There are few things as seductive as being forbidden. It is enough for us to be told “you must not read that book” to make an effort to get it. Not because they are bad or disobedient (labels of those ignorant of complex human nature), but unattainably fascinating. The desire for the forbidden, exclusive from others, is so powerful that they even say that it led us to lose Paradise. Oh, but we don’t learn from other people’s mistakes, we want to taste the forbidden fruit in our own mouths.

In an effort to forcibly direct man to the path of virtue, self-control, protection of his family and his own body, the USA banned alcohol between 1920 and 1933. Although every drunkenness does not end in tragedy, it is statistically undeniable that this substance is an accomplice in the most terrible acts of which human beings are capable (extreme violence, sexual abuse, destroyed families, traumatized children). However, the numbers and history (from which we never learn) prove that the infamous dry law was one of the most violent times: mobs, extortion, illegal and uncontrolled supply and consumption. Because? Well, because banning something, no matter how harmful it is, has never solved anything.

What was the “Valentine’s Day Massacre”, the crime that marked the end of Al Capone and the dry law in the United States

Tell a boy in front of a closed drawer: “It is forbidden to open it”, and he will think about it day and night, maybe he will look for and find a way to open it, it will certainly occupy a space in his mind that he would not otherwise occupy. Free human beings do not like to have things imposed on us, not even well-being. Order someone desperate to “calm down!” and it will get worse. We want to be heard and understood, seen, supported and included. An addict is not addicted because he has access to substances. If it were so, all those who drink alcohol would be alcoholics or all of us who tried drugs despite the prohibitions would be on the street and give our lives in exchange for drugs. But it’s not like that, is it? Not all of us decide to try drugs, nor do all of us who try them become addicted.

(…) our human instinct tells us that the solution is to examine why and look for realistic strategies…

For decades we’ve been applying the same formula (crack down on sellers, punish consumers) instead of doing the obvious: focus our efforts on reducing demand (which automatically reduces supply), rehabilitate addicts, prevent abusive childhoods, lives without opportunities, or futures that make us statistically vulnerable to addiction. But under the duress of the US (by the way, the country where addiction has spiraled out of control), Latin America has spent decades pouring millions into the war on drugs. It is clear to anyone who wants to see: this punishing male strategy (aggressive and self-indulgent), far from solving the problem, makes it even worse. Before any inexorable government, rivers of blood will flow, addicts will continue to destroy themselves and their families, drug dealers will continue to terrorize and enrich themselves. We live under the dictatorship of a stupid male whose answer to every problem is to punish with sticks while repeating “I will not give in, I will not show weakness”, while our human instinct tells us that the solution lies in questioning why and looking for realistic, generous and creative strategies. (OR)