7 ms·

Sure, because everything in the US is about racism these days. The world is very simple and easy to deal with when every problem is explained by one reason. S

Sure, because everything in the US is about racism these days. The world is very simple and easy to deal with when every problem is explained by one reason. Some people believe the reason for everything bad is racism. Others believe it is Jews secretly holding power. Thirds blame secret Martian masters directly controlling president heads. All of them have reasonable and consistent explanations of the world with their model. These people are called conspiracy theorists. Also, people reducing the world to such a simple model are always wrong. We have seen it many times throughout history. Often their mistakes led to grave consequences.

singhrac 6y ago
I'm afraid I don't understand your comment. I think you're trying to say that it wasn't just racism that caused the war on drugs (and in particular on marijuana). But I do think the quote in the parent comment makes it pretty clear that the Nixon administration engineered the war on drugs in order to incarcerate black people (for political power, not necessarily racism, though the two are very difficult to divide here). "Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did." The linked article quotes the head of the proto-DEA making an extremely racist comment showing the reasons why he attacked marijuana. I think the specific targeting of drugs used by the black community (marijuana and crack were and are significantly more prosecuted than opioids and heroin) gives this weight above a conspiracy theory.
- lightgreen 6y ago
  If it was black who were incarcerated the most because of drug laws, it doesn’t make it racist. Moreover, even if you know upfront that black people will be incarcerated the most because of drug laws, it doesn’t make that war racist. (Moreover the quote in the linked article clearly states that hippies were also the target of the war on drugs, which, even if the quotes are correct and not taken out of context etc., make this war at least not fully racist.) If we of course use the dictionary definition of the word racism, not extremely wide interpretation used today. Some people were racists of course. But most people just thought harsher law on drugs would make communities safer. And most government actors just wanted more power regardless of who is going to get in jail. It is much much more complicated issue than (quoting the comment I replied to) “Straight facts, it was all about the racism”.
  - lukeramsden 6y ago
    Cannabis was named "marijuana" by American newspapers for the express purpose of associating it with Mexican immigrants. The criminalisation of cannabis was started by racism, and has been solely for the purpose of racism ever since. How else can you explain demonising a mostly harmless plant without any evidence?
    - h_anna_h 6y ago
      They call it both cannabis and marijuana here too and yet it is not associated with blacks nor mexicans. Countries without a significant black or latin american population have the same laws, I think that you have an american-centric view regarding this topic.
      - boomboomsubban 6y ago
        What they said is a well documented part of American history, so it is an American centric view but also true. If you're curious, read about Harry Anslinger for a start. >Countries without a significant black or latin american population have the same laws There are international laws stating marijuana should be legal for medicinal use only, which the US is largely responsible for. Countries that don't want to piss off the US have little choice.
      - SamoyedFurFluff 6y ago
        But the topic is about drug laws in America. America had centuries of race-based slavery, significant political fighting and wars based on protecting race-based enslavement, and after said enslavement was banned a further generation(or two) of institutionalized separation of services based on race. In America there are people alive who at one point were unable to participate in the democratic political system because of their race. America is unique in that their culture has only fairly recently outlawed explicitly, institutionally treating people of other races as lesser than whites, as a result of longstanding cultural traditions and norms to justify centuries of have race-based slavery. (The only way you can have massive slavery of a specific race of people in a society and have that society not view it as a complete aberration is if they somehow normalize and justify it to themselves.) In this context of a country has had, until very recently, explicitly government sanctioned discrimination on the bases of race, it makes sense that even though explicit discrimination is no longer allowed laws may still be passed that are designed to implicitly be government sanctioned discrimination on the basis of race.
KDJohnBrown 6y ago
Racism is so inherent in US legislation that it was enshrined by our founding fathers in Article 1, Section 2 of the constitution where African American slaves were reduced to 3/5th citizenship rights[1]. No need for conspiracy theories when the facts are so readily available. If you really think that America’s marijuana prohibition had nothing to do with racism, then digest Harry Anslinger’s Wikipedia page[2]. Anslinger was an opportunist lawman who made a name for himself during Prohibition and latched onto America’s racist fears of blacks and latinos to cement his legacy and influence. Ironically his early stance was that prohibiting marijuana was absurd, until alcohol was legalized and he neeeded a new way to grasp onto relevancy. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_Compromise?wprov=sfti1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_Compromise?wprov=... 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_J._Anslinger?wprov=sfti1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_J._Anslinger?wprov=sfti1
- jacob2484 6y ago
  You use is (current tense) and cite a section that was removed over 150 years ago. It IS not in the US legislation anymore. US has a racist history, but cite any laws today that are in fact racist. Most recently, California Democracts tried to put in a clearly racist law (Prop 16), but voters thankfully rejected it.
  - KDJohnBrown 6y ago
    So, did you read my second example and research Harry Ansliger? Cannabis laws were specifically marketed to stoke the fears of white americans.
    - happyconcepts 6y ago
      Reefer Madness
- jki275 6y ago
  African slaves were not citizens and had no rights. There were no “African Americans” prior to the fourteenth amendment. The 3/5 compromise had nothing to do with citizenship rights. It had to do with reducing the representation of the wealthy slave owners of the South in congress with the aim of eventually forcing the end of slavery.
LocalH 6y ago
History shows that the drug war in the US was racially motivated from the very beginning.

singhrac 6y ago

I'm afraid I don't understand your comment. I think you're trying to say that it wasn't just racism that caused the war on drugs (and in particular on marijuana). But I do think the quote in the parent comment makes it pretty clear that the Nixon administration engineered the war on drugs in order to incarcerate black people (for political power, not necessarily racism, though the two are very difficult to divide here). "Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did." The linked article quotes the head of the proto-DEA making an extremely racist comment showing the reasons why he attacked marijuana. I think the specific targeting of drugs used by the black community (marijuana and crack were and are significantly more prosecuted than opioids and heroin) gives this weight above a conspiracy theory.

lightgreen 6y ago
If it was black who were incarcerated the most because of drug laws, it doesn’t make it racist. Moreover, even if you know upfront that black people will be incarcerated the most because of drug laws, it doesn’t make that war racist. (Moreover the quote in the linked article clearly states that hippies were also the target of the war on drugs, which, even if the quotes are correct and not taken out of context etc., make this war at least not fully racist.) If we of course use the dictionary definition of the word racism, not extremely wide interpretation used today. Some people were racists of course. But most people just thought harsher law on drugs would make communities safer. And most government actors just wanted more power regardless of who is going to get in jail. It is much much more complicated issue than (quoting the comment I replied to) “Straight facts, it was all about the racism”.
- lukeramsden 6y ago
  Cannabis was named "marijuana" by American newspapers for the express purpose of associating it with Mexican immigrants. The criminalisation of cannabis was started by racism, and has been solely for the purpose of racism ever since. How else can you explain demonising a mostly harmless plant without any evidence?
  - h_anna_h 6y ago
    They call it both cannabis and marijuana here too and yet it is not associated with blacks nor mexicans. Countries without a significant black or latin american population have the same laws, I think that you have an american-centric view regarding this topic.
    - boomboomsubban 6y ago
      What they said is a well documented part of American history, so it is an American centric view but also true. If you're curious, read about Harry Anslinger for a start. >Countries without a significant black or latin american population have the same laws There are international laws stating marijuana should be legal for medicinal use only, which the US is largely responsible for. Countries that don't want to piss off the US have little choice.
    - SamoyedFurFluff 6y ago
      But the topic is about drug laws in America. America had centuries of race-based slavery, significant political fighting and wars based on protecting race-based enslavement, and after said enslavement was banned a further generation(or two) of institutionalized separation of services based on race. In America there are people alive who at one point were unable to participate in the democratic political system because of their race. America is unique in that their culture has only fairly recently outlawed explicitly, institutionally treating people of other races as lesser than whites, as a result of longstanding cultural traditions and norms to justify centuries of have race-based slavery. (The only way you can have massive slavery of a specific race of people in a society and have that society not view it as a complete aberration is if they somehow normalize and justify it to themselves.) In this context of a country has had, until very recently, explicitly government sanctioned discrimination on the bases of race, it makes sense that even though explicit discrimination is no longer allowed laws may still be passed that are designed to implicitly be government sanctioned discrimination on the basis of race.

KDJohnBrown 6y ago

Racism is so inherent in US legislation that it was enshrined by our founding fathers in Article 1, Section 2 of the constitution where African American slaves were reduced to 3/5th citizenship rights[1]. No need for conspiracy theories when the facts are so readily available. If you really think that America’s marijuana prohibition had nothing to do with racism, then digest Harry Anslinger’s Wikipedia page[2]. Anslinger was an opportunist lawman who made a name for himself during Prohibition and latched onto America’s racist fears of blacks and latinos to cement his legacy and influence. Ironically his early stance was that prohibiting marijuana was absurd, until alcohol was legalized and he neeeded a new way to grasp onto relevancy. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_Compromise?wprov=sfti1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_Compromise?wprov=... 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_J._Anslinger?wprov=sfti1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_J._Anslinger?wprov=sfti1

jacob2484 6y ago
You use is (current tense) and cite a section that was removed over 150 years ago. It IS not in the US legislation anymore. US has a racist history, but cite any laws today that are in fact racist. Most recently, California Democracts tried to put in a clearly racist law (Prop 16), but voters thankfully rejected it.
- KDJohnBrown 6y ago
  So, did you read my second example and research Harry Ansliger? Cannabis laws were specifically marketed to stoke the fears of white americans.
  - happyconcepts 6y ago
    Reefer Madness
jki275 6y ago
African slaves were not citizens and had no rights. There were no “African Americans” prior to the fourteenth amendment. The 3/5 compromise had nothing to do with citizenship rights. It had to do with reducing the representation of the wealthy slave owners of the South in congress with the aim of eventually forcing the end of slavery.

LocalH 6y ago

History shows that the drug war in the US was racially motivated from the very beginning.