From a New Jersey Star-Ledger report by Suzette Parmley, Minorities and women seeking to own N.J. legal weed stores `swimming uphill’ to land licenses:
The New Jersey cannabis law* was meant to give minority applicants from disadvantaged backgrounds . . . not just an even playing field to get into the cannabis industry, but a leg up.
Some say the statute that Gov. Phil Murphy signed a year and half ago touting “social equity” to create a diverse and inclusive cannabis industry and help reverse the damage of the nation’s failed War on Drugs isn’t living up to its promises.
[My emphasis]
But how do you “reverse the damage” of history by creating new victims of injustice out of innocent people—the people who are the “wrong” color or are not from the “right” background?
New Jersey’s cannabis law has a “social equity” carveout option for members of historically “disadvantaged” groups, including minorities and women. This means that a person is to be judged by skin color, ethnicity, or gender. Where does that leave actual individuals? The 14th Amendment? Without any recognition. The law evades the fact that the smallest and only morally relevant minority on Earth is the individual.
The Cannabis Regulatory Commission [CRC], the 16-month old state agency regulating the industry and overseeing licensing, lists “equity and safety” as its twin goals. On its website, the CRC says: “Social equity businesses, diversely owned businesses, and impact-zone businesses** will be prioritized in the licensure process so that their applications are reviewed before other applicants – regardless of when they apply.”
Of 102 conditional licenses awarded by the CRC in May and June, 37 were self-identified majority black-owned; 13 were self-identified as majority Hispanic or Latino owned; and roughly a third have owners who have past marijuana convictions.
[My emphasis]
So an applicant who is waiting for his/her approval is continuously pushed to the back of the line whenever the latest “historically disadvantaged” group member files an application. Is this equitable?
The article highlights economic difficulties of aspiring small business applicants who face large competitors and municipal licensure and zoning restrictions**. Parmley profiles Colia Best, a “minority” applicant approved by CRC’s bigoted process:
“We can’t compete with all these big MSOs [multi-state operators],” said Best, 48, who claims he spends hours on the phone daily trying to line up investors, calling townships, and researching online for real estate. “It’s a waiting game. It’s like trickle down economics — we’re waiting to see what’s left for us.”
Best has some nerve whining about “trickle down economics.” The CRC process prioritizes people like him based on group identity, leaving others “waiting to see what’s left for us.” It’s a “trickle up” process, privileging state-favored people like Colia Best.
This is what the innocent-sounding “social equity” ploy looks like in practice—unequal treatment before the law. That is the opposite of equity. To treat someone equitably means fair and impartial. There is nothing equitable about NJ’s cannabis law. A truly equitable law creates precisely what the NJ cannabis law explicitly does not—a legal even playing field. Instead, we get a legal leg up for a privileged few.
What we’re witnessing in NJ and across the nation is neo-tribalism. Tribalism is an ancient evil that The Enlightenment, and America, left behind in the dustbin of history. The Enlightenment recognized, philosophically, the moral primacy of the individual. Individualism is the foundational principle that gave rise to institutions such as universal inalienable individual rights, rule of objective law, capitalism, and limited rights-protecting government. Yet the ghost of tribalism lives on in NJ law. NJ’s cannabis law is collectivist, racist, sexist, and thoroughly un-American.
* [The law deals with state-issued licensure. It still leaves the licensee applicant needing to deal with local municipal licensure requirements.]
** [Government occupational licensure and zoning laws are another problem. They should be repealed or greatly scaled back. But that is a different issue.]
Related Reading:
The Racism of the ‘Anti-Racists’
Collectivist Left on 'Pay Equity for Women'
On New Jersey’s Proposed Bill to Study Racial Reparations
NJ Turns its Back on the 14th Amendment – and History
Woke Redistricting Madness in NJ
The Diversity Delusion by Heather McDonald
Don’t Allow the Left to Own ‘Diversity’
Individualism vs. Collectivism: Our Future, Our Choice—Craig Biddle
Related Viewing:
VIDEO: Individualism vs Collectivism - Dr. Yaron Brook
No comments:
Post a Comment