Guest rule boy, I don't think anarchy and civil disobedience are the same thing, and I think your worry that legal pot will break down society is overwrought. Having done my share of pot smoking I strongly suspect that cheap legal pot would be much less popular than the whole cult of the expensive illegal stuff. I think it was Peg? who mentioned commercial motives in keeping pot illegal. I'd suspect it. The money and the market is more the thing to watch in drugs, legal or otherwise. There's your decadence.
   It's decadent because, like a drug, money puts off the question of personal values, you don't need to figure that out, because with money you figure you can probably get or pursue whatever you value, whatever it turns out to be. So it induces an opium-dreamy, drugged, addicted, morally procrastinating view of life. Maybe we should make it illegal? No, of course not. We should use it responsibly, like anything else. Drug money is about money, not drugs.

I sometimes think advertising can be inherently corrosive, and laws have emerged to control some of the worst of it in my lifetime. When people make links between drugs and where the money goes, I don't see the logic. It's just blaming drugs for the way things are, with money, with or without the drugs.

When I tested for a CDL license there was a law still on the books in IN that you can't shift gears in an intersection--because of the old split-shift busses that would sometimes jam. So I didn't. The Trooper faulted me for going through it too slow, in second, and holding everyone up. Laws should reflect some basic pragmatism, and not clog up all our time and resources with piddly business and old irrelevent worries. Just because something is still illegal doesn't mean that it will break down the rule of law to change it, and just because there are no laws to properly prosecute new crimes like identity thefts and video voyeurism doesn't mean there shouldn't be, quick.