A war on drugs is not an effective policy -why global policy towards drug reform needs to change

Our generation is increasingly aware of the scale of the global issue that is illegal drug use. Those of us who are lucky enough to live in developed countries are educated on the matter through school, on the street and on social media. In short, we know that illegal drugs are a bad thing and should be taken seriously. Now it’s the latter point here that I want to talk about; if our generation is to genuinely take illegal drug use seriously, we must begin to think and act a whole lot more effectively, as the present attitude has failed. We currently see a culture that has declared a war on drugs by focusing on criminalising and punishing those involved and vigorously destroying supply chains, without considering the significant and dramatic economic, human and social costs this results in. It’s now time to start focusing on how we can truly help those caught up in the industry by seeking more regulatory and inclusive solutions.

In 1971, US President Richard Nixon famously declared a ‘war on drugs’ with the objective of “stemming the tide of drug abuse” by vigorously fighting the supply of narcotics in the US and beyond. This attitude spread rapidly to the extent that today, world leaders still believe in it. In real terms, it has failed. Drug related criminal law enforcement costs the UK alone £3.3 billion a year with little return in terms of victim reform and safety. In the USA, an astonishing $51 billion is spent on the war on drugs every year, with 1.6 million annual arrests and 47,000 related deaths in 2014. Furthermore, 83% of those charged were merely done so for possession. These figures are worse than those of 1971, which clearly confirms that the war on drugs has worsened the crisis, not improved it. Continuously prioritising punishment over supporting drug victims is not good enough for the 21^st century. As the next generation we must begin to impose regulation, improved health services and social inclusion programmes to tackle what is becoming an ever more human threat to both national and international society.

Furthermore, it’s not just social and health problems that are the resulting factors of the failure of the war on drugs. In third-world areas such as West Africa, it is responsible for a huge proportion of the spread of blood-borne infections such as HIV and Hepatitis C, with a lack of the use of clean needles that are supported in better off countries by charitable schemes; third world countries simply do not have the funds or resources to do this. Why do they not have the relevant funds or resources? Mainly because incompetent governments are spending funds on maintaining criminal centres, using powerful herbicides to eradicate crops (that often cause land and water pollution and health problems), and missions to disrupt black markets. Globally, governments spend an estimated $100 billion a year on this. And still, 75% of the world’s population are without access to any pain-relieving alternatives. The fact that we are simply aware of these figures should be enough to convince leaders to take bold action on enacting more effective and humane policies. By investing $100 million in a war on drugs, law enforcement are effectively acting as a seed for funding an extensive criminal industry, now seeing estimated annual turnovers of $320 billion. So despite this excessive investment, the global drug trade is now almost completely controlled by violent criminal organisations- including terrorists- who have little or no concern for the consequences of their criminal actions. One could compare this to the current migrant smuggling crisis, which governments across the globe are now thankfully attempting to tackle. Well the illegal drug industry is an issue causing even more deaths than the smuggling crisis, with little prospect of improvement; while in many cases, the victims are not as vulnerable and desperate as the refugees and migrants, millions in West Africa and South America use such substances as their only means of pain relief or energy, often unaware of what they contain or their effects.

It is evident that as a global society, we must begin to work towards a more effective and sustainable system of tackling this issue, through taking a more supportive approach to vulnerable victims and by putting the vast criminal organisations that run the industry, out of business. This could be done through investing in government regulation via doctors, pharmacists and in some cases, licensed retailers. Illegal drugs are literally worth more than their weight in gold. World leaders must recognize that using the criminal justice system as an effective deterrent has failed and therefore, access to information and social support should be put in its place. In turn, we must support this cause and demonstrate that it is in generation Y’s interest to publicly tackle this taboo issue, in order to achieve a less manipulative criminal justice system when it comes to the issue of drugs. Obviously, this is one of those imperfect issues that we’re realistically never going to truly solve, but we can at least take gradual steps such as diverting funds used in criminal justice to boosting information services and access to health clinics in deprived communities.

Here’s a link to a really good campaign I’ve discovered, who are tackling the issue of the war on drugs, Support Don’t Punish:

http://supportdontpunish.org/

John McDonell's intriguing speech on 'Building an Entrepreneurial State at a local level'

Very interesting: Jeremy Corbyn's right hand man, John McDonell is currently working on an alternative concept of using co-operatives as a better means of redistributing wealth; it's shocking to read that less than half of our national income goes to workers in the 21st century. I could not agree more with this view of creating a more equal and diverse economic society, through encouraging greater creativity and innovation by such simple methods. 
Follow the link below to read:

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/143115086454/building-an-entrepreneurial-state-at-a-local-level

A socialist case for the British business sector

The concept of business is an everyday subject for all of us. You may not be a dedicated follower of it, but I’m sure most of us realize that it is a key part of the capitalist society in which we live in. As a result, we probably each have a stereotypical view towards business and the kind of people that are involved in it. Day in, day out we are subject to stories of large, multi-national companies such as Google and Starbucks, causing fury amongst the working public for not paying their fair share in tax. We hear about government deals with ‘important clients’ such as China or Saudi Arabia’s oil market. It all seems a little bit distant and precarious to the majority of us who are working in and around our local communities to provide for our families. And rightly so. Since the catalyst of modern business- the industrial revolution- the British public have become ever more so aware of a ‘top 1%’, ‘an elite’, whatever you may like to label it as, who we presume are the front-runners of the capitalist world, exploiting the free market for the benefit of a few and to gain political influence. However, I would argue over the past 5 decades or so, British business has been exposing a secret up its sleeve, a revolutionary element of positive business, through the new found concept of entrepreneurship and social business. What do I mean by ‘social business? I mean exploring ways in which we can use business as a force for good across society, through small step by step solutions to social problems, both nationwide and globally.

In the 21^st century we live at the peaking point of capitalist society; capitalist society enables a free market to exist with the supposed objective of enabling the individual to make their own way in life be it through employment by a company that grants them civil rights and a ‘fair’ wage, or through setting up their own business with limited red tape and government intervention. Now let’s be realistic, it’s probably a far off dream for socialists that their image of a perfect society is going to be politically established any time soon. We live in a very well established society run on enterprise and individuals rights. But that does not mean we cannot use the concept of socialism to influence capitalism for the better. This first occurred to me last summer, when I started to read about a small but influential group of entrepreneurs who are saying no to the normal way of doing things, and are consequentially doing a huge amount for social inclusion and awareness in society. Such examples include:  Reel Gardening founder, Claire Reid who established a water saving solution to growing vegetables in some of the continent’s most water-deprived areas at the age of just 16 (http://www.reelgardening.co.za/), Innocent Drinks founder, Richard Reed who in 2004 set up the Innocent foundation (http://www.innocentfoundation.org/) that has given over £3m worth of profits to sustainable farming projects across 3^rd world countries and Sam Branson and Johnny Webb, founders of Sundog Pictures (http://sundogpictures.co.uk/), who produce documentaries and films by using the accessibility of the digital world to tell important social stories around the globe to those who may otherwise not be educated on the matter. These individuals are perfect examples of how socialism in business can result in an increase in awareness of global problems and the ways in which we can use established business methods to improve them.

Specific to Britain, there are many sectors of society where business could act as a force for good over making profits for their shareholders; with continuously competitive household costs, the housing market should attract the exploration of 21^st century green methods of daily living, such as renewable energy production and water saving; with continuous logistical problems in our health service, entrepreneurs could work a long side relevant professionals to look for small but mighty solutions to over-crowding and data accessibility. These are just a couple of examples of where social awareness combined with innovative thinking could begin to lead to a more socially inclusive society though the positive integration of the business sector and other sectors affecting our daily lives. In 2014, a record-breaking 581,000 businesses were set up in the UK alone; I believe that our generation should take maximum advantage of the ever increasing accessibility to start-up funding and research, to say no to business as usual and instead begin to investigate how we can use this advantage to look for socially sustainable and inclusive solutions to problems that often lead to an unfair disadvantage felt by certain areas in a country or certain individuals who may have, over time, been manipulated for the benefit of the few.

It’s about time countries such as the UK started to recognize business’ primary aim as that of improving the quality of our lives through looking for innovative solutions, instead of manipulating problems for the benefit of the individual. If we are to act as an influential democratic force in the world, I believe it is up to Generation Y to work towards a socialist attitude towards business, by embracing its past mistakes as learning points and putting into action a more diverse range of business methodology that will enable us to look for these solutions. To quote one of the greatest entrepreneurial minds of our time, Virgin Group founder Richard Branson, “Entrepreneurship is not about looking for a problem, it’s about finding a solution and enacting it”…”so let’s work together and screw business as usual”. By embracing this attitude, I believe there is a strong case for a socialist business environment in Britain and that we shouldn’t be afraid of exploiting it.

#sbau    #Yforchange   @jalbryson98

I am now a certified member of the blog network at StudentVoices.co.uk

I am very pleased to announce that I am now a certified member of the Student Voices' blog network (http://www.studentvoices.co.uk/p/blog-network_15.html). Check out the site and fellow bloggers if you haven't done so before. It offers a really good variety of news, comment and debate on current affairs and general social and political issues, relevant to our generation.

Cut corruption top-down? It’s up to the next generation of leaders to do so

How the ruling generation have built an incompatible system of global finance and what we must do to disrupt it.

Over the past few decades, the scale of the abuse of political power has become more and more apparent to us as members of the voting public to the extent that today, we see our current political leaders desperately attempting to reconcile this stigma. Indeed one of the last government’s biggest ‘democratic’ pledges in 2010 was to “seek radical reform to the banking industry”. Furthermore, the current government made a promise to us last October to find an extra £5 billion of savings from tackling tax avoidance. Such pledges are much welcomed and indeed progress is being made: in regards to the banking sector for example, most banks will supposedly have to be bailed out by their bond and shareholders if another financial crisis were to occur, instead of by the public as witnessed in 2008/09, under legislation formed in the coalition government. But if we are to truly make progress on assuring one rule for all and strict rule for those with an economic advantage, we must look to the seeds of corruption not just specific examples, many of which are not currently labelled as ‘corruption’ because of the simple fact that they are legal. It is up to the next generation of leaders to re-sow these seeds.

To help explain the concept of ‘seeds of corruption’, I’ll give you a couple of clear and relevant examples:

Firstly, this week we have become aware of an exposed set of documents called, ‘The Panama Papers’, which put simply are 11.5 million pieces of paper outlining the details of high-profile world leaders and businessmen and businesswomen that have engaged in large scale offshore trade deals or savings, allowing them to avoid paying tax in their country. To many of you, I’m sure most of these findings won’t come as too much of a shock. They certainly didn’t to me. One did however, and for me it demonstrated how we will never solve such corruption without eliminating it and other examples. The case was of how the highly-held law firm, Mossack Fonseca, had been directly involved (and aware that they were so) in a famous robbery- the Brink’s-MAT robbery, that saw 3 tonnes of gold stolen from a warehouse near London in 1983. They are still in operation to this day. This company is not a small amateur law firm operating from a New York basement- this company is one of the largest investment handling firms on our planet. It has ‘assisted’ associates linked directly to: Vladimir Putin; the prime minister of Iceland; the new FIFA president Gianni Infantino; the president of Ukraine and indeed our own prime minister’s father, Ian Cameron. The list continues. Tax avoidance is a perfect example of the abuse of wealth and ‘social standing’. Our government aims to ‘seriously reduce’ tax avoidance by the end of its term. We will not seriously reduce tax avoidance until the global community takes bold steps to bring such companies to justice. I therefore believe that it must fall to our generation, as witnesses of how simple corruption will always end in catastrophe, to crack down on the fundamental elements that make tax avoidance possible for those quite simply abusing the authoritative power of their money. Money should not determine the application of rule. That is a simple part of our democracy, yet it is still, in the 21^st century, being enacted.

Secondly, I’d like to take a step back 8 years to the beginning of the global financial crisis. Simply put, it was caused most significantly by the selling of something called a ‘CDO (collateralized debt obligations) which is basically a collection of miss sold loans sold on to a consumer who wishes to buy a house say. As more and more banks gave out more and more of such loans, actual credit became less and less. It was done on account of personal greed- the more CDOs each banker sold, the more commission they would receive. This occurred to such an extent that in March 2008, Gordon Brown’s government had to use taxpayers’ money to save these banks from folding. Now obviously and rightfully so, public outrage followed; how could our elected representatives have the will to conduct such an act without our consent? This would’ve been an obvious question posed. CDOs were thankfully banned from use shortly after. However, today I watched our prime minister claim that he has done more than either prime minister of Labour’s 13 years in power to tackle bank reformation, to ensure the public will not be manipulated in such a way again. Well, I’m afraid it remains the case that we, the public, have been continually manipulated since 2011 when the exact same format that made up a CDO, was brought back, this time under the name of CLOs (collateralized loan obligations). Upon this clear evidence, I therefore believe it is up to our generation to crack down on such manipulative practices, so to prevent innocent and hard-working members of our society being at an unjust disadvantage by the few who prioritize financial gain over the well-being of others.

Both of these examples signal a pattern; a pattern of an incompatible relationship between global finance and the ability for those ruling our society to truly enact their supposed pledges for the benefit of those whom they are supposed to represent. Our generation must allow each other to enter into public representation without compromising on basic principles of leadership. Together, we must disrupt this corrupt structure by dismantling it piece by piece, in a simple and democratic format, such as allowing wealthy corporations to collapse and banning any practice of selling ‘non-existent’ entities such as loans. Furthermore, we must embrace global finance as a force for solutions to simple humane problems such as natural disasters and improving the quality of living conditions and not be allowed to manipulate specific markets for the benefit of the few. If we are able to make progress on these simple and responsive aims, I genuinely believe such corruption will become less and less concentrated and significantly easier to effectively address.