I think that would matter more to the lower end of the intellectual spectrum than the higher, because the lower end is more often characterized by black-and-white thinking.
But what about the global thinking and sophisticated strategic concepts that are necessary to operate the War on Drugs?
I would expect a higher-IQ individual to be able to separate their opinions on drug use and the drug war as two distinct positions, which may or may not overlap. Also, I'd expect that the relationship is usually the other way around... rather than a position on the drug war informing personal choice regarding drug consumption, people's personal decisions about consumption inform their positions on the drug war.
So the below-average person goes, "Drugs bad, so war good." A higher-IQ individual might conclude that both are bad, which the below-average individual cannot help but see as a contradiction, because of black and white reasoning. Then the high-Q individual starts qualifying those as more nuanced positions, with not all types personal consumption bad, and low-Q decides high-Q is a raging addict.
And so, welcome to the modern political discourse.
Anyway, I wouldn't expect a high-Q to decide to use drugs because of moral/political objections to the war on drugs. That'd take some really tortured logic.
Just my take, anyway.
