legalization/medicalization

This question of the supposed bio-physiological bases for addiction, the
whole drug-war assemblage (not reducible to any one of the 'disciplines'
of Law or Medicine, and much more then both), and the uses of
so-designated illicit drugs: These are the sorts of problems/questions
that have drawn me to D&G's work, and what I hope to do my dissertation
on.  I've hesitated to bring it up before because I am still so much
working things out for myself ...

But Dan's suggestion is one I would second with an observation.  Dan
wrote: "why not confuse everyone by arguing the [clearly strong] case FOR
marijuana as an enjoyable drug with negligible side-effects in comparison
to alcohol and tobacco, demonised hysterically in america after the end of
prohibition, but then saying you DON'T think it should be legalised
because the government has too much power already?!"

Interestingly, the current move to recover marijuana's demonized image has
resorted to a rhetoric of medicalization.  And, given the way the votes in
various states in the U.S. has gone, it seems to be working fairly well.
what is interesting about this to me is that we seem to be stuck with two
options: Medicalization or legalization.  

The first brings it under a whole drug assemblage, which 'disciplines' the
intermingling of bodies in a particular way (both biological bodies, of
rats as well as humans, and drug bodies), according to a particular logic.  
I saw a television news show two years ago (wish I new what it was, so I
could get a transcript!) about the marijuana coops in San Francisco.  a
doctor claimed that smoking was a most "un-medical" form, that they would
approve some sort of pill or shot, but no smoke!.

The other option, as Dan's post points out, brings marijunana into an
intense, economic and legal machine.  For a substance to be legalized, the
legal assemblage forms its contents, its production distribution
consumption, it becomes subjected to all forms of state control.

This raises a couple of questions for me:

1) why only this choice, EITHER legal OR medical control?  Why these
assemblages and not others?

2) Is there really a difference?  Doesn't it work out to be nearly the
same thing, medico-legal assemblages or lego-medical assemblages?  Don't
the same folks profit either way?

3) Dan brought up prohibition, which was followed by what has proved to be
a peri0od of unprecedented control of the distribution, production,
consumption of alcohol.  Maybe a prohibition of marijuana was necessary,
in order for it to be controlled ...?

4) drug use has been asociated with rebellion, resistance, a line of
flight from the stratified plane of the assemblages, but isn't this to
assume that drugs always have the same affect (expanding the mind)?  could
it not be true that drug use performs a sort of
re-territorialization/reorganization of the 'addict'-body in relation to
other bodies?  addiction as a form of the reterritorialization, rather
than always only a line of flight?

Just some thoughts ...

-g



. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..
  Gordon W. Coonfield
  Humanities Department
  Michigan Technological University
  1400 Townnsend Drive
  Houghton, MI  49931
    <gwcoonfi@xxxxxxx>
    <906.487.3230>
. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..