| Home. Contact. |
| See: Global Marijuana March. ~600 different cities since 1999. First Saturday in May. City lists: 1999 2000 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 2010. 11 ...Search them. Add city name to search. |
| With less than 5% of world population the USA has over 2.3 million of 9.2 million world prisoners! The majority of U.S. inmates are in due to the drug war. |
| Most Republican leaders oppose cheap universal healthcare. 45,000 uninsured Americans die each year due to lack of health insurance. |
| Drug War Platforms of Green Parties worldwide. Links, sources, process, history. Platform positions on drug war, marijuana, cannabis. Also, some Usenet messages by a web page compiler of Green platform links. Drug reform, hemp, harm reduction, legalization, decriminalization, etc.. | |
| Mirrors 1. 2. | Change mirror pages if problems. |
*Introduction. *Greens. Drug War platforms worldwide. *Relevant Usenet newsgroup messages. *Drug War charts, and more. |
| |
Introduction. [TopLink] |
Greens. Drug War Platforms Worldwide. [TopLink] |
2. The advent of a “prison industrial complex” in the United States has become a national disgrace. ...
20. We support decriminalization of “VICTIMLESS” CRIMES, for example, the possession of small amounts of marijuana.
21. We call for legalization of industrial hemp and all its many uses.
22. We oppose the illicit activities of the international drug trade and the illicit money laundering that often accompanies the drug cartels. We call for a revised view of the “drug problem” and an end to the “war on drugs,” recognizing that after over a decade of strident law-and-order posturing, the problems with hard drugs have only worsened.
23. We call for expanding drug counseling and treatment for those who need it.
24. We believe mandatory drug testing violates civil rights; therefore, we oppose mandatory testing.
25. We favor innovative sentencing and punishment options, including community service for first-time offenders and “Drug Court” diversion programs. We support alternative sentencing for non-violent crimes (i.e. community service) and guaranteed education within prison – G.E.D. courses and college courses as well as skill training and dispute resolution.
--- end of this set of platform excerpts ---
Drugs
Government should exercise restraint when regulating its citizens' private lives. Basically, we should question a government's right to tell citizens what they may consume.
The "war on drugs" is actually a war on urban ghettos, supplier nations and civil liberties. That war has failed. Outlawing drugs has turned drug users into criminals and crowded our jails with them. Interdiction, foreign and domestic, has been ineffective in stemming the flow of drugs. The U.S. Government has used the drug war to justify foreign military intervention, while the CIA has been involved in the drug trade to finance its illegal activities. The ones who profit from the drug war are the sellers, organized crime, chemical corporations and banks that launder money.
The Green Party calls for a basic change in our drug policies:
- · Shift our focus from interdiction and incarceration to addressing the social causes of drug use. Redirect the funds presently spent on the drug war to education, prevention and treatment.
- · Recognize that drugs are not just a problem affecting minorities and the poor, but also white, upper class communities.
- · End the subversion of due process of law under the guise of the "war on drugs."
- · End all corporate tax deductions for cigarette and alcohol advertising.
- · Give states a greater autonomy in choosing to criminalize, de-criminalize or legalize drugs without having to fear federal reprisals (such as taking highway funds from states like Oregon that wanted to legalize marijuana).
- · Open a public dialogue to determine the most feasible plan to de-criminalize drugs.
-------------------------------------------talk.politics.drugs and alt.politics.greens Usenet newsgroup messages. [TopLink] |
| Forum:
talk.politics.drugs >> Thread: Why G's and LPs seem to differ on the War on Some Drugs, Re: fwd. article - voting for Nader >> Message 2 of 4 |
||
 |
||
| Subject: | Re: Why G's and LPs seem to differ on the War on Some Drugs, Re: fwd. article - voting for Nader | |
| Date: | 06/14/2000 | |
| Author: | Cameron L. Spitzer <spambait@petra.dyndns.org> | |
| In article <1d7a1270.3109fd28@usw-ex0101-005.remarq.com>, Brian N. Miller wrote: >spambait@petra.dyndns.org (Cameron L. Spitzer) wrote: >> >> johnnyCjohnny wrote: >>> >>> The "war on drugs" is a "war on rights". >> >> That is something on which Libertarians and Greens agree. > >Today I revisted the USA Greens social platform page >( http://www.greens.org/gpusa/plat/p_soc-just.html ), and I was >elated to find that the Greens now concretely claim to be on my >side. There are many Green Parties in North America and most of them write their own platforms. It's quite a lot of work and keeps us arguing during non-election years. I try to keep a collection of them at http://www.greens.org/platforms/ You'll find Green positions on the War on Some Drugs scattered across many planks. In the California platform (exceptionally well indexed by Jim Stauffer) it's in the planks on criminal justice, AIDS/HIV, human rights, labor rights, and education. The WoSD causes damage in all those areas. > This is the quote that wins my support as a dope fiend: > >"The use of and cultivation of marijuana for personal use by >adults should be legalized. In California, that sentence would have been waffled a little to get consensus from the schoolteachers and the people who think "industrial" hemp is something distinct from marijuana. The rest of the paragraph probably appears in about the same strength in most Green platforms. The GP of Cal is about 100 times larger than the Greens/Green Party USA. It's a lot harder for us to work out platform language than for G/GPUSA. G/GPUSA's platform is for internal use; most of the others are for candidates and the public. >The Greens are indeed cool! I apologize for wrongfully bashing >them. We're all learning all the time. Apology accepted. Cameron |
| Forum:
talk.politics.drugs >> Thread: Why G's and LPs seem to differ on the War on Some Drugs, Re: fwd. article - voting for Nader >> Message 14 of 78 |
|
|
|
| Subject: | Why G's and LPs seem to differ on the War on Some Drugs, Re: fwd. article - voting for Nader |
| Date: | 06/14/2000 |
| Author: | Cameron L. Spitzer <spambait@petra.dyndns.org> |
| << previous in thread · next in thread >> |
| In article <8i6vt6$8tv$1@bob.news.rcn.net>, johnnyCjohnny wrote: > >Ending the "war on drugs" is much more than just appeasing a bunch of >potheads. It's about ending the biggest assualt on our constitutional rights >in our nations history. The "war on drugs" is a "war on rights". That is something on which Libertarians and Greens agree. The differences in our platform planks on the subject reflect differences in the internal processes of the two movements. Most Libertarian parties either use autocratic rule or a parliamentary system with some version of Robert's Rules of Order. It is easy in such a system for the leadership to dictate strong platform positions. Most Green parties use a system called "modified consensus" where issues only go to a vote when consensus cannot be reached. One weakness of that system is that a vocal minority can scuttle a proposal that had majority support but not consensus. I have watched very strong language with regard to legalizing recreational and medicinal substances shot down in the plenary session of the world's largest Green Party, at least twice. What happens is a couple of school teachers object that they "can't teach stoned kids," they refuse to "stand aside with their concerns," and they send the language back for rewrite. It's impossible to outlaw a substance for schoolkids only, so the satisfactory rewrite never comes. Democracy is slow and difficult. Greens are convinced real democracy is the way to achieve social justice, peace, and ultimately save the planet. Other parties seem to think shortcuts can get them there faster . As an engineer, I distrust shortcuts. Nature finds the hidden flaw, every time. Cameron Ps., please change the Subject: when you change the subject. |
| >> Forum:
alt.politics.greens >> Thread: Slick Ralphie - Nader vs the Greens >> Message 2 of 2 |
|
|
|
| Subject: | Re: Slick Ralphie - Nader vs the Greens |
| Date: | 07/16/2000 |
| Author: | Cameron L. Spitzer <spambait@petra.dyndns.org> |
| << previous in thread · next >> |
| In article <87NL0J5L36722.8646875@anonymous.poster>, the anonymous Norton Anti-Ralph wrote: > >Nader has put the Green Party apparatus in the service of his own >obsessions. Rather than make the Greens' issues his, Nader has made >his issues theirs. Nader is running on a platform written by long-time Green party activist Steven Schmidt and extensively revised by Greens throughout the US over the last year or so. It's posted here: http://www.gp.org/ and there are a bunch more at http://www.greens.org/platforms/ As you can see, the Greens have taken positions on quite a lot of issues. Now is there any *particular* issue here that Mr. Nader has imposed on the Greens? Be specific, which issue? Or is the anonymous Norton Anti-Ralph just blowing smoke? Cameron |
Drug War charts, and more. [TopLink] |