As far as drugs are concerned, consider me completely ignorant. As someone who is nearly abstinent and has no interest in hard drugs, I never found the topic worth deep investigation. So, I have no idea how Chasing the Scream ended up on my reading list. Yet, I picked it up, and despite my initial lack of interest in the topic, I was surprisingly convinced by its arguments. In his now ten-year-old work, Johann Hari manages to fight on two fronts. First, he paints a vivid picture of drug users, portraying them as troubled human beings deserving of compassion. Second, he presents hard facts to argue that, regardless of the moral debate, the current global approach to drug policy is ineffective and causes more harm than good.

Hari generally advocates for the legalization of drugs, though he acknowledges uncertainty about whether this should apply to the hardest and most dangerous substances. He presents many compelling arguments, but the following stood out to me:

• The illegal production and sale of drugs create opportunities for lawless criminal gangs. Their immense wealth grants them extraordinary power over entire nations, while their fear of losing it fuels extreme brutality. In this way, the illegal status of drugs benefits only those unscrupulous enough to exploit it.
• Drugs produced illegally are inherently unreliable. With no quality control, safety regulations, or oversight, producers are incentivized to maximize profit at the expense of users. Competition is controlleough violence rather than product quality. As a result, the dangers and health risks associated with drug use stem not only from the drug itself but also from harmful additives. If drugs were produced under the same regulations as medications, this issue would be eliminated.
• When all drugs are illegal, users, producers, and dealers tend to gravitate toward stronger substances. If a gram of marijuana carries the same legal status and harsh penalties as a gram of cocaine, there is a logical incentive to opt for the more potent and profitable option.
• Addiction results from multiple factors. While the body’s chemical response to a drug plays a role, the primary driver of addiction is often an attempt to cope with unresolved trauma or emotional pain. This explains why some people can use recreational drugs without long-term consequences, while others become addicted and struggle to break free.
• Legalization does not lead to a significant rise in drug consumption. Whether legal or not, drugs are already widely accessible, so those who want them will find a way to obtain them.
• A drug dealer does not check ID, but a pharmacist does. When drugs are legally regulated, illegal dealers disappear, eliminating one of the primary avenues through which minors gain access.
• Legalizing drug sales allows for taxation, generating revenue that can be used to fund drug treatment programs and mitigate the social harms of drug use. Currently, taxpayers bear the financial burden of the consequences as the drug dealers and producers have no interest in solving the externalities they create.
• Drug legalization leads to a reduction in crime. When drugs become legally available, their prices drop significantly, meaning users no longer have to resort to desperate or criminal activities to sustain their habits.

These are just some of Hari’s arguments that intuitively make sense to me. I have not delved deeper into the topic or fact-checked his claims—fortunately, my opinion on the matter holds no real influence. Ideally, we would live in a world where no one felt the need to use drugs or alcohol, but it is naive to think that repression and denial are effective strategies. The right way to legalize hard drugs is not to make them readily available in corner stores but to provide them through controlled services that include safe spaces, medical supervision, and counseling. As for lighter substances like marijuana or ecstasy, there is no logical reason to treat them any differently than alcohol, as they are significantly less harmful.

Ultimately, we are choosing between two bad options. In one, we take the path of prohibition, achieve nothing, and surrender control to criminal enterprises. In the other, we acknowledge the problem while maintaining at least some degree of regulation and oversight. When framed this way, the choice seems clear.

Further Reading

Johann Hari - Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs