Although I’m an opponent of drug prohibition, I come to that conclusion from a libertarian perspective. What I was wondering about today is those that come to that conclusion from a leftist perspective. That side of the political spectrum favors massive regulation and subsidization of pharmaceuticals consumed for medicinal purposes. Would a left leaning anti-prohibitionist favor a truly open market in recreational pharmaceuticals? Suppose it is claimed that some recreational pharmaceutical has medicinal properties - will it then become regulated? Or regulated only if taken for medical reasons and not recreational ones? Will users be able to sue the manufacturers for bad quality, insufficient potency or becoming an addict? Will we have “public interest” groups going after Big Tobacco and ignoring Big Marijauna? It just seems odd to have the same people advocating massive regulation of almost every aspect of modern life but supporting open use of recreational pharmaceuticals.
This isn’t an issue for me, as I openly support changing the FDA to be purely advisory (i.e., one can take non-FDA approved pharmaceuticals as long as one is informed that they are not approved).