I can understand how people who are unfamiliar with my career, or my writing, could draw the wrong conclusion from one of the closing comments I made on Weed Wars: “I do not believe in legalization of cannabis for recreational purposes." I'd like to thank my old friend Steve Bloom for raising the issue in the post entitled, “Say It Ain’t So, Steve DeAngelo," and for providing me this opportunity to clarify my position.

Cannabis is one of the safest - possibly the safest - therapeutic substance known to mankind. As such, any and all criminal penalties against those who use it are unjust and immoral, and should have ended a long time ago. Furthermore, and for the same reasons, adult Americans should be empowered to make their own decisions about whether and how to use cannabis, in the context of a taxed and regulated distribution system. It's my personal view that people should (when possible) consult with their physician before using cannabis - or any other therapeutic substance. But I don’t think anybody should be subject to criminal penalties for failing to do so.

At the same time, it's my strong belief that our movement’s use of the concept and terminology of “legalization for recreational purposes” has caused us tremendous damage. Our opponents have used the term to paint us as unrestrained hedonists who advocate a society-wide lifestyle of self-indulgence. In the '80s, this kind of propaganda succeeded in undoing all the accomplishments our movement had made up till then - and kept us on the defense until medical cannabis reinvigorated the movement in the mid-'90s. But the anti-recreational propaganda left a bitter legacy of workplace urinalysis, housing discrimination, transplant denials, student-aid denials, interference with parent’s custodial rights and more horrors sadly still with us.

There was a time, before our discoveries of industrial hemp and medical cannabis, when an individual-rights argument was the main tool in the activist toolkit. Today, we have more compelling and effective reasons to advance for changing the laws than an individual's right to get high. The discovery of the endo-cannabinoid system has established a sound scientific basis for the incredibly widespread therapeutic efficacy of cannabis, and almost two decades of experience has taught us that the vast majority of cannabis consumers are using it for wellness purposes. In addition, dozens of public opinion polls have shown that Americans support medical cannabis in numbers far greater than “recreational” cannabis.

For me, all of this points us in the direction of emphasizing the use of cannabis for wellness purposes, rather than for “recreational" purposes. That’s why I've said I don’t believe in legalizing cannabis for recreational purposes - and still believe that. But I do believe adult Americans should be empowered to make their own health and wellness decisions about cannabis. Several months ago I released a paper, "Wellness Not Intoxication," in which I called on the movement to reevaluate its use of the recreational-cannabis concept. Also see my companion piece, "Wellness and Recreation."

However, since I’ve begun to advance the wellness strategy in the news media, I’ve learned it's vulnerable to creative editing. That’s what happened on Weed Wars, where Discovery editors kept in the one line about “legalization for recreational purposes," but edited out my other companion comments denouncing all criminal penalties, and calling for a regulated system of distribution.

Over almost 40 years of activism, my views have changed and adapted as I've integrated new experiences and new lessons into my outlook. None of us will do everything perfectly, every time. If we're lucky, we'll get it right most of the time, and be willing to admit and learn from those times when we didn’t get it right.

Looking behind, I recognize that I left myself open to creative editing and misinterpretation in advancing the wellness strategy. The experience has taught me it’s tricky to reduce that theory to sound bites, and I will need to craft my phrases with more precision in the future. I could see using an alternative like, “I believe all criminal penalties for cannabis are unjust, but think there are better reasons to advance for reforming the law than recreational use." So I'll head back to the workshop to better hone my tools of rhetoric, and make them more
impervious to misinterpretation.

I appreciate CelebStoner offereing me this opportunity to take another, closer look at my choice of language, and for us all to discuss the underlying issues. But I have to admit I was saddened by Steve Bloom's choice of language and allegations. I try to assume best intentions on the part of everybody in the movement, even when I disagree with their choice of strategy or terminology.

We, of course, should not shrink from constructive criticism of each other when needed; but our real enemies are so many, and so powerful, I think our movement needs to be very careful about unleashing forces of disunity. My hope is that this exchange can serve as the basis for a continued dialog on wellness and recreation, with all of us communicating in a more thoughtful and respectful fashion.

Meanwhile, the response from Weed Wars has been overwhelmingly positive. We've received hundreds of messages from ordinary Americans saying the show had changed their views about cannabis. Retired cops and schoolteachers, and PTA moms from all over the country have expressed their appreciation for the show, and told us how it changed their minds, and the minds of their friends and neighbors. Millions of Americans have been shown that cannabis can be safely distributed in a way that brings benefits to communities, rather than harm. That shift in consciousness is a huge plus for all parts of the now very diverse cannabis-reform movement.

A few factual corrections in Steve Bloom's post:

1. He's made millions selling pot to medical patients in California.

I have not made millions from Harborside, which is a non-profit, community-service organization. I make a salary like everybody else at Harborside - and only that salary. It's about one-third what I would make in a private company of comparable size and success. Every year, we submit our complete financial records to the City of Oakland, so they can verify our non-profit operations. Our permit has been renewed four years in a row.

2.  Allegedly, a producer named Kylie Krabbe pitched the idea to Discovery in 2010. She lined up The Farmacy, based in Los Angeles, as the featured dispensary. According to her complaint, Discovery thought the concept was 'too edgy' for them and rejected her proposal. Then, lo and behold, Discovery inked a deal with Harborside instead. If that's true, it's really sleazy.

Discovery’s dispute with Kylie Krabbe is Discovery’s dispute alone. I never met Kylie or heard about her idea or knew anything about the lawsuit until I read about it in the news media.

3. Just last year DeAngelo proposed a legalization initiative for California. When Richard Lee beat him to it with Prop 19, DeAngelo pulled back and said he'd wait for 2012. Now it appears that he's not in favor of taxing and regulating marijuana for all uses any longer.

Regarding Prop 19, I initially argued against it going on the ballot, because it was clear to me it would not win in that election - not because I backed an alternative initiative. I never advocated for a different initiative in 2010. Of course, once Prop 19 made it on the ballot, I endorsed it and vigorously campaigned for it, as I would for any pro-cannabis initiative. And I am emphatically in favor of taxing and regulating cannabis.

I don’t think my willingness to support even those pro-cannabis efforts I have some disagreement with makes me a hypocrite. It makes me a principled pragmatist who's willing to support reasonable efforts even if they partially conflict with some of my ideas. I'll do the same thing again every time a measure to reduce or end criminal penalties for cannabis is on the ballot.

4.  To his credit, DeAngelo and his then partner Eric Steenstra founded the hemp clothing line Ecolution in the mid-'90s. Unfortunately, business didn't go well and they soon closed up shop.

Ecolution was one of the foremost hemp companies in the world. After more than six years of success, in which millions of people were educated about industrial hemp, it was severely impacted by a general downturn in the hemp industry, which claimed well over 50% of existing companies. Having had enough of thinking about buttons and zippers, I decided to move to California and put my professional experience to work in the medical cannabis movement, rather than struggle through the downturn. Harborside reflects the same dedication to professionalism and excellence that made Ecolution a success.

Steve DeAngelo is executive director of Harborside Health Center in Oakland.

Also see:
Top 10 CelebStoner Stories of 2011
More Blogs by Steve Bloom
CelebStoner News