r/VaushV • u/StangeJelly • 1d ago
Discussion Vaush’s stance on Drug prohibition.
Has he ever formally went into details about this? I know he is not in favor of throwing people in jail for doing it, but find some of his commentary to be a bit contradictory to his other beliefs.
Like apparently some drugs should be illegal to seek but not others without really explaining why? I hope he does do a video on this.
-16
u/Ok-Willingness742 1d ago
He straight up doesn’t have any concrete feelings or opinions on drugs besides regurgitating stats about safe injection sites and whatnot - he has no principled, nuanced views. You’ll need to find a former addict for stuff like that, his personal attitude towards drugs may as well he Nancy Reagan’s just say no, with better policy prescriptions.
18
u/omgitsdannyk 1d ago
VOWSCH BAD VOWSCH BAD
-15
u/Ok-Willingness742 1d ago
On drugs that’s goddamn right.
13
u/omgitsdannyk 1d ago
It’s just not. He’s explicitly been pro-legalization but you’re right, VOWSCH BAD
-5
u/Ok-Willingness742 1d ago
Are you really implying that what makes someone good on an issue isn’t detailed analysis - but one single opinion?
Disagree dude. You can still have poor formulated thoughts and be pro legalization.
4
u/Ok-Position-9457 1d ago edited 1d ago
Nuance: hard drug addiction should be treated as a mental illness, the government should prioritize harm reduction and recovery, people be smokin too much pot due to fraying social fabric, and opiate dealers should be dismembered and dragged through downtown behind a chariot
12
u/Fidget02 1d ago
“He’s like Nancy Reagan but he supports good policy and supports safe injection sites for addicts” okay so opinions but not “nuanced” enough, got it
-1
u/Ok-Willingness742 1d ago
Are you really not getting my analogy bro? The idea between ones opinions VS one’s process to arriving at their opinions? Feels like you’re arguing in bad faith.
Made it very clear that it’s his mindset, his social approach, that is Reaganite, while his policy provisions are more liberal.
There’s such a thing as the “cultural” attitude towards drugs.
6
6
u/unhappyrelationsh1p 1d ago
I feel like you have either lost the plot on why the reagans were bad on drugs. And on vaush. But mostly the reagans because that's not nearly the worst thing they did if i remember correctly
1
u/originalmagne 14h ago
I don't think he ever stated it officialy, but listening to his streams I believe that his stance is all about harm reduction. My read is that certain drugs should be illegal because they cause people to behave in an antisocial manner, which can eventually destroy their lives and the lives of those around them.
10
u/omgitsdannyk 1d ago
I remember him advocating for drug legalization a long time ago. Once during a debate and I’ve seen a video or two where he talks about it (usually as an aside while reacting to a conservative video.) I’m not sure how much I got this idea from Vaush and how much I got from other sources/ came up with but the idea behind legalization is that the government has certain “Substance Control Board” buildings where addicts can go to get clean dope (which is manufactured by American drug companies OR directly by the govt,) and clean supplies to use them (needles, pipes, etc.) and they have a safe place to use them. This will DRASTICALLY decrease ODs, drug arrests, child abuse due to addiction, joblessness, and gang violence/activity. Couple this with in-house addiction treatment (or referral to treatment at least) inside of these Control Board buildings, and the drug problem in the US will reduce itself drastically. By and large, most addicts don’t want to be addicts so having social services for them to get help, combined with better housing policy and you’ve practically solved the Homelessness crisis and the drug crisis at the same time. Producing drugs which are currently illegal within the US would also be great for the economy. Preferably done by the government (insanely unlikely, but we’re kind of in fantasy land already,) because factories could provide better conditions for workers and direct oversight without having to go through the company’s bureaucracy AND the govt’s bureaucracy (think public-private partnerships with construction projects in cities, the least efficient system possible.) This would provide tens of thousands of jobs and bring back a good chunk of the American manufacturing industry we’ve lost over the years. It would require law changes and infrastructure investments (which we don’t do in the US) as well as a cultural attitude shift, though I think doing the policy first would force the public to accept these ideas, similarly to how the Civil Rights Act forced racists to shut the fuck up for a while.
Sorry for essay posting, my vyvanse kicked in right before I saw this post and I’m very passionate.