In response to "Legalization doesn't lead the way to tyranny" (Opinion Exchange, April 19): In 1958 Aldous Huxley differentiated the mind-numbing drug soma portrayed as the instrument of governmental mind control in "Brave New World" from marijuana. He was right to say marijuana was more nuisance than the source of reefer madness. However, today's 21st century, high-potency addictive cannabis variety is not at all that nuisance weed of the mid-1900s.
The issue of control addressed by authors Marcus Harcus and Oliver Steinberg is a very real one. But from a medical perspective they picked the wrong culprit. Most people avoid becoming addicted to the numerous legal and illegal available substances by cultivating self-restrictive "control" strategies. Make no mistake, addictive substances are a risk to everyone. So, who is more vulnerable to addiction? There are some genetic markers that are at play, but no easily available test to let us know. There are the impulsive and the risk-takers. But I am most concerned about our teens. Without the well-funded education, prevention and early-intervention programs that worked so well for cigarettes, we are setting up some of this generation's teens to underachievement if not failure.
Finally, the bill sponsored by House Majority Leader Ryan Winkler in the Minnesota House has a provision for expunging nonviolent misdemeanor marijuana convictions. This provision would have bipartisan support. It is a step in eliminating the Jim Crow injustices. Let's end this tyranny.
Let's also protect the vulnerable and revise the medical cannabis program to fulfill its original mission. None of these solutions requires unleashing another addictive and mental-health-altering drug into society.
George M. Realmuto, St. Paul
• • •
The remarkably well-written April 11 commentary intelligently conveyed the writer's concern that legalizing marijuana would lead to a placid and stupefied citizenry ("Legal marijuana will lead us to a 'Brave New World,' " Opinion Exchange).
But he wasn't there, and he's wrong.
Having lived through the latter half of the 1960s and the early half of the 1970s as one of the millions of dope-smoking hippies and jackpine savages then prevalent, I can assure him that we were neither placid nor stupid. Our greatest concern was that our parents and government were both.
We stood up for the Constitution, marched on Washington and rebelled — all without resorting to armed insurrection or sedition. We persuaded a talented but misguided president to turn down his chance for a second term. We persuaded a self-deluded fascist to resign instead of facing a sure impeachment.
