5 ms·

The big question is why drugs are illegal at all? Drugs are a multi trillion dollar business. 100's of billions of dollars turning the wheels of the shadow eco

The big question is why drugs are illegal at all? Drugs are a multi trillion dollar business. 100's of billions of dollars turning the wheels of the shadow economy every day. Who stands to lose all that money if drugs were legalized? Who is involved in drug business? think of all of the players in the chain.. We know examples of developed countries where drugs are legalized and everyone did not become a junkie over night, or next week, or next year. Drug money fuels a lot of things in this world, entire countries are built and destroyed using drug money, new political systems are built and presidents elected using drug money. It is convenient "invisible" hand that makes a lot of things happen in this world. Drug problem is not about me or you becoming a junkie. Its about money, a lot of money, its about economical and political power that comes with it. The day when drugs are legalized the convenient way to make lots of money out of "thin air" all of the sudden would be gone... Hearings on the CIA and Drug Trafficking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Km0Z2XmzBDw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Km0Z2XmzBDw John Kerry committee: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvFr5K8zJRA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvFr5K8zJRA Police Officer Mike Ruppert (dead now, shot in the head 2 years ago) Confronts CIA Director John Deutch on Drug Trafficking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UT5MY3C86bk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UT5MY3C86bk

madaxe_again 10y ago
Without the drug economy, it's not clear how the CIA and DEA would remain profitable enterprises, which is what fundamentally matters to them - so until it becomes illegal for the CIA to produce and import drugs, don't expect anything to change. The incentives to maintain the status quo are just too big. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_drug_trafficking https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_drug_traf...
- armitron 10y ago
  This, so much this. During conversations in everyday life, I can not believe how many (well-educated) people I meet that are completely ignorant of the humongous elephant in the room even when they've been caught multiple times with their hand in the suitcases full of money that the CIA likes to throw around their potential "customers" like they're candy. Even if black budgets that are kept off the books are a small slice of the pie, all the other colossal bureaucracies (DEA, prison-industrial complex) more than make up for it.
  - liminangel 10y ago
    we may be fellow travelers i have noticed you have perceived things others have not, even though they have seen them with their eyes, they have not seen them with their mind how would you like to connect?
sfifs 10y ago
Past experiences with widespread drug availability and addiction suggest social cohesion is lost as people become dependent on the next fix. Look up the history of opium war in China or for more recent experiences, drug problems in Punjab India or the drug dependency in the Middle East .
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- armitron 10y ago
  This is far from an objective point of view and extremely misleading. Opium war in china had nothing to do with social cohesion, but trade and geopolitics. Same for the war in Afghanistan. You don't need to go that far in order to come up with dubious examples (that few are familiar with) however. The early 1900s in the good old USA, where morphine and later heroin were sold over the counter should provide plenty of evidence that you're spewing garbage.
- adrusi 10y ago
  In the Opium Wars, opium was illegal. It wasn't much of a risk to smokers, but it drove the cost up and drove the trade underground. Social cohesion is lost when addicts can't go through socially acceptable avennues to get the next fix they're dependent on. If you can just pick up your fix from the corner store like alcoholics can, then you won't expect social cohesion to be affected any more than it is by alcoholics, especially since many of the people who might become addicts after legalization were likely to become alcoholics anyway.
55555 10y ago
I recommend people read The Politics of Heroin and A Legacy of Ashes. Both great books. Basically, The US makes drugs illegal and then enforces embargoes against other countries so they comply. Drugs have a very inelastic demand so this doesn't actually stop people from using them, but it DOES make drugs an extremely profitable enterprise. Keeping drugs illegal has at least one massive 'benefit' -- if law enforcement grants anyone immunity and gives them permission to deal in drugs, they are essentially immediately granted billions of dollars. It's really not hard to grow poppies or cook meth or truck packages between cities. Nothing about that is intellectually difficult. Consider the following: If the head of the CIA told you that you had total immunity and could deal in drugs all you wanted, how much money could you make? The answer, for any idiot in the world, is literally billions of dollars per year within just a few years. This becomes enormously useful when we want to implement regime change around the world or otherwise provide funding to certain elements without directly giving them money. Someone comes to the CIA and says they want to overthrow the government of Nicaragua but don't have enough money? Just let them deal drugs. [Contras] Someone comes to the CIA and says they want to help fight against the soviets in Afghanistan but don't have enough money? Just let them deal drugs. [Osama bin Laden, Hekmatyar, various other Afghan groups, and Pakistan's ISI] Someone comes to the CIA and says they want to fight against communist-backed forces in Laos but don't have enough money? Just let them deal drugs. They run out of adult soldiers and have to start using children? That's fine, give them the go-ahead. [Vang Pao] The illegality of drugs is integral to our foreign policy strategy. To my understanding, until about a hundred years ago, we didn't mess with other countries. Remember our policy of "isolationism"? It's hard to, these days, but that was once a core part of our national identity. But since the end of WWII, the US has overthrown a sovereign foreign government, attempted to overthrow them, or attempted to overthrow them through support to a third-party, almost once per year. Literally about 50 times since then. Our intervention with some countries is absolutely brutal. We installed the Iraqi governments both immediately before and after Saddam's. You think Iran hates us because of our freedom? I think they hate us because we refuse to respect theirs. Understand that the OSS/CIA was created because we had no idea what was going on during WWII. Prior to WII, we did not have a foreign intelligence agency. During WWII, we did, but it was an Intelligence agency, not a paramilitary or interventionist organization. Then everything went to crap and now we are the most hated country in the entire world. Drugs let us weaken and overthrow regimes without doing anything. Suddenly, _inaction_ is sufficient. Just don't arrest that guy or any of his friends, and don't investigate their activities.

madaxe_again 10y ago

Without the drug economy, it's not clear how the CIA and DEA would remain profitable enterprises, which is what fundamentally matters to them - so until it becomes illegal for the CIA to produce and import drugs, don't expect anything to change. The incentives to maintain the status quo are just too big. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_drug_trafficking https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_drug_traf...

armitron 10y ago
This, so much this. During conversations in everyday life, I can not believe how many (well-educated) people I meet that are completely ignorant of the humongous elephant in the room even when they've been caught multiple times with their hand in the suitcases full of money that the CIA likes to throw around their potential "customers" like they're candy. Even if black budgets that are kept off the books are a small slice of the pie, all the other colossal bureaucracies (DEA, prison-industrial complex) more than make up for it.
- liminangel 10y ago
  we may be fellow travelers i have noticed you have perceived things others have not, even though they have seen them with their eyes, they have not seen them with their mind how would you like to connect?

sfifs 10y ago

Past experiences with widespread drug availability and addiction suggest social cohesion is lost as people become dependent on the next fix. Look up the history of opium war in China or for more recent experiences, drug problems in Punjab India or the drug dependency in the Middle East .

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
armitron 10y ago
This is far from an objective point of view and extremely misleading. Opium war in china had nothing to do with social cohesion, but trade and geopolitics. Same for the war in Afghanistan. You don't need to go that far in order to come up with dubious examples (that few are familiar with) however. The early 1900s in the good old USA, where morphine and later heroin were sold over the counter should provide plenty of evidence that you're spewing garbage.
adrusi 10y ago
In the Opium Wars, opium was illegal. It wasn't much of a risk to smokers, but it drove the cost up and drove the trade underground. Social cohesion is lost when addicts can't go through socially acceptable avennues to get the next fix they're dependent on. If you can just pick up your fix from the corner store like alcoholics can, then you won't expect social cohesion to be affected any more than it is by alcoholics, especially since many of the people who might become addicts after legalization were likely to become alcoholics anyway.

55555 10y ago

I recommend people read The Politics of Heroin and A Legacy of Ashes. Both great books. Basically, The US makes drugs illegal and then enforces embargoes against other countries so they comply. Drugs have a very inelastic demand so this doesn't actually stop people from using them, but it DOES make drugs an extremely profitable enterprise. Keeping drugs illegal has at least one massive 'benefit' -- if law enforcement grants anyone immunity and gives them permission to deal in drugs, they are essentially immediately granted billions of dollars. It's really not hard to grow poppies or cook meth or truck packages between cities. Nothing about that is intellectually difficult. Consider the following: If the head of the CIA told you that you had total immunity and could deal in drugs all you wanted, how much money could you make? The answer, for any idiot in the world, is literally billions of dollars per year within just a few years. This becomes enormously useful when we want to implement regime change around the world or otherwise provide funding to certain elements without directly giving them money. Someone comes to the CIA and says they want to overthrow the government of Nicaragua but don't have enough money? Just let them deal drugs. [Contras] Someone comes to the CIA and says they want to help fight against the soviets in Afghanistan but don't have enough money? Just let them deal drugs. [Osama bin Laden, Hekmatyar, various other Afghan groups, and Pakistan's ISI] Someone comes to the CIA and says they want to fight against communist-backed forces in Laos but don't have enough money? Just let them deal drugs. They run out of adult soldiers and have to start using children? That's fine, give them the go-ahead. [Vang Pao] The illegality of drugs is integral to our foreign policy strategy. To my understanding, until about a hundred years ago, we didn't mess with other countries. Remember our policy of "isolationism"? It's hard to, these days, but that was once a core part of our national identity. But since the end of WWII, the US has overthrown a sovereign foreign government, attempted to overthrow them, or attempted to overthrow them through support to a third-party, almost once per year. Literally about 50 times since then. Our intervention with some countries is absolutely brutal. We installed the Iraqi governments both immediately before and after Saddam's. You think Iran hates us because of our freedom? I think they hate us because we refuse to respect theirs. Understand that the OSS/CIA was created because we had no idea what was going on during WWII. Prior to WII, we did not have a foreign intelligence agency. During WWII, we did, but it was an Intelligence agency, not a paramilitary or interventionist organization. Then everything went to crap and now we are the most hated country in the entire world. Drugs let us weaken and overthrow regimes without doing anything. Suddenly, _inaction_ is sufficient. Just don't arrest that guy or any of his friends, and don't investigate their activities.