From Free Life, Issue 19, November 1993
ISSN: 0260 5112

Some people of a puritan cast of mind get very angry about Ecstasy, a drug which has become linked with gruesome electronic music and films of young people ``raving'' mindlessly for hours on end. The sight of people thoroughly enjoying themselves is enough to drive our caring leaders into fits of concern. What passes for average argument with our legislators is this: Ecstasy is dangerous and should be banned. And so, in a country increasingly incapable of distinguishing between toleration and approval, it is banned. The penalties for possession and supply of Ecstasy, or MDMA, can be severe. In British law, Ecstasy is treated as a Class A drug, on a par with heroin or cocaine. The standpoint of this reviewer is simple and stark. However dangerous the drug may be - and I do not think it is particularly dangerous - if people wish to ingest it then that is their look out.

Personally, I have never taken ``E'' and have no great desire to start, although I might take one as an experiment. I believe our most valuable possession is our rational faculty, which should not be ruined by strange substances. But that is my own choice and I do not presume to foist it on my fellows. Anyway, there is no shortage of information, warnings and even hysterical propaganda about drugs in society today.

As an instance of the hysteria, take "spiking" - or the secret adding of illegal drugs to another person's drink in a pub or at a party. This is often put forward to justify the current prohibtions. Of course, if someone slips a pill into a drink as a prank, the victim can hardly take responsibility for the consequences. Then again, outlawing certain narcotics has not stopped this sort of thing and is unlikely to do so in future.

Our bodies are ours to take responsibility for, but this liberal attitude hardly invades the present legal consciousness. Outlawing Ecstasy has sadly produced all the classic by-products of a war against a substance ingested by consenting persons: inflated prices, organised crime, spin-off criminal activity by users desperate to pay high costs, clogged-up courts, over-full gaols, not to mention the sheer injustice of banning something which should be a matter for individuals. Banning the drug has also worsened relations between police and the public, particularly the young, who often prefer taking Ecstasy to drinking alcohol, which can be far more of a problem for public order.

So it is a pleasure to read a serious, well-researched and intelligent book about this drug. Nicholas Saunders describes the benefits and possible hazards of Ecstasy, includes personal descriptions of what it is like to take the drug, the current state of the law, a huge reference section for the serious researcher, and a great deal of useful data. The book does not have to be read in one go. Some may just want to read a few chapters and forget the rest.

Although I am not a qualified chemist or biologist, Saunders convinces me that Ecstasy is far less harmful than other Class A drugs like heroin and cocaine. There is no clear evidence the drug is addictive. Saunders is so honest about some of the problems in taking the drug that I am inclined to believe his generally favourable view of Ecstasy.

The drug is alleged to have caused a number of deaths - at least according to the tabloid press, that bastion of objectivity and subtle analysis. One of the most common problems was illness and even death through overheating, although this has more to do with the often unpleasant environment of raves than with the drug itself. There have been cases where a dead person has been found to have MDMA in blood or urine, although this does not prove that Ecstasy caused a death. The book is packed with statistics and references on all aspects of the drug, which is sure to impress even the most sceptical reader.

Mr Saunders writes in a Sixties-type vein about the advantages of Ecstasy for personal relationships, self-esteem and consciousness. The accounts of different users testify to the benefits of the drug, although Mr Saunders also describes how some people have had unpleasant experiences with the drug too. It is tempting to poke fun at the psychological benefits of taking Ecstasy, but I found Mr Saunders' enthusiasm rather touching. This is definitely a book for those who are young - both in fact and in spirit.

Some of the best bits in the book are essays by people describing the benefits of Ecstasy and defending the right to take drugs consensually. Libertarian readers will be delighted to see that Paul Staines has an essay which was originally published by the Libertarian Alliance. Mr Staines, a former member of the Committee for a Free Britain and organiser of the ``Freedom to Party'' campaign in 1989, makes the case for tolerance with great gusto. Also good is a piece by American writer Alexander Shulgin, who has been campaigning against America's unwinnable and costly ``War on Drugs''.

I was particularly pleased at the libertarian tone of the book, and the spirit of sincere rational enquiry that informed every page. Mr Saunders is not a crank and neither are many of the people who take Ecstasy. But it does not really make any difference whether they are silly or sensible. They own their bodies, and what they do is their business. Period.

Tom Burroughes

NOTE: Another excellent book defending the libertarian position on drugs in general is Our Right to Drugs: The Case for a Free Market. Thomas Szaz, Praeger, New York. 1992.