serting its sovereignty overseas hasnbought time for rapid, dramatic, andnreal political reform. In the election,nEnglish-speaking white voters returnednto previous voting patterns and chose annew moderate-left party, the Democrats.nAfrikaans-speaking voters pickedneither the National Party or the Conservatives.nFinally, in the only provincenwhere successful multiracial powersharingnnegotiations have occurred,nNatal, voters were comfortable withnthe moderation of black leaders. ThenConservatives were shut out there.nPresident F.W. DeKlerk’s task is tonpreserve his nation’s sovereignty bynpacifying internal ferment through negotiation.nHis course may or may notnscotch assaults on South Africa’s sovereignnrights. The American blindnessnremains: leftist Congressman HowardnWolpe, a Michigan Democrat, joinsnDesmond Tutu and Allan Boesak inndemanding more sanctions, while diehardnconservatives, calling DeKlerk’snremarks a “speech at Appomattox,”nmay raise funds in the US for thenConservative Party. America would donbetter to contribute to positive changenby supporting a responsible course, notnby making South Africa more turbulentnby fueling revolution.n— Bruce RickersonnT H E ANTI-DRUG CRUSADEncontains the common hype along withnalways-commendable pledges to crackndown on drug criminals and introducen”zero tolerance” for users. Nonetheless,nPresident Bush’s war on drugs cannonly fail, for it insists on attacking thensymptoms of the problem rather thannthe real disease itselfnSocial research on the use of illegalndrugs shows one consistent theme:nintact traditional families strongly discouragendrug use; broken families orn”alternative family forms” encouragenit. Our “drug crisis” is in large measurenthe result or symptom of our “familyncrisis.” No number of new prisons orntreatment programs can repair thendamage to the young caused by familyndecay.nIn the 1964 study The Road to H,nIsidor Chein and his coauthors studiednthe family patterns of heroin addictsnand found that 97 percent of “addictnfamilies” showed a “disturbed relationship”nbetween the parents (e.g., di­nvorce or history of separation), comparednto only 41 percent of drug-freenfamilies. Another intensive study fromnthat period by William Westby andnNathan Epstein reported that “fatherled”nfamilies with traditional mothersnwho were “deeply satisfied” with theirnrole as housewife produced “emotionallynhealthy children.” Meanwhile,n”mother-dominant” families or “sharingnfathers” (where the mother andnfather strove to hold equal roles)nspawned serious pathologies in children,nincluding the abuse of drugs.nHoratio Alger’s Children, an extensivenieport on a sample from MarinnCounty, California, prepared by RichardnBlum and Associates in 1972,nidentified family-oriented factors relatednto “low risk” and “high risk” ofnteenage drug use. The team found thatn”low risk” families held an unquestionednbelief in God; regularly attendednchurch; were father-led and authoritative;nhad more children; and hadnmothers who gave first priority to theirnhome and family, and had voted fornGeorge Wallace in 1968(!). “Highnrisk” families, in contrast, had mothersnwho were employed and gave prioritynto meeting their “human potential”;nhad fathers who were “overly intellectualn[and] took on mothers’ functions”;nand were skeptical about God andnrarely attended church. Simply put,nintact, religious, traditional familiesnsuccessfully used “protective measuresnto ensure that external influences willnnot affect family unity” and gave theirnchildren enough “intestinal fortitude”nto fight temptation.nWork in the 1980’s confirms thensame points. One study found marijuananuse by youth related to the presencenof “unconventional” mothers. Anothernfound that drug-users came fromnfamilies where the fathers weren”weak.” A major study by Dr. AlfrednS. Friedman of 2,750 adolescents admittednto drug treatment programsnfound that the larger the family ofnorigin (more siblings and extendednfamily members in the home) thenlower the use of drugs, while parentalnseparation and divorce produced morenabuse among the children. In a 1985narticle in The American Journal ofnSociology, two researchers showed anstrong negative relationship betweenn”conventional family roles” and marijuananuse. More recenfly, a study atnnnUCLA reported again that parentalndivorce and other signs of “inadequatenfamily structure” significantly aggravatedndrug and alcohol abuse, whilenwork at the University of SouthernnCalifornia found that “latch-key” adolescentsnwith working mothers werentwice as likely to abuse drugs andnalcohol as those enjoying after-schoolncare.nIn sum, the overwhelming evidencenshows that intact, traditional familiesnhelp prevent drug abuse. Alternatenfamily forms encourage it. The cynicalnreality is that existing federal and statenpolicies actually help disrupt family lifenin ways that will invariably increasendrug abuse. Take our welfare system,nwhich discourages marriages andnencourages female-headed families, ornthe day-care subsidies and the incomentax structure that encourage mothersnto work outside the home, or an ongoingnwar against “sexism” that disruptsntraditional gender roles, or “nofaultndivorce” that has cheapened thenmeaning of the marriage covenant.nProposed new programs of “workfare”nand the ABC “child care” bill can onlyncompound the problem.nOn the one hand, government policyndisrupts families and produces evennmore children and youth “at risk” ofndrug abuse. On the other hand, thengovernment declares “war” on illegalndrug use, and proposes to expand itsnpowers, size, and spending. The predictablenresult will be both more governmentnand more drug abuse.n—Allan CarlsonnFREEDOM OF ASSOCIATIONnhas come to mean no freedom ofndissociation, at least not in Madison,nWisconsin. There a city statute barringndiscrimination in housing has beenninterpreted by the Madison Equal OpportunitiesnCommission (MEOC) tonapply to roommates. In other words,nwhen Ann Hacklander and MaureennRowe were told by their prospectivenroommate Cari Sprague that she was anlesbian, and decided (politely) not tonroom with her for that reason, theynwere breaking the law.nAfter Ms. Sprague complained tonthe city, the MEOC asked Hacklandernand Rowe to come in and discuss thenmatter. In a 4-‘/2 hour meeting, duringnwhich the two women were in tears.nDECEMBER 1989/7n