Response

The drug prohibition church and the adventure of reformation

Peter Cohen *

Centre for Drug Research CEDRO, University of Amsterdam, Wibaustraat 4, Room 05.26, 1091 GM Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Received 6 January 2003; received in revised form 10 January 2003; accepted 13 January 2003

In Memoriam Giancarlo Arnao (1927�/2000) who wrote ‘Proibito capire. Proibizionismo e politica di controllo sociale’ Torino 1990.

Whatever the origin of the UN Drug Treaties, and

whatever the official rhetoric about their functions, the

best way to look at them now is as religious texts. They

have acquired a patina of intrinsic and unquestioned

value and they have attracted a clique of true believers

and proselytes to promote them. They pursue a version

of Humankind for whom abstinence from certain drugs

is dogma in the same way as other religious texts might

prohibit certain foods or activities. The UN drug treaties

thus form the basis of the international Drug Prohibi-

tion Church. Belonging to that Church has become an

independent source of security, and fighting the

Church’s enemies has become an automatic source of

virtue.In the history of Western culture, we have known

many churches. The best known are the Roman

Catholic Church, with its Rome-based Central Office

of the Faith, but also the Church of Communism as

ultimately ruled by its once Moscow-based Central

Committee. All these churches know and worship

central texts that do not serve to promote scientific

understanding and social development, but rather to

promote the Church’s own dogma, faith, and the reign

of its Institutions. When, for reasons that no longer

count, the USA became inspired to write the first

versions of the first global drug treaties slightly more

than a century ago, no one could have foreseen the

results.

But then had anyone foreseen the ramifications of

setting up central texts and later central headquarters of

Christianity, or, indeed, of Communism?

Sociologically seen, the equation between the UN

Drug Treaties and Faith may not be immediately self-

evident. As I have written elsewhere, (Cohen, 2000) the

mid eighteenth century birth of individualism, with its

ensuing fights against dependence, colonialism and

slavery should be seen as the cradle of our modern

mythologies about drugs and addiction. The concept of

a drug and the concept of addiction were sincere

expressions of that new ideology, the religion so to

speak, of the ‘free individual’. In the cradle of individu-

alism new movements and cultures were born and

raised, trying to create ‘independence’ and ‘emancipa-

tion’ of both peoples and persons. The aim that would

define Humanity, acquiring God’s ‘grace’ for the soul,

was from the eighteenth century on replaced with

‘independence’ and later ‘health’ for the body. Here, I

will not discuss the specific interpretations of ‘indepen-

dence’ or ‘health’ that are chosen, because they do not

matter for this short paper.

The socialist ideologies, too, can be understood as

expressions of that new vision of individuality and

freedom, of which the best known and the best

researched was Marxism. We should understand that

The First Communist International and the First Global

Drug Treaty have the same secular philosophical

parents, begot similar institutional empires, and had

similarly destructive Inquisitions as their consequences.

In the Catholic Church, congregations of the Sacred

College of Cardinals or administrative departments

thereof, would decide on matters of saints, heretics

and secular strategies of the Papal Office. One of the

famous Congregations*/the Congregation of the In-

dex*/would decide on what books could be read by the

faithful, and for instance in one of their meetings, in

1616 (March 5) it was decided that reading Copernican

astronomy would be banned, as it was ‘false and

contrary to Holy Scripture’ (Sobell, 1999).

In the Prohibition Church we have several of these

Congregations, where the Cardinals of Prohibition

compare the sacred texts with policies the world over,

and decree if these policies are holy or not. It makes no

sense to try to show the Congregations where the anti* Tel.: �/31-20-525-4278; fax: �/31-20-525-4317.

E-mail address: pcohen@cedro-uva.org (P. Cohen).

International Journal of Drug Policy 14 (2003) 213�/215

www.elsevier.com/locate/drugpo

0955-3959/03/$ - see front matter # 2003 Peter Cohen. Published by Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/S0955-3959(03)00012-4

drug version of emancipation has brought us, just as it

makes no sense to go to Rome to tell the congregations

of Cardinals there are more ways to lead a virtuous and

ethical life than through Christ or by strictly followingthe Bible.

The places where the Cardinals of Prohibition con-

vene do not matter. In Vienna, in Rome, in New York,

the scenes are identical. The Cardinals convening there

are chosen not to express problems surrounding the holy

texts, but to create faith, unanimity and possibly glory.

The bureaucracies that organise these meetings are

masters of the text, and masters of the rules that guidethe faith.

The Prohibition Church’s bureaucrats are not hired

because of their knowledge about sociology, pharma-

cology, drug use, or the problems drug prohibition

creates for hundreds of millions of people from Malaga

to Memphis to Moscow to around my corner. The anti-

drug bureaucrats are hired because of their religious

conformity and usefulness to the Church; and of coursetheir workplaces are often far away from the worlds of

drug users or the effects of drug policy.

What about drug policy reform? Reformation does

not happen during the Congregations nor should drug

policy reformers focus on that level. The UN Congrega-

tions are just as likely as the European Song Festival to

promote change in the drug policy field.

Since a Congregation of Prohibitionist Cardinals hasno army (unlike the old Popes or the former secretary

general of the Soviet Communist Party), its real powers

will be tested by time. The Prohibition Church itself has

only powers of faith, belief, intimidation and awe. How

long can the Church maintain those powers and prolong

its orthodoxy without looking or listening to the small

Reformations that are going on all over? The Reforma-

tions that are happening are the user rooms in Germany,the decriminalisation laws in Portugal, the coffee shops

in the Netherlands. They are the (almost secret) syringe

exchanges in New York, but also the fully open super-

market-syringe-availability in that Tuscan village where

you rented your villa.

Drug policy reform is local, and the little political

power that reformers should have not been wasted on

the Church or its Congregations.Drug policy reform is inextricably tied to local

cultures and politics. No two systems of harm reduction

can ever be identical. Therefore, drug policy reformation

first proceeds and then diversifies itself on local levels.

Only there can reform respond to the uncountable

unique sets of conditions and constraints. Even under

brutal drug prohibition regimes, at the local level drug

policy reformers can be the voices and agents of thepeople who need change. From neighbourhoods, com-

munities, towns, cities and regions, reformation can

eventually creep up to the national and international

capitals.

Our only chances are local because in the local arenas

we can be the specialists. At the level of the Congrega-

tions no one wants change. And there we are the anti-

specialists. Change and Reformation are enemies to theCardinals of all well-established Churches, including the

Prohibition Church. The Cardinals fear change and

forbid discussion about it. Even when the voices of

reformation speak out inside the sacred rooms where the

Cardinals convene, and even when the Cardinals are

forced to listen, the reformers’ words come out in

languages that the Cardinals cannot understand and

that they will not translate. For the Cardinals, merelyunderstanding the reformers’ words can be seen as

yielding to the forces of unbelief, unfaith, and heresy.

And like the work of the Congregation of the Catholic

Index, designating and seriously diagnosing heretical

voices or countries is the lifeblood of the Congregations

of the Prohibitionist Faith. (Books by Andrew Weil,

Norman Zinberg, and Lester Grinspoon have been

listed on drug warrior websites in the US as ‘dangerous’while ‘concerned’ citizens are encouraged to demand

their removal from local libraries.) The more detail in

which the heresies are spelled out, the more the security

of the Faith is established. This work, the work of the

Establishment, has to be repeated at least every few

years. It is a highly necessary ritual of Faith for the

Church of Prohibition.

To summarise, the real challenge to the legitimacy ofthe Drug Treaties will not consist of bringing initiatives

of change to the level of the Congregation. The real test

will be when countries or groups of countries realise that

the changes their cities need will always contravene some

phrase or some comma in the sacred texts. Or, as Fazey

remarks in this issue (Fazey, 2003) ‘Change will come

about by governments selectively ignoring parts of the

Conventions.’When European countries have introduced changes

that are contrary to the sacred texts, up till now they

have found that nothing happened! The countries find

that the Church cannot stop them from reforming their

own laws or at least their policies, and they find

(sometimes to their surprise) that the Church does not

even try to stop them. This has already occurred in

Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and manyother places.

However, countries sometimes discover*/as may be

the case in the near future with Canada*/that their own

local drug policy Reformation discussions have become

deeply threatening to the Prohibition Church and its

Cardinals. In such cases, the autonomy of a nation may

be challenged, not by the Prohibition Church itself, but

by national governments for which support for theProhibitionist Church is more important than their own

Constitution. This moves the Reformation far beyond

local drug policy. New coalitions between such heretical

countries will then have to be forged, and when these

P. Cohen / International Journal of Drug Policy 14 (2003) 213�/215214

coalitions are strong enough, drug policy reform might

be taken to the level of the Conventions (Bewley-Taylor,

2003). But drug policy Reformation will not wait so

long. The reformations that are already happening willeat the flesh out of the Conventions, just as Rome’s

holiness, pompous Congregations, and once fierce

armies could not prevent the Reformation from hap-

pening and ultimately European churches emptying,

divorce becoming commonplace, and abortion a human

right even in Spain, once the country of the Catholic

Kings.

The international drug treaties are among the holiesttexts of the Drug Prohibition Church. At the Church’s

meetings, wherever they are held, you will find people

kneeling in ridiculous postures before them, because for

them the texts contain the sacred words of the Divine. A

reformist perspective on the Treaties or a refusal to

kneel before the texts, are very dangerous actions now

for countries, as the growing hegemony of the US has

consequences that push towards extremism and ortho-doxy. The more the US Caesars exploit their hegemony,

the more the UN Drug Conventions symbolise their

desire to define and control Humankind, the same way

as their gulag state, armies and armada of aircraft

carriers are its material expression.

Acknowledgements

Thanking Harry Levine, Craig Reinarman, Peter

Webster and Dava Sobell for their help.

References

Arnao, G. (1990). Proibito capire. Proibizionismo e politica di controllo

sociale . Edizioni Gruppo Abele, Torino.

Bewley-Taylor, D. Challenging the UN Drug Control Conventions:

Problems and Possibilities. International Journal of Drug Policy 14,

171�/179.

Cohen, P. (2000). Is the addiction doctor the voodoo priest of western

man? Addiction Research 8 (6), 589�/598 (Special issue).

Fazey, C. (2003). The Commission of Narcotic Drugs and the United

Nations International Drug Control Programme: politics, policies

and prospect for change. International Journal of Drug Policy 14 ,

155�/169.

Sobell, D. (1999). Galileo’s daughter . Penguin Books: London.

P. Cohen / International Journal of Drug Policy 14 (2003) 213�/215 215