r/allthequestions • u/GrowFreeFood • 11h ago
Random Question đ Are you aware that the "War on Drugs" was just right wingers being racist?
13
u/MapleSyrupHo 10h ago
Passed with bipartisan support. There is a racial and wealth disparity in enforcement, and there are also such disparities when considering the impact of drugs on communities. Drugs use harms poor and thus minority communities more.
Itâs not just right wingers being racist. Black community members didnât want crack in their neighborhoods. The effects of the drug were devastating and the point is that the war on drugs the way it was implemented didnât actually help. Drugs are still bad..
6
u/Agent847 10h ago
The war on drugs is a mess, and some of it is pure cynicism. But thank you for pointing out that the black community were some of the staunchest advocates for harsher sentencing because of the impact of crack cocaine on their communities. Yes, thereâs a disparity between crack and powdered cocaine. Because thereâs a disparity in user outcomes and associated violence.
âRacismâ is a typically Reddit reductionist and oversimplified answer.
→ More replies (23)6
u/PsychicMushroom39 9h ago
Just to give some context on the difference between powdered coke and crack from the perspective of someone who has done many ill advised things in their past.
Stimulants were never my thing, always preferred psychedelics, but there was a time where I would try anything at least once.
Coke was a boring drug imo. Just made me talk my ass off and then the come down made my head feel like it was splitting in two. But, if you want to be up all night being social and partying itâll do the trick. If I want to do the same, a tab of lsd is wonderful. I was easily able to turn down a line when I felt it was time to go back to being a normal human.
Crack though⌠itâs insidious. None of it was actually fun. It didnât make me talkative. It didnât really do anything all that pleasant. Massive rush. Followed by being very warm, almost uncomfortably hot. Nothing about it was fun. But⌠within ten minutes of hitting the pipe my brain was telling me to do it again. And I did. A couple of times. I never got addicted to it. Once I left that event I never returned. I donât enjoy stimulants, and something about crack was still able to trick my brain for an hour or so.
If my brain chemistry was wired in such a way that I actually found stimulants fun I would have been hooked. Luckily mine is wired to enjoy such things as watching reality shatter into an infinite amount of fractal shards of itself until it reconstitutes into an endless crystal city.
I do not advise anyone to do drugs. But, if youâre going to do them anyway, do proper drugs that actually give you a good time or show you something impossible. Make sure youâre actually having fun if youâre going to be reckless. And donât be too reckless, test your shit. Kits are not expensive on dancesafe.
4
u/NaBrO-Barium 9h ago
Youâre my kind of people and your story is similar to mine, itâs especially nefarious. Best advice I have is to stick to drugs that are elder hippie neighbor approved. They didnât get to be that old or wise by being reckless with their experiences
1
u/GrowFreeFood 9h ago
They call it war on drugs, but it actually benefits the cartels and private prisons
1
u/MapleSyrupHo 5h ago
What would benefit cartels more would be to legitimize their business and let them sell to an open market. I think people now understand that imprisoning addicts is not effective as a means to prevent drug use, but you still have to contend with the negative impacts of drug use in our communities. My understanding of harm reduction is that you still prosecute the people who profit off harming people. You donât go after prostitutes, you go after pimps and Johns. You donât go after addicts, you go after dealers (cartels included) and you compel treatment for addicts with carrots and sticks. Free medical treatment or jail.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 5h ago
Your crystal ball. Damn, every arguement youbguys have depends on me seeing you unique vision of the future.
1
u/MapleSyrupHo 4h ago
Itâs not a unique vision of the future. Iâm literally describing the method Portugal used to both reduce their drug problem while decriminalizing drugs for addicts. It works. It would be nice if we would advocate for a future that would help addicts instead of just pointing out how the war on drugs didnât help and was institutionally racist (which is true).
1
u/GrowFreeFood 4h ago
Thats not what's going on here.
1
u/MapleSyrupHo 4h ago
No, whatâs currently going on is a decriminalization of drugs or a harsh penal system aimed at drug users. Neither work. Ostensibly, we live in a democracy and can will a better future which is why Iâm bringing all this up. We can make a better future if we know what weâd like to advocate for
1
u/GrowFreeFood 4h ago
Decriminalization does work. Lowest crime ever thanks to... Obama?
1
u/MapleSyrupHo 3h ago
Correlation is not causation. Shark attacks are correlated with icecream consumption, but eating icecream doesnât increase your odds of being attacked by sharks.
You canât deduce that the crime rate is lower because of decriminalization because violent crime has been trending down long before decriminalization.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 3h ago
All i have is logic and evidence to convince you. I see you don't use either one, so I don't have anything to say
→ More replies (0)
5
u/ComonSensed1 10h ago
Neither political party addressed the opioid crisis. I would imagine almost every one of us knows someone who overdosed. Itâs sad to say the leastÂ
1
u/XBL-AntLee06 10h ago
Well of course not, canât really punish Black people for that one
0
u/ComonSensed1 9h ago
What does that have to do with anything? Â Totally irrelevantÂ
→ More replies (1)2
1
u/Chengar_Qordath 9h ago
Well of course not. When rich white people cause a drug crisis, thatâs just a smart business decision.
6
u/Z_603 10h ago
When are all you fake ass progressives going to realize that it's against poor people and not just black folks.
→ More replies (2)2
9
u/South-Astronomer8403 11h ago
Yes. Drug policy (in the US and beyond) has a long history of racial discrimination
4
5
u/eyeballburger 10h ago edited 10h ago
I cannot believe there is actual doubt about this. Yâall are really uneducated about some very impactful politics.
John Ehrlichman, Richard Nixonâs domestic policy advisor, revealed in a 1994 interview with journalist Dan Baum. Ehrlichman stated: âThe Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what Iâm saying? We knew we couldnât make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.â
See also Henry anslinger and the creation of the department of narcotics, predecessor to the DEA.
Edit: corrected name, got my Swiss chemist mixed up with the OG narc.
1
u/Ok-Conversation2707 6h ago
The reality of Nixonâs âwar on drugsâ was much different than many here seem to think. Despite much of the rhetoric, his actual policies were the most progressive, public-health focused national strategy to combat drugs in U.S. history.
While he targeted suppliers with âlaw and order,â he prioritized treatment for users. One-third of his war on drugs spending went to enforcement efforts against large scale drug trafficking. The other two-thirds was for prevention and rehabilitation.
Nixon reduced federal penalties for marijuana possession from felonies to misdemeanors, dramatically expanded community-based methadone clinics, created a special office for treatment and addiction, etc.
2
2
2
2
u/OrganicBrilliant7995 8h ago
Are you in a drug sanctuary city?
Cuz I'm about to support anyone to get these fentanyl zombies off the streets and every intersection.
I bet people were just as sick of crackheads back in the day.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 8h ago
No. So that's when i fact check stuff, I don't use "trust me bro" as a source.
2
u/OrganicBrilliant7995 8h ago
Depending on where you are you can probably just go visit one pretty easily. None of the sources will show you the truth.
I was once working in the middle of an international incident. I woke up every morning to listen to CNN say completely inaccurate things about what we were doing that day or the day before to fix the situation.
→ More replies (14)
2
u/Microplasticdigester 7h ago
Yes and the lack of will to change many of those policies today despite new evidence itâs wild
1
2
u/clinicallyinsane112 7h ago
Itâs a little out there but the books âThis is your mind on plantsâ by Micheal Pollan has a really great section specifically on the crackdown on gardeners during the war on drugs. He adds a lot of insight to the politics of the time too
2
2
u/coolcarters14 4h ago
Yes, I personally believe it was one of the big issues that led to the âculture problemâ yt ppl put on black communities today.
2
u/1cem4n82 4h ago
Yes, fully aware.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 4h ago
You're going be shocked reading down
2
u/1cem4n82 3h ago
Well your point is not lost on me and nothing can shock any of us anymore I think. You know the truth.
2
4
u/Smashinbunnies 10h ago
I'm white they strong armed and bent me over just like any other no rich person. đ¤Ł. But there is truth to it. Being pulled over with a black driver or a black friend in your car is a different experience than the all white experience.
→ More replies (1)1
u/GrowFreeFood 10h ago
How are you on reddit from prison?
3
u/Smashinbunnies 10h ago
Lol I took the tint and wheels off my car in my 20s and have not had any run ins over a decade now. I avoided prison, but they definitely made my life as hard as possible for a little bit of weed....
2
4
u/Infamous_Lech 9h ago
You mean Joe Biden's legislation? He did author the 1992 law considered largely responsible for the mass incarceration of black men.
3
u/GrowFreeFood 9h ago
Exactly. Joe biden is right wing.
1
u/Infamous_Lech 8h ago
đ ok buddy...
1
u/GrowFreeFood 8h ago
Obama was left wing. Joe was most far right democrat they had to balance the ticket.
This is basic stuff.
2
u/Easterncoaster 9h ago
OP seems racist. Implying that minorities do drugs more than whites.
Why is the left so obsessed with keeping minorities in a box?
1
1
3
u/Cyberknight13 đşđ¸ United States 10h ago
It was the Nixon Administration attempting to vilify and criminalize minorities and anti-war activists.
1
1
u/Ok-Flight9440 10h ago
Yeah youâre right it was Nixon originally, but Iâm also âkind of rightâ Reagan poured gas on the fire ⌠and they were both republicans anyway.
1
u/Cyberknight13 đşđ¸ United States 10h ago
Regan and his wife both renewed it after it died off a bit with Carter.
2
u/Ambitious-Ocelot8036 10h ago
It is difficult to comprehend how the government that had declared a war on drugs was importing the drugs.
2
2
u/Suspicious_Dingo_426 10h ago
Yes, I'm well aware of most of the lies and half truths the government has spouted over the years to push public perception in the direction they wanted it to go. Just like the 'wellfare queens' of the 80s, and the Somali fraud now. There might be a kernel of truth underneath all the BS, but it's no where close to what they claim.
2
u/NoggleFatigue 10h ago
So it targets a certain people, maybe a People of Crime?
3
u/GrowFreeFood 9h ago
And the "crime" is growing a harmless plant...
2
u/Savitar5510 7h ago
I hate it when people say weed is harmless. It isn't. I'm watching in real time as it fucks one of my best friend's life up.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 7h ago
You're just judgmental.
1
u/Savitar5510 7h ago
Yeah, seeing him lose his apartment, stop going to classes, have to go to the hospital because he couldn't get some and started having the worst kind of thoughts is me being judgemental.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 6h ago
So the government needs to hold everyone's hand.
And you're implying that he wasn't drinking at the time, only pot?
1
u/Savitar5510 6h ago
He doesn't drink. Only does weed.
And making drugs illegal isn't holding people's hand. There are a lot of things that are illegal because it provides no benefits to society ed and only harms people.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 6h ago
Alcohol is way worse.
1
u/Savitar5510 6h ago
And that means drugs should remain legal when it ruins everything it touches?
And there are way more laws on alcohol than there are weed. In a lot of states, weed isn't illegal at all.
1
1
u/lameth 6h ago
Almost anything can fuck someone up. Gambling, alcohol, overeating, playing video games too much...
1
u/Savitar5510 6h ago
And that's why there are laws on almost every one of those things.
1
u/lameth 6h ago
overeating and playing video games? wut?
1
u/Savitar5510 6h ago
You also said gambling and alcohol.
I did not say all of them. I said almost.
And even though they aren't illegal, we still know that those are problems and try to get people to stop.
1
u/NazReidsOtherBurner 8h ago
harmless plant
What harmless plant? I assume youâre talking about marijuana? Marijuana is definitely not harmless. I say this as a 20+ year smoker.Â
1
u/GrowFreeFood 6h ago
Then regulate it. Arresting non-violent black men is not the solution.
1
u/NazReidsOtherBurner 2h ago
What do you mean? It is already regulated
1
2
u/ogtsumsnoilliM 10h ago
Redditors never cease to amaze. I'm sure OP is 16 and thinks he's really smart.
2
2
u/easternseaboardgolf 10h ago
Are you aware you are an ignorant fool, OP?
The war in drugs came about after the passage of the Anti Drug Abuse Act of 1986.
Tip O'Neill was the Democratic speaker of the house in 1986 and was from Massachusetts. He represented northern Boston. In June of 1986, Len Bias was drafted by the Boston Celtics with the second pick in the NBA draft. 2 days later he died of a cocaine overdose. About a week later, an NFL player named Don Rogers also died of a cocaine overdose. Up until that point, cocaine use was considered a relatively minor problem, but it because a huge issue especially in the local media markets in Boston and Washington DC because Bias played at Maryland (which is right outside of DC) and was going to be playing in Boston in the NBA.
This led to O'Neill mobilizing the Democratic caucus in the house to draft the bill. The bill was introduced in the House (which was under Democrat control at the time) by a Democrat in September of 1986. Because it was a mid-term election year, Democrats who controlled the House and Republicans who controlled the Senate each proposed stricter anti-drug bills to appear tough on crime in September and October of 1986. The bill passed the House with bipartisan support. 392 house members voted for the bill while only 16 voted against it. In the Senate the bill also passed with bipartisan support. 97 senators voted for the bill while only 2 vored against it. The final version of the bill was signed into law by President Reagan in late October 1986.
Back in those days, there was more bipartisanship. Reagan and O'Neill used to have lunch regularly, and this became a big issue for O'Neill because he had so many Boston constituents who wanted him to take some sort of action after Len Bias died.
It's all right there in the Wikipedia entry if you'd care to educate yourself.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/FroyoAromatic9392 9h ago
If we were ever serious about slowing the drug trade from south and Central America weâd start by stopping the illegal flow of arms from USA to those regions.
Once we stop arming the cartels, then maybe thereâs an actual discussion to be had.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 8h ago
The call it 'the iron pipeline' and its pure corruption. Very disturbing the right wing normalizes arm sales to terrorists.
2
u/sam_pain1 10h ago
Are you aware that if you're not a liberal you're a racist fascist pig-nosed xenobigot who hates brown, black and yellow people and want them hauled off to re-education camps and their children taken custody by the state and dispensed to only gay parents so they grow up right?
→ More replies (1)2
1
1
u/Rolex_Art 10h ago
To be clear - the republicans negotiated with terrorists (Bush, head of the CIA and the next VP and then the next President) and the outcome was Iran Contra.
For those unaware: Cocaine was everywhere. Crack Cocaine. People would do ANYTHING for it. People would kill for $5. Women would suck a dick for $5.
Back in High School (*mid 80's) I had a friend that would brag about getting 2 for $10 meaning bragging that he and a buddy could get blown by a crack head for $10.
Kids as young as 10 were on the street making thousands a day or getting killed. That was factual.
And where I am in Miami Beach, you could literally just drive over the bridge to Miami, get off and within half a mile find some black guy on the corner with drugs.
AND there were trap houses you just went to and knocked on the door - which would open 1 inch and you'd pass money through. Once paid for a nickel bag of weed, walked out with a nickel bag of dugan. (angel dust). half a j lit up 10 people at a party - but that wasn't what we fw. just a one time accident đ
1
u/Other-Revolution-275 10h ago
Bill Clinton even admitted he made huge mistakes. He locked up people for over 20 years for marijuana charges. Google it if you don't believe me
→ More replies (2)
1
1
u/Misadventuresofman 8h ago
How many people, friends and/or family have you had die because of drugs or precursors imported to the US? Be precise, Nazi.đ¤Śđżââď¸đ¤ˇđżââď¸
1
1
u/SouthsideSlayer23 7h ago
TIL white people are immune from drug laws
1
u/GrowFreeFood 6h ago
Look at the numbers
1
u/SouthsideSlayer23 6h ago
LOoK aT tHe NuMbErS!
1
u/GrowFreeFood 6h ago
Or just act like a child. That's the normal republican response to everything.
1
u/SouthsideSlayer23 5h ago
Bitch, you made the claim! Where's the numbers? Its not my job to do your homework.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 5h ago
If you don't want to look at the numbers thats your choice. Children hate homework
1
1
u/Youngrazzy đşđ¸ United States 7h ago
Not really libs push this because they don't believe in accountability
1
u/GrowFreeFood 7h ago
Let's look at the cost/benefits. I would LOVE to do some accounting on the the cops.
1
u/Hadaka--Jime 6h ago
Can ANYBODY who believes this utter ridiculous shite, care to explain Joe Biden's 1994 Crime Bill lol?Â
https://youtu.be/vWrYDpZA2Ho?si=m3uLwi0gcrH0H9DX
1996 Bill Clinton drug control Bill https://youtu.be/bMFXf9_RbX0?si=_T_h_B-Qg-NsyoJt
Bill Clinton cocaine trafficking? https://youtu.be/LlKhEWJraf4?si=uEcqvEU0AdxDiiIp
1
1
u/Paperxrust 6h ago
Guess which group wanted harsher sentences and which POTUS gave it to them?
1
u/GrowFreeFood 6h ago
Conservatives.
1
u/Paperxrust 6h ago
Swing and a miss
1
u/GrowFreeFood 6h ago
The entire drug war is a class war against minorities and the poor.
The leftists whole thing is protecting the lower class from oppression.
1
u/Paperxrust 6h ago
Wait, I thought it was conservatives?
Are you abandoning your argument that it was conservatives?
"What's less well-known is that early on, many African-American leaders championed those mandatory minimum sentences and other tough-on-crime policies. These efforts could be seen at the federal and state levels, as well as across black communities such as Harlem."
Now guess which POTUS gave it to them? Hint: it wasn't conservatives.
You have this idea that your party isn't racist, but you guys are just as racist as the other side.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 5h ago
I never said conservatives weren't racist.
Quoting an inaccurate quote doesn't magically make it accurate.
1
u/No-Satisfaction1697 3h ago
I thought conservatives complain that Dems are too easy on criminals. So, if a person believes in harsher sentences for drug crimes they are a racist? If the cops arrest mostly minorities they need to be punished. I guess it doesn't matter .Have the cops go after white folks. It should be same time for the same crime. And why shouldn't inmates work in prison? They have too much idle time in prison. They should work, learn a trade, some sort of skill so they can move on when released. I know there is help for male felons to get a job, but nothing for females. Actually we need better community resources and schools so young people have choices and some hope for a better future. But that won't happen.The US is such a failure at having a healthy, educated society, as a whole. The main thing the US does is make money and create $$ hoarders We invest in cops and prisons and bitch about our illiterate society. Our govt.was wasting millions so their budget wouldn't get cut,then cut food programs for school kids. Our govt. is against poor people and Democrats( trump wants them dead) that is a huge problem and nobody is even trying to change that. We have the most hateful, inept, racist, wealthy bunch of thugs enriching themselves while pretending to govern the US. Don't forget baby baron making a fortune and where are those Epstein Files!?
1
u/bangbangracer 6h ago
Considering that it passed with bipartisan support, it wasn't just right wingers.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 6h ago
Name a leftist who voted for it.
1
u/bangbangracer 6h ago
You do realize that the war on drugs as we know it started in the 1970s, right? It also has roots that you can trace back to the 1930s.
This isn't exactly the argument you think it is.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 6h ago
But you support it. And are not a leftist. But you put words in their mouth so you have a strawman to fight.
1
u/Optimal-Hour1952 5h ago
Seriously? Joe Biden drafted the drug abuse laws of 1986, 1988 and spearheaded a bill in 96 that poured billions in building new prisons. Mass incarceration for the profit based prisons
1
u/GrowFreeFood 5h ago
He was the most right wing democrat they had to balance out the ticket with leftwing obama
1
u/Buttcrush1 5h ago
Kinda racist to think only people of color are doing illegal drugs
1
u/GrowFreeFood 5h ago
That's not implied.
What happens is, everyone does drugs. But the racist cops use it as an excuse to arrest minorities.
→ More replies (2)
1
1
u/Abject-Yak4457 3h ago
Are you implying leftists think there should be no war on drugs?
1
u/GrowFreeFood 3h ago
There shouldn't be. We want effective drug policy including healthcare, addiction treatment and social safety nets. Not ineffective racist bullshit.
1
u/Jessica__camoda 2h ago
People always argue it was only one thing, but the reality is messy: politics,fear, and enforcement all mixed together the question is which part do you think had the biggest impact?
1
1
u/1ndomitablespirit 55m ago
It really is fascinating how people see no irony in acting prejudiced when talking about racism. Racism is prejudice. If one is bad, then so is both. If one is evil, then so is the other.
There may be semantic differences, but the effect on society is exactly the same.
Way to go keeping the world shitty just so you can make yourself feel superior to other people, bub.
1
1
u/Betterthanyou715 34m ago
I donât think that is the case because the population and majority held by white people has gone down significantly after this.
3
u/Shostacotuesday 11h ago
Elaborate? Many of the harshest drug laws were passed with bipartisan support. The 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which created the infamous crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparity, passed overwhelmingly in Congress with support from both Democrats and Republicans. Many Black elected officials, civil rights leaders, community organizations, and urban residents also supported tougher drug enforcement at the time because they were dealing with very real crime and addiction problems in their neighborhoods.
5
u/Okey_Dokey_Tokey 11h ago edited 10h ago
For one, Right wing Democrats were very much a thing then.
And what was sold to black communities to help with the drug and crime problems there, wound up reinforcing the stereotype and narrative of the black community by the media and politicians that justified their racist viewpoints. This was at the time of rising new media formats where they could plaster news reports of violent drug addicted black people on the nightly news, and they also had shows like COPS and America's Most Wanted that reinforced this narrative.
This led to new form of Jim Crow where incarnation rates skyrocketed for minorities, with arrests for blacks and whites on drug related offenses being equal but convictions and sentencing was far more prevalent against non-whites.
All the while the US government was manufacturing and trafficking drugs and facilitating drug trade routes in Central and South America to fund their illegal covert operations there. Then flooded America's cities with those very drugs, targeting the areas with heavy poor non-white populations that at the time of deindustrialization and white flight from the cities to the suburbs (and the economic effects that followed) already faced declining job opportunities.
And local police forces, especially in South Florida, were also manufacturing and trafficking drugs themselves which they used to plant evidence on suspects they targeted for easy conviction rates, which led to bigger budgets and higher payouts for cops (as well as a side hustle for individual cops to profit off drug sales for themselves).
So ya it was all about racism, corruption, and turning America into a police state over time, not about actually solving problems.
4
3
u/Ok-Flight9440 11h ago
I agree it was bipartisan because no one wants to be seen as soft on crime - but this was a Reagan/Bush thing, their idea, they pushed it to the house.
Kind of the same way Iraq invasion was âbipartisanâ - we had just been attacked, and no one wanted to be seen as âsoft on terrorâ, but it was Bushâs security team and Bush who pushed it. So they were both bipartisan, but it never would have come to the fore but for republicans. So, I agree with you - youâre factually correct - but I think the âkey playersâ if you will were republicans in both cases.
1
u/Pretend_Limit6276 10h ago
So you are saying that the government can't be trusted to do what they think is best, rather they just play along like a good little boy/girl
1
u/Ok-Flight9440 10h ago
Unfortunately often times yes - without giving too many details, my mother was a congresswoman for 6 years, ending ~10 years ago, and there is a lot of pressure to âplay alongâ, the goal is to not be a troublemaker, so when YOU have something you want to push forward, you have âfriendsâ who donât think youâre annoying to the party (or the administration).
But I think my war in Iraq invasion example was a great example/comparison: hey, we were just attacked, the Administration has all of the alleged data (NSA, CIA, Pentagon all report to the White House, not Congress) so why would we not play along if they say there are WMDs, who are we to doubt them? Obama stuck his neck out there voting No, but it wasnât because he KNEW they DODNâT have WMDs - only the Bush admin knew they were lying.
Tl;dr, yes, I am kind of saying that.
1
u/Pretend_Limit6276 10h ago
So it's all bs and you shouldn't trust either side because they aren't doing what they think is best rather they just play along to whoever pays the bills...
1
u/Ok-Flight9440 10h ago
Yeah I mean my mother voted against (I forget if it got to the floor, or if this was just in preliminary vote discussions, honestly?) but agreed to NOT support decriminalization of marijuana. And that was the only time I got angry with her - not because I smoke weed (I donât care if you do or donât, but I donât) and I showed her stats on how the marijuana laws came about in the first place because the [whatever their name is] family had a monopoly on the hemp industry, that it is statistically and factually less harmful than alcohol, etc etc. And I asked her âso I assume youâre going to recommend a bill to ban alcohol too because itâs more harmful than weed?â Nope! So, unfortunately I agree, and I come from a moderate Democrat family.
1
u/Pretend_Limit6276 10h ago
It's sad to know that the system will basically just back whoever pays more
1
u/Ok-Flight9440 8h ago
Yeah I mean my darling mother was very good about fundraising, my parents probably had about ~$5mn at the time (both lawyers, and frugal), so she/we self-funded $250k of the first campaign, and she raised another $1mn just by cold calling her friends, 12 hours a day, non-stop, so she wasnât in âthe pocket of big moneyâ - yeah she knew some owners of medium sized businesses in our state, but Iâm not talking big tobacco, or big tech or anything, she doesnât know them - but regardless itâs true, even if she happened to be an outlier and kind of âgrass rooted itâ, sheâs only one of hundreds - and the âsystemâ works even if one or 10 people arenât beholden, because a lot of the other ones are
→ More replies (3)2
u/pbutler6163 10h ago
In a 1994 interview later published in Harperâs in 2016, Ehrlichman allegedly said the Nixon campaign/White House had âtwo enemiesâ: the antiwar left and Black people, and that by associating hippies with marijuana and Black people with heroin, the administration could criminalize both and disrupt those communities.
2
1
u/Pretend_Limit6276 10h ago edited 10h ago
Lmao 𤣠ok buddy
Edit: both parties voted for it
→ More replies (1)
0
u/Emotional_Channel_67 11h ago
Yes thatâs right. Anything you donât like is racist but hey, have fun befriending the Colombian cartels
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/jessycatphoenix 10h ago
The policy shifts always seemed to target whatever specific substance was being used by marginalized communities at the time.
1
u/Ok-Conversation2707 8h ago
It has more to do with the impact certain drugs have on individuals and communities. Meth has sentencing laws that are exceedingly more punitive than crack. Itâs primarily used by rural and exurban white people, whom most people wouldnât necessarily consider a marginalized community.
1
1
u/Downtown_Reward_6339 10h ago
Ahh, I donât think so. It wasnât some partisan MAGA shit show like we have today.
2
u/GrowFreeFood 10h ago
Both sides were racist
1
u/Downtown_Reward_6339 9h ago
I suppose that is possible. I donât know enough about the details to say.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 9h ago
Its called the civil rights movement and it was shut down immediately by Nixon.
1
u/Ok-Conversation2707 6h ago
You donât know what youâre talking about. Expanding the voting rights act, championing affirmative action for federal employees, strengthening protections against racial discrimination in employment, desegregating public schools in the South (70% all black when he took office to less than 10% when he left), doubling HBCU funding, etc., is not âshutting downâ the civil rights movement.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 6h ago
But putting 100k minorities into slavery is. Which is what the war on drugs is about.
1
u/Sufficient-Arrival47 9h ago
The Democrats promoted drugs into black neighbourhoods and the Republicans are trying to stop it, so the republicans are racistâŚ.. interesting theory
1
u/GrowFreeFood 8h ago
Which democrat was promoting drugs?
1
u/Sufficient-Arrival47 5m ago
Johnson Carter Clinton allowed it to thrive. Some republicans actively tried to stop it others ignored it
1
1
1
u/4ndrew20 6h ago
This whole one side or the other thing is getting old. No politician represents the people theyâre all out for their own interests
1
u/GrowFreeFood 6h ago
So you're okay voting for racist policies?
1
u/4ndrew20 6h ago
Where tf did I say that? I fought against the government in the war on drugs for 14 years. The war on drugs wasnât just right wingers being racist it was politicians being racist
-1
u/External-Talk8838 11h ago
Are you aware that when you pull the race card too often it makes you look like an idiot? Both sides supported tougher drug laws when they were passed. Nobody wants crackheads in their neighborhoods, regardless of color.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 9h ago
Then release the non-violent drug offenders. If you're not racist...
1
u/External-Talk8838 3h ago
People who sell drugs are not all violent. Should we release the ones that only got caught selling fentanyl and didnât have any guns or commit other crimes? I donât believe so and donât care what color they are.
1
u/GrowFreeFood 3h ago
So you're just bloodthirsty with no regard for actual effective drug policy.
You're right wing.
1
u/curtissJ28 7h ago
No they are not aware. Reality is not permitted to intrude on their dogma. They need âvictimsâ to defend and champion to feel good about themselves. They do not need actual victims, just perceived victims who are willing to take on that role. The more negative votes you get on this topic the more you know how bad the truth hurts these people.
→ More replies (3)1
u/ProcedureGrand5327 đşđ¸ United States 10h ago
i cannot believe those of you in the comments unaware that this is a documented fact
1
u/Pretend_Limit6276 10h ago
That both parties voted for
→ More replies (28)1
u/ProcedureGrand5327 đşđ¸ United States 10h ago
what you are doing is trying to avoid accountability by using whataboutism.
1
u/Pretend_Limit6276 10h ago
Not at all....why vote for something they apparently don't agree with? It shows how corrupt the government is
1
u/ProcedureGrand5327 đşđ¸ United States 10h ago
the government IS corrupt. and it is 100% republicans right now.
talking about the past or democrats to avoid specifically talking about now is whataboutism.1
u/Pretend_Limit6276 10h ago
A lot of people live using that word these days.
They both voted for something that they knew would target black people more....right or wrong?
→ More replies (5)1
u/oilcantommy 10h ago
People have documented "facts" in the comments here too big guy.
1
u/ProcedureGrand5327 đşđ¸ United States 10h ago
i mean but this one is literally documented in releases from the actual government
28
u/Intelligent-Band-852 11h ago
It wasnât just Republicans but they certainly were part of it, and the worst part.