All warfare is based on deception.
- Sun Tzu

Introduction
Human interactions are very complex on an individual scale. On a mass scale the patterns are easier to discern. The purpose of this paper is to formulate a response to the human interactions generated by drug policy.

As an engineer and scientist I am always looking at the world from its physical and mathematical dimensions. Experts of any field tend to do this — we see the universe from a specific perspective. In a previous paper I derived a set of equations which can give some insight (in a very simplistic way) as to why our present drug policy must fail. The present paper is mathematical in spirit but there are no equations.

I am very optimistic in believing that our present drug policy will eventually be changed to a more rational approach. The time it takes to achieve this change could be long or short and the number of people hurt before the change occurs could be large or small. It is my belief that reformers can reduce the damage to society which is being caused by our present policies by getting their message out in the public arena as much as possible.

Change occurs rapidly when people understand the need for it. Educating the public is normally a slow process. As Machiavelli points out "people are by nature changeable. It is easy to persuade them about some particular matter, but it is hard to hold them to that persuasion. Hence it is necessary to provide that when they no longer believe, they can be forced to believe." Clearly the reformers and prohibitionists are attempting to force people to believe their respective persuasions.

Natural Philosophy

There is no accurate model of human behavior amenable to mathematics. There is ample written history which shows that people tend to be intolerant of different cultures and that majority cultures force minority ones out of existence. The idea of America's founders was a society which tolerated many minority cultures.

This tolerance has created many problems in our history because it is not natural for humans as individuals to accept it. Intolerance is a survival mechanism of a culture. Because drug use is part of American culture there is a natural tolerance for it.

For the past 20 years there has not been any real effort behind the "War on Drugs". Until recently there has not been any real effort opposing it. In the past two years both the drug warriors and reformers have been getting louder and more numerous. The following argument is based on observations of nature — human and otherwise.

Much work has been done in the past about specific aspects of drugs and our society. Read the 1989- 1990 Reformers Catalog and its references. I would like to abstract the problem but avoid explicit mathematics. The following is an argument for a course of action to help accomplish the goal of legalization.

The goal is to end the war on drugs. The rules are given by nature. The goal is accomplished by applying the rules in a controlled fashion. The basic tenets of Newtonian Natural Philosophy are the definition of force, inertia and interaction. These are 'rules' and can be defined as follows:

1) Force is the application of physical or mental coercion,

2) An idea or thing in motion keeps its motion unless acted upon by an outside force,

3) For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

The definition of force is not a standard Newtonian one. Force includes advertising, arresting, or public discussion. Any attempt to change a person's attitude is an application of force.

How does this rule of force apply to the rule of inertia? People who use drugs will continue to use them unless acted on by an outside force. There are many kinds of force. There is education and rehabilitation or there is confiscation of property and imprisonment. Either form of force will change the actions of a drug user.

The rule of interaction tells us something about the response of drug users (or anything) to any given force. They will react to oppose the force in such a way as to counteract it. These rules apply in a statistical sense, some individuals will over-react, others will under-react but on average the Newtonian response is useful to understand society as a whole.

To end the war we require use of force. The war will continue unless acted on. The source of this action is people. As more people are affected by the war (having their licences revoked or losing their jobs) the reaction to the war will gain some momentum. The key to ending the war is to focus this reaction onto the points which have the most leverage.

Manifesto

Since Congress has created the war, this is the point where the most pressure should be applied. There is a need to put efforts into drug education and rehabilitation but these efforts will not end the war. The people who become motivated to react to the war must have an organization to accept them. Over the past few years more organizations have been formed to fight the war than ever before. The International Anti-Prohibitionist League, the Drug Policy Foundation, The No More War Foundation (Denver), the Drug Policy Network, the Grass Roots Party (Minnesota), and the Illinois Marijuana Initiative.

Each of these groups was created spontaneously as a reaction to social pressure. Present technology allows these groups to stay in constant communication via computers and telephone lines. However, there is no single focus for these groups. So, while there is reaction to the war, the attempts to end it will fail without appropriate focusing of the available forces.

There are several levels to application of force. The largest force is that of individuals voting for a new Congress. This can only occur if the majority of people believe that they can change congress. Unfortunately that belief does not exist. This may be a good time for new political parties to start as they could tap into a large fraction of disenfranchised voters. This is happening to some extent already in Kentucky where one of the candidates for governor is running on a platform of legalizing hemp. The Minnesota Grass Roots Party has also run candidates for various local offices to help get their message out.

An alternative is to have people convince present congressmen that the war should end. To do this requires getting people to write or call. Again, few people believe this works and convincing them takes time. Groups like the Marijuana Initiatives usually take this tactic and tend to be ignored by politicians.

The vast majority of people do not know the truth about drugs. One application of force is the use of advertising as education. Putting up billboards all over the country which simply say "marijuana is safer than aspirin" and a phone number or address for further information would generate a very large response. It would convince people that there is more to the war than one sided propaganda and it would disseminate information on a large scale. Cost is of course prohibitive.

It is interesting to observe our drug war from an abstract or global perspective. For every action taken by government the people have reacted. Until the government actually threatens each individual, the response of the people will not be enough to end the war. Unfortunately many innocent careers will be destroyed before diffuse action brings an end.

Focused Force

The time is ripe for a formal organization to help focus all the spontaneous local organizations. This is a political job and not easy, but the benefits would be unified efforts.

It is necessary for each local group to maintain its structure and to convey the national message to their local members in the local dialect and cultural context. This keeps the large national response to each legislator in his district and forces him to pay attention. As well, all his colleagues are receiving a similar, but culturally different message. The net reaction is quite powerful as the efforts of groups such as the NRA show.

The lead organization must be a good listener as well. Since each region has different problems there will be some diffusion of effort as each region attempts to prioritize its needs. The lead organization must recognize these priorities and work with them.

The results of patience in working with local groups will create an atmosphere of trust. One only needs to look at NORML to see that a national organization which does not listen to its regional groups has a hard time existing.

However, I am discussing a national organization which can maintain communications between different types of groups. This is harder still than what NORML is attempting to do (focus is on marijuana only). Communications is clearly the goal of the Drug Policy Network, but there is no focus. There must be a priority list of pressure points in the war. The toughest points will need consistent low pressure to erode the problem. The weakest points may be eliminated by a single application of force.

As an example, we need to educate people about the true medical aspects of drugs. This is tough because there are so many myths and there are great numbers of people who believe them. A steady application of advertising, talk shows, discussion groups, etc. at the local level is low pressure. By keeping it steady the media will begin to recognize that the truth about drugs is going to sell better than the present lies.

Another example is the bill HR3220 which was introduced to make drug paraphernalia include "all equipment, products and materials of any kind which are used ... in planting, .... preparing .... storing .... ingesting ... a controlled substance." Dirt, forks, and plastic baggies fall into this category. A national outcry from many diverse groups would make this kind of legislation immediately foolish and politically dangerous. Thus a single application of force would eliminate the problem.

Obviously any organization requires funding. Those that already exist have their own specific goals and will not want the additional political baggage of many small organizations. The organization which does accept the task will have the power to end the war much faster than inevitability requires. It will have to convince all its member organizations that it is worth paying for or it will have to be endowed from a business which can afford to 'waste' profit.

Conclusion

Human beings do not like being forced to do anything against their will. I have used the term education as an application of force but it does not push against an individual, it merely suggests an idea. How does one accurately model the response of a society to ideas? The effect is usually slow, more like diffusion of a dye in a tank of water. If the water is in motion the dye spreads quickly, otherwise it spreads slowly.

At present our society is in motion. Ideas are moving quickly. Actions take longer, and so do reactions. There is enough history to show that forcing a "Drug Free" society will ultimately fail. Carefully tapping the human resources and pointing them in the right direction will bring that failure to a soft landing rather than the usual catastrophic crash humans usually endure.

For every action there is an opposite reaction. If the response is controlled, the damage which is going to be caused by the next round of get tough policies might be avoided. People need to know that they do count. Local organizations give them a place to be heard. National organizations can focus this force into effective changes of policy. International organizations allow discussion of higher ideals and make local groups feel important. Whether this be a new political party or an existing organization, the time is ripe. Local organizations have formed spontaneously because of social forces. The group that taps this energy can be a powerful tool of social change.

Those who know do not talk.
Those who talk do not know.
- Lau Tsu

References

Drug Policy 1989-1990, A Reformer's Catalog, Drug Policy Foundation, 1989

Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, Isaac Newton, 1687

The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli, 1532

The Art of War, Sun Tzu, 350 B.C.

Tao te Ching, Lau Tsu, 500 B.C.