Up In Smoke

Remnant first-timer Jonathan Adler joins Jonah today, not to watch Cheech and Chong over a ...

By
16

Remnant first-timer Jonathan Adler joins Jonah today, not to watch Cheech and Chong over a bag of Doritos, but to talk about the politics of marijuana. Earlier in the year (right around the time that the world was ending, actually), Adler edited a volume entitled Marijuana Federalism, which explored the legal contradictions within the laws regarding cannabis in the U.S.; the situation is somewhat unprecedented, in that we now have a substance that is a federal crime to possess, while many states have had such an overwhelming turn in public opinion that this same substance has now become perfectly legal within their own jurisdiction. How do individual states get away with this without the feds swooping in? The amusing answer is something like: Eh, turns out that the feds are pretty understaffed.

Jonah then moves on to his role – well-known among the Remnant fan base – as Inquisitor of Libertarians, figuring out how Adler feels about total drug legalization. He gives one of the most grounded and logical responses to this inquisition we’ve ever heard on the program, continually emphasizing the fundamental fact of American federalism: “The freedom to live how you want to live also includes the freedom to live conservatively.” This brings the two gents down the avenues of nationalism, post-liberalism, and the hope for a return to localism, all wrapped up with a bow of “420” puns that Jonah just can’t help but put to good use.

Show Notes:

–Marijuana Federalism: Uncle Sam and Mary Jane

–The origin of “laboratories of democracy”

–Vitamin E Acetate as the root cause of many vaping illnesses

–Libertarianism: A Primer

–The Office, a dinosaur in internet years, is Netflix’s most popular show

–For the uninitiated, the fusionist’s Bible

–Acton.org/Dingo to subscribe to the Acton Line podcast

–Gabi.com/Remnant to stop overpaying on your insurance today

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

By
Comments (16)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Steve Gordon

    I generally agree at this point with a lot of Adler's points about marijuana legalization, especially around legalizing the banking and legal regulatory aspects of it. However, what drove me crazy listening to this was theoretical discussion about how if we legalized more drugs, and had government oversight and free markets, things would probably work out fine. We already have a frickin' real world test of this, it's called the OPIATE CRISIS, brought to you by the incompetent geniuses at the FDA, the medical profession, the insurance companies, and the drug companies. We turn a blind eye or wink at the 2nd and 3rd order impact of alcohol abuse, we're heading down the same path with weed. (To be clear, I enjoy a cold one as much or more as anyone!) If we're really going to contemplate turning lose the holy terror of hard drugs like cocaine, meth, heroine, etc. within the confines of "regulatory oversight" then heaven help us for what comes next.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Jeff Walden

    It's high time you got Jonathan Adler on, I told you to get him on the show months ago. 😉

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Karyllcooper

    I have to admit that my libertarian bent seems to stop in its tracks when confronting the emotional reaction I have to legalizing marijuana for recreational purposes. My partner's use of marijuana was one of the main causes for the loss of my prior marriage, and I've never been able to get past that. The discussion in this podcast is the first time I have been able to take a rational and intellectual view of this question in a long, long time. Thank you for an enlightening and interesting episode!

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Adicesa14

    Having worked in an industry that routinely drug tested, we were taught that marijuana usage could be detectable for up to 45 days after. So, unless something has changed, weekly testing would assure any marijuana user would be identified.

    Ivory soap? Jonah, what are you thinking?

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    LisaE

    Great pod. Adler did not have a good answer about the full implications of total legalization of all illicit drugs. For example, should heroine be advertised during the super bowl. He kind of fumbled around on that one.

    Collapse
  6. ROBERT

    Wow, I guess there's a first time for everything! Jonah, your comments about the dangers of legalizing marijuana because, in some people, it can take away their motivation to work hard and better their lives, sounds like the most hypocritical and in my opinion, wrong thing you've ever said!
    First the hypocritical: So does alcohol!!! And you don't seem to have interest in banning that.
    Wrong: Only if abused and generally only in people susceptible to abuse - just like alcohol!
    I know many people who are most productive when they use marijuana on occasion and even daily - if they use it while not working. Obviously there are some who are less productive if they use marijuana daily. But I see the exact same thing with alcohol! What's the difference? My understanding is marijuana is less addictive than alcohol. Finally we've all heard of people dying of alcohol poisonins - i.e. alcohol overdose. I could be wrong, but I've never heard of anyone dying of marijuana overdose.
    So I'm shocked you said this stuff.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      LisaE

      Jonah did not say weed should be banned.

      Collapse
      1. ROBERT

        You're right, he did not say that. But he clearly indicated a fear of legalizing this substance that could take away the motivation and work ethic of young men. I believe that to be excessive fear mongering and besides, we already have plenty of things available that could take away the motivation and work ethic of young men. So I found it hypocritical.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Jason Gibson

          He actually qualified it by saying "not everybody". He did not generalize. If sir you are saying the opposite that that DOESN'T happen to anyone then you should go back to your research

          Collapse
          1. ROBERT

            I did not say that. Read my post.

            Collapse
        2. Avatar photo
          LisaE

          I don't agree that this is fear-mongering.

          Collapse
          1. ROBERT

            That's certainly a fair and defensible position. We are allowed, even encouraged, to disagree here at The Dispatch.

            Collapse
  7. Jane

    Great podcast today - where could I find Peter Suderman’s work on video games? Hope you can have Mr Adler on again.

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Cornelius O’Brien

    Good stuff. Wanted the ‘Big Weed’ discussion to hit on the impact of legalization / regulation on the existing economies and players. Do we learn from the history if bootlegging after Prohibition ended?

    Collapse