Decriminalization of Drugs and the Support for Free Markets in the United States

C. Collins, W. McCorkle
{"title":"Decriminalization of Drugs and the Support for Free Markets in the United States","authors":"C. Collins, W. McCorkle","doi":"10.33422/jarss.v6i1.870","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For nearly 250 years, Americans have been able to ponder on their relatively short, but extensive ideological history. The United States was founded upon a number of ideals, but arguably the most predominant and preceding has been freedom. Heavily influenced by the Enlightenment, the U.S. founders laid the propositions protecting natural rights, while limiting governmental authority to retract upon these so-called “God-given rights.” The country’s roots lie in classical liberalism, and free markets have been an integral mechanism since 1776, through the championing of private property rights and economic freedom. However, since the War on Drugs, political discourse has distorted our historical vision and validated governmental coercion in criminalizing drug consumption and production whether that was for personal pleasure or legitimate medical reasons. The paper investigates this conflict of ideology and principle through the analysis of literature and survey data. The quantitative analysis revealed a negative relationship between support for free markets and drug decriminalization. The findings imply a substantial role of two-party politics in the U.S. in determining political beliefs outside of a clear ideology particularly related to issues like the War on Drugs.","PeriodicalId":14964,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Advanced Research in Social Sciences and Humanities","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Advanced Research in Social Sciences and Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33422/jarss.v6i1.870","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For nearly 250 years, Americans have been able to ponder on their relatively short, but extensive ideological history. The United States was founded upon a number of ideals, but arguably the most predominant and preceding has been freedom. Heavily influenced by the Enlightenment, the U.S. founders laid the propositions protecting natural rights, while limiting governmental authority to retract upon these so-called “God-given rights.” The country’s roots lie in classical liberalism, and free markets have been an integral mechanism since 1776, through the championing of private property rights and economic freedom. However, since the War on Drugs, political discourse has distorted our historical vision and validated governmental coercion in criminalizing drug consumption and production whether that was for personal pleasure or legitimate medical reasons. The paper investigates this conflict of ideology and principle through the analysis of literature and survey data. The quantitative analysis revealed a negative relationship between support for free markets and drug decriminalization. The findings imply a substantial role of two-party politics in the U.S. in determining political beliefs outside of a clear ideology particularly related to issues like the War on Drugs.
美国毒品合法化和对自由市场的支持
近250年来,美国人一直能够思考他们相对较短但广泛的意识形态历史。美国是建立在许多理想之上的,但可以说最重要和最重要的是自由。深受启蒙运动的影响,美国开国元勋提出了保护自然权利的主张,同时限制政府权力收回这些所谓的“上帝赋予的权利”。这个国家的根基在于古典自由主义,自1776年以来,通过对私有产权和经济自由的支持,自由市场一直是一个不可或缺的机制。然而,自从禁毒战争以来,政治话语扭曲了我们的历史观,并证实了政府强迫将毒品消费和生产定为犯罪,无论是出于个人享乐还是出于合法的医疗原因。本文通过对文献资料和调查资料的分析,对这种意识形态和原则的冲突进行了探讨。定量分析显示,支持自由市场与毒品合法化之间存在负相关关系。研究结果表明,在美国,两党政治在确定明确意识形态之外的政治信仰方面发挥了重要作用,尤其是在与毒品战争等问题有关的问题上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信