PM Bangladesh UADC 2020 Round 5 – In areas with a significant amount of illegal trade and production of drugs, this House believes that the state should legalise and aggressively produce and sell drugs

0
154

(Prime Minister) Bangladesh UADC 2020 Round 5

Video Source: YouTube


The war on drugs, ironically enough, came from a principle of law and order. But the only thing it managed to produce is lawlessness, death, and destruction in every instance and area that is permuted. In the world of government, we seek to rectify this.

Firstly, how exactly are we going to aggressively legalize and produce these drugs. three things.

  1. Firstly, there will be an immediate decriminalization of the usage and possession of all forms of drugs. This would also extend to an immediate appeal of all provisions of penal codes or criminal codes that criminalize possession distribution and possession.
  2. Second, in the interim period when we immediately legalize drugs, we will have an interim period of amnesty. This amnesty period will be such where all individuals who are associated with the drug trade are welcome  to interact with the state and apply for legal licenses in return, we will expunge convictions and also guarantee immunity from prosecution.
  3. The third thing is that we would also expunge and be happy to expunge all formal and past convictions with regards to drug possession. So if you previously were convicted for smoking marjuana, we are happy to quash that conviction. However this doesn’t extend, obviously like if you murdered someone for drugs. Like that conviction would still stand, because you are a murderer. That’s not our problem with you. So that’s why for this instance, you would reply to that. With regards to production, we would immediately use all state resources, such as the ministry of health and any form of national production. Such as our factories and factories that are associated with the healthcare industry, to immediately begin a distribution of drugs. We would also be more than happy to incorporate, whether it’s members of the Cartel, or members of individuals who have been involved in the drug trade, to collaborate and work with us as well.

But, the first question I want to answer is why do we have the political capital to carry out this particular policy.

Now, notice the wording of the motion. It’s an area where there is a significant amount of distribution for drugs. What this means is that drugs and the consumption of it has existed in these territories we’re talking about for a very long time. By the time it’s 2020, these are probably very much ingrained in culture and very much to some extent accepted by some significant portions of society. Because if there isn’t much demand, it wouldn’t be very influential. It wouldn’t be that big of a problem to begin with. So this suggests there is a significant amount of the population that will support this policy.

But, number two, obviously there are going to be individuals that don’t support this policy that are upset that it is being legalized and we are doing things like expunging convictions. I don’t think they have much power. The reason for this is because they have opposed drugs for all this time, yet we are still here at this particular juncture where drugs are running out of control, and individuals are still consuming drugs at a record rate. This suggests that any opposition to our policy, whilst they may be very angry, I’m uncertain as to what power they have to convince the populace to overturn this policy and also to oppose the state. That’s why our policy has support. That’s why our policy can work.

Now, I think there are two areas this debate engages with.

The first is a debate on a centralized type of drug trade. This is like the Cartel in Mexico, or the second alternative is where it’s decentralized. This is like in Malaysia where there are random weed dealers here and there and random individuals that aren’t necessarily part of a large, overwhelming organization.

Let me begin with the first. So the first question that I want to answer is, are these drug cartels, such as the Sinaloa in Mexico going to work with us.

The first thing is there is a huge incentive for cartels to collaborate with the state in this particular context. The first reason for this is because the primary consideration of the cartels, while there are movies about their families, and everyone loves them. Their primary motive is money. They want to make as much profit as possible and the problem with regards to criminalization and not having state access is that the state being an adversary to you is incredibly expensive.

The second reason is because the state has conducted a very expensive war on drugs that has specifically your infrastructure and your individuals. So whilst the war on drugs has failed on most accounts, it has done very well in terms of inflicting significant monetary damage on the cartel. Whether it’s you need to bail out individuals, or need to hire legal representation, or you just need to recruit a lot of individuals to work for the Cartel as well

The third thing is like as a byproduct of the state criminalizing you, you also need the protection from the state. That’s why many cartels spend so much money hiring telepathy military groups, especially in South America, to protect drug trades and drug routes to begin with.

This proves on four levels that given the main incentives of these organizations are profit. These are four major incentives that exist for them to work with the state. These are four major things they no longer have to spend on. These are four things that now don’t cut into their profit margin.

BUT let me talk about a comparative here. Because I think it’s very reasonable that some of these organizations probably will not compare and probably won’t compete with us. Probably won’t work with us. Here’s why that’s okay.

Firstly, they are significantly outnumbered by individuals that will opt into our system. This suggests not only do they have less power on a net because they now don’t really have control of the market anymore. Given the state essentially monopolizes the market. Given the reasons as to why individuals would defect to use.

The second is also that they have significant reduction in terms of power. The reason why the Cartel is very powerful is because they used to have a complete monopoly and dominance over the drug industry. Thus giving them immediate access to significant amounts of funding and etc. In a world where it is legalized, significant portions of this funding is taken away from this Cartel and instead directed to the state.

The third is people don’t have any alternative to go to as well. All the people that previously would work with the Cartel, in terms of producing drugs, being their informants, working with them to work on their infrastructure, all go to the state. Or a significant amount of them go to the state because they don’t want to risk prison sentences and they also don’t need to take on the risk of working with the Cartel anymore, because there is a much safer and more guaranteed option of working with the state, where you are possibly a civil servant as well.

Before I move on, I am happy to hear a POI.

Can you just clarify how efficient the governments are within these areas?

I think they are pretty efficient, in the sense they put up a good fight in the war on drugs and many of them tend to be big pharmaceutical areas as well. Malaysia is a developing state, we’re pretty trash on most accounts, but we do very well in terms of producing drugs too.

Now, what’s the benefit here?

I think there’s a three benefits.

The first is on a net, massive organizations like the Cartel are wrecked right. The cartel is an immediate or evil organization that recruits individuals from the poorest of areas, and explicitly tells them that you need to fight on the front lines of the war, and you also need to fight to die for the Cartel essentially.

The second benefit is also in a world where drugs are no longer criminalized, a lot of minorities don’t get wrecked as well. The average African-American child is arrested almost once every two years as a byproduct of police officers, assuming they are carrying out illegal trade. In a world where it’s legalized, whilst his incentives still exist, at least don’t have a major reason to arrest them because drugs are legal. There’s no crimes being committed.

The third thing is that our drugs are significantly more effective and more safe. The reason is because we introduce all kinds of drug controls that usually apply for other pharmaceutical companies. So whilst drugs may exist in the world of opposition and like there’s an illegal trade for both, ours are significantly safer and significantly cheaper. Thus, less people on the net are placed in harm.

For those reasons, we are proud to defend everyone getting high.