includes our presidents' speeches and remarks, it was on a Thursday in the White House Briefing Room that Nixon said drug abuse required "an all-out offensive." That Friday he was in Rochester, New York, pitching media executives. "So we ask for your help in this," Nixon said. "We are going to be sending a lot of materials out. Please don't treat it as boiler plate. It is, in my view, as I have indicated, drug traffic is public enemy number one domestically in the United States today, and we must wage a total offensive, worldwide, nationwide, government wide, and if, I might say so, media-wide." If Nixon intended the drug war to go after black people - and there's plenty of evidence that he did - he was a master at disguising his motivations. For example, in his pitch to media executives, Nixon said that drug addiction was not "a ghetto problem" and that "whites have now substantially passed blacks in terms of the use of drugs." Did Nixon wink when he said that? What else explains the media association of drugs and black people? What else explains the drug war's disproportionate focus on black people? In January, New Orleans Councilwoman Susan Guidry said she wanted to "make application of marijuana laws more fair and just across ethnic and economic backgrounds." On March 17, the council gave New Orleans police permission to ticket - and not jail - those caught with marijuana. Kudos to all of them for that. But it's past time we admit that the unfair application of laws wasn't a flaw in the war on drugs. The unfairness was the point. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom