Doug Casey: All Things Fun (ATF)

(Interviewed by Louis James, Editor, International Speculator)

L: Doug, among the many things you find perverse in our world, I've heard you say that one of the most perverse is that the U.S. government has created a bureau to regulate and suppress three of your favorite things in life.

Doug: Ah, yes. Alcohol, tobacco, and firearms – the three things you need for a decent hunting expedition. Or a Class One party. A Class Two party would also include sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll.

It really is strange that they have one agency to regulate these three particular things. Of course, none of them should be regulated at all. Regulating alcohol makes as much sense as… regulating water.

L: The government does that, too.

Doug: These people learn absolutely nothing from their mistakes – ever. To me, that's proof that the problem isn't intellectual; it's moral. Spiritual. And I don't mean on the part of the drinkers, smokers, and shooters. The bluenoses just have to tell others what they can and cannot do; they're uptight, nosy, unhappy, and small-minded. Not the type you'd want for a neighbor, but they are nonetheless quite successful at wheedling their way into political power. These types pushed the U.S. into prohibiting the manufacture and sale of alcohol from 1919 to 1933, and it was an unmitigated disaster. It created a crime wave the likes of which had never been seen before, and not just because peaceful, otherwise law-abiding citizens became criminals with the stroke of a pen. It created a black market for liquor, and that spawned many related criminal activities.

L: When those activities become criminal, the people involved can't take their differences to the courts, so there's an increase in settling disputes with violence. And since the goods are traded in the black market, people can't complain too loudly if the quality is bad. Plus, prices go up, to account for the cost of evading the law, which attracts new people to enter a life of crime to cash in on the high margins. Bathtub gin was easy money, like meth today.

Doug: Right. Prohibition established the Mafia in the U.S., which became the main supplier of alcohol. The Mafia didn't really exist in the U.S. before the Volstead Act initiated the Prohibition Era. It was Prohibition that made crime profitable as a big business; Al Capone would never have been more than a small-time hood without it. Prohibition caused destruction and havoc, cost a lot of money, and affected the moral fabric of society – it was a total disaster.

L: I've read that women rarely drank spirits before Prohibition, and almost never in the company of men, before the speakeasies. Even though I rarely drink any alcohol at all, I'm not sure this fall from grace is entirely bad – but it sure does indicate a fundamental change in the fabric of society. All unintended consequences of busybodying.

Doug: They never learn. They've declared war, of all the stupid ideas, on various plant extracts that are unpopular with the neopuritans: cocaine, marijuana, heroin, etc. It's not a war on all drugs – really dangerous psychiatric drugs like Ritalin, Prozac, and scores of others are being actively promoted. The War is really just on recreational drugs – and not even all of them, just some of them. All these things were legal in the 19th century and were never serious problems, even when anyone could buy them at the corner drug store. Sure, some people abused them, just like some do today. But they were cheap in a free market, and no one had to resort to crime to support his habit. For what it's worth, alcohol is much more dangerous than marijuana. Cannabis has demonstrated medicinal uses, but don't try telling that to an anti-drug crusader.

L: What do you say to people who ask if drug addiction isn't a terrible thing that destroys families, etc.?

Doug: It's true – but mostly only if kids haven't been brought up right to start with. So a lot of fools want the government to do their job for them. But depression also destroys lives. Are you going to outlaw that? Overeating is a deadly vice, so busybodies are working to outlaw that now too, with laws against fat and salt. These neopuritans, who think they know best for everybody else, suffer from serious psychological aberrations. I'd say "So what?" except they insist on imposing their values, by law, on everyone else.

Tragedy is part of the human condition. You can't legislate it out of existence. And, as with Prohibition, the United States' admittedly disastrous War On Alcohol, most of the bad things we see in relation to drug use today don't come from the drug use itself, but from people being forced into criminal activity in order to engage in otherwise peaceful activity.

But as I said, a hundred years ago, well before the insane War On Some Drugs, most of these drugs were known and commonly used as medicines, among other things, with no regulation at all, and the people with problems were few. Sigmund Freud prescribed cocaine to his patients and used it himself. I'm not advocating the use of recreational drugs, incidentally, and I generally eschew the company of users. I'm simply saying it's nobody's business if you indulge.

I could go on, but I won't. The point is that alcohol is no different and should be completely unregulated; the market would ensure cheaper, safer, better drinks and everyone would be better off.

L: What's your favorite drink? I mean, we all know you like a good glass of wine, but is there a variety you like?

Doug: The technology of wine making has become so sophisticated, and widespread, that any wine above a certain level is quite acceptable today. It's a far cry from the days – not so long ago – when people crushed grapes barefoot or thought Mogen David was a special treat at dinner. Hell, things have changed from when, in college, we used to mix grain alcohol with Welch's grape juice and think we were living high on the hog. But seriously, above, say, $15 a bottle, the difference between most wines is largely promotion and marketing as far as I'm concerned. But to answer the question, everything being equal, I'll order a Malbec in a red – they're very hearty. And a Torrontés in a white.

L: And what about mixed drinks – martinis or manhattans?

Doug: Once again, I'm not a connoisseur. But I enjoy bourbon on the rocks, when it comes to the hard stuff. I used to be a fan of Old JTS Brown, mainly because it was the brand Fast Eddie drank in The Hustler – that movie was made in the days before paid product placements. But I haven't seen it for many years. The brand seems to have been killed – probably by some corporate "suit" who obviously didn't know either good bourbon or the value of free advertising.

Now the market is totally dominated by Jack Daniels and Jim Beam, which are perfectly acceptable products – but the alcoholic equivalents of McDonald's and Burger King. Of course now there are lots of very expensive small batch makers as well. But 90% of the cost of the product is taxes, which I resent. I hope someday Americans again have the guts to go back to rum running private stills – all the great NASCAR drivers of the '50s and early '60s got their start as bootleggers outrunning revenuers on back roads.

L: The parallels with tobacco are obvious. It's another victimless crime that Big Brother and all his busybody supporters have decided has got to go.

Doug: Yes, they're ratcheting up the anti-tobacco rhetoric in the same way these other substances were demonized before they were made illegal. I generally don't believe in conspiracy theories, even though everybody and his dog conspires, simply because it's hard enough to get four people all to agree on what movie to see, much less how to commit a giant malfeasance. But, clearly, people of bad will often think alike. And if they see some group of do-gooders has a new agenda, it's monkey see, monkey do. The anti-smoking hysteria is worldwide at this point.

L: I'm not a smoker either, and frankly, I hate the smell of cigarette smoke. But it's striking to me the way that habit is being rebranded in such a negative way. The little smoker's booths are bad enough, but making it illegal to smoke in bars, which are private property where people want to go smoke and drink – and even in your own house in some places – is taking the anti-smoking witch-hunt beyond apartheid to persecution.

Doug: It's actually insane. And a violation of property rights – the owner of the establishment should make the rules; the customers can abide by them or go elsewhere. People have become such whipped dogs in accepting government decrees. There's a cigar bar in Vancouver, right across from the Terminal City Club. They sell good Cuban cigars, and they have a tastefully appointed room that's air conditioned, filtered, sealed, etc., set up so people could smoke cigars without affecting a non-smoker's most delicate sensitivity in any way. But the Vancouver government has outlawed any smoking in any commercial establishment. So, here we have a state-of-the-art cigar bar where you're not allowed to smoke.

It's just incredible. Stupid and destructive. It's a depressing sign of how degraded the average person has become that people are not out in the streets with pitchforks and torches, storming the busybodies' castles. And, of course, the police enforce any and all laws, like robots.

Back in the 1980s, when I flew the Concorde…

L: They let you fly one?

Doug: [Laughs] No, although I did fly a Cuban airliner once. It was a Russian Antonov-1, which is a gigantic prop plane. I went up to greet the pilot, who didn't speak very good English, and my Spanish wasn't very good at the time. He asked if I was a pilot, and I said yes, which was true, albeit for little Pipers and Cessnas, and he invited me to take over the plane. My friend Ben Johnson had the same thing happen to him in Russia on a Tupolev jet airliner… but that would not likely happen on a British Airways Concorde.

L: No, I wouldn't think so.

Doug: Anyway, not only could you smoke on the Concorde in those days, but they actually passed out a selection of Cuban cigars for you to smoke after your dinner.

L. Wow...

Doug: That's a genuine fact. And earlier, back when I was in high school, stewardesses would pass out free sample packs of cigarettes to all the passengers who wanted them, courtesy of the cigarette companies.

L: Things sure have changed…

Doug: Radically. It seems like all these chimpanzees get a new meme in their heads, and that becomes the new way it is. Fashion totally overrules principle.

L: It's like that thing about, first they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Communist; then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak out because I'm not Jewish, etc., then when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out.

Doug: Pastor Martin Niemöller, referring to the National Socialists, of whom, incidentally, he was an early supporter. That's exactly right. First they came for the smokers…

L: What would you say to people who don't want to breathe other people's smoke? Isn't it a violation of their rights when a smoker fills the air with fumes they don't want to breathe?

Doug: It might be, but it might not. It's a matter of property rights. If someone comes into your house and blows smoke in your face, that certainly is a violation of your rights. But if you're in a restaurant or airplane and the owners are okay with smoking, no one is violating your rights. You have the right to leave or fly another airline, but you don't have a right to impose your personal air quality standards on others, in their places. In these types of situations, it's not the smoke that's the problem, it's unclear property rights.

L: Fair enough. So, what's your favorite cigar?

Doug: Well, I have to give the nod to the Cubans. I used to argue with my old friend Jose that the Dominicans were just as good – but he was right. Too bad they're illegal in the U.S. The best in the world is probably the Trinidad, and it's also the most expensive at close to $50 a copy, for some models. Next is the Cohiba, especially the Esplendido and Lancero. During the cigar boom of the late '90s – and cigar booms always coincide with tops in the stock market, it's uncanny – Castro idiotically put out a directive to triple production. Needless to say, quality collapsed; he almost single-handedly destroyed the industry. But Cubans are now back up to snuff.

I think there's much more variation in quality and taste in cigars than in liquors. And marketing also is a major controller of price. Once, when I visited perhaps the best cigar store in Havana, I mentioned to the manager, who was a real aficionado, that I really like Cohiba Lanceros but didn't like the $20 price. He suggested El Rey del Mundo, Grandes de España. As far as I could tell, it was the same cigar – but at $4 a copy. The cheapest place I know to buy Cubans is at the Duty Free in Buenos Aires. The most expensive is anywhere in the UK – including the Duty Free at Heathrow, where they're over twice the price they are in Buenos Aires.

L: Well, I'll leave that experiment to those of our readers who share your taste in this regard. So, what about firearms?

Doug: In many ways, this is the most egregious, dangerous, and offensive stupidity of them all.

L: Why?

Doug: Times were that to be a freeman meant to be a person who could possess weapons. They were not just a symbol of freedom but the means for securing it and maintaining it. Only slaves were disarmed – or, for that matter, allowed themselves to be legally disarmed. But that's exactly the direction the U.S. is going, and indeed most of the world.

I'm a firm believer that everyone ought to be able to carry any arm they wish. It's a matter of your rights as a free and sovereign individual. And guns, the "great equalizers," put 90-pound girls on a level playing field with 250-pound men half again as tall.