Ideological Intuitionism

David Farrar believes that probably half the Labour caucus would support marijuana decriminalisation. This is good news, even if they are too timid to do anything about it.

The issue of marijuana is an interesting one. Opposition to its criminalisation generally comes from groups associated with the political Left. By contrast, opposition to the anti-smacking law came from the Right. At a superficial level, criminalisation of mariujuana seems far more paternalistic, so you might expect it to be the other way around.

There are several possible explanations for this general intuitional inconsistency (although it may be logically resolved within individuals), but what follows is what I think is the best one.

Firstly, people often behaviourally reflect people they respect. We see this in language, but we also see it in certain beliefs - someone is more likely to be persuasive if they are likeable and appear knowledgeable. This, I think, explains why self-identified conservatives in New Zealand support relatively limited Government, even though New Zealand does not really have a tradition of this. In America, the level of political discourse is much higher, and they really do have a rich tradition of constitutionally limited authority and relatively small Government. So it makes sense that conservatives here will adopt these views to a certain extent.

Secondly, since the 60's, the smoking of Marijuana is associated with a counter-culture image, one of rebelling against established traditions and norms. I would argue that this image has faded somewhat now, but it is still perhaps strongest among the most vociferous opponents of its legalisation. It is this that makes it intuitively grate against the sensibilities of the older and/or more conservative populace of New Zealand.

I believe this is inconsistent. Just as a progressive should allow people the opportunity to experiment with their bodies without respect for the sensibilites of the easily offended, so too should a conservative rail against this arbitrary state intervention into the lives of others.