3 ms·
> If Ehrlichman did say that (as you pointed out, even that is disputed) it's quite absurd. The prohibition of drugs started decades before the Vietnam War or t
by wxnx 6y ago
> If Ehrlichman did say that (as you pointed out, even that is disputed) it's quite absurd. The prohibition of drugs started decades before the Vietnam War or the Civil Rights movement, and it was an international effort, in response to real dangers. It's not tenable to argue that it was all about control, nor that Nixon's motives (if those were his motives) were even relevant to the passage of the CSA with only 6 opposing votes in Congress.
Nominally, perhaps. But nobody can argue against the fact that widespread enforcement efforts stepped up drastically in the late 60s and 70s, with drugs being a particular focus after Nixon declared war on them explicitly. Just look at any chart documenting the incarceration rates [1], not to mention the literal creation of agency with (in modern times) a multi-billion dollar budget dedicated exclusively to drug enforcement.
[1] https://www.nap.edu/read/18613/chapter/4#35 https://www.nap.edu/read/18613/chapter/4#35 figures 2-1 and 2-6
- leereeves 6y ago> But nobody can argue against the fact that widespread enforcement efforts stepped up drastically in the late 60s and 70s I can certainly argue against that claim, using your source. According to figure 2-1, the increase in incarceration rates clearly starts in 1974, after Nixon left office, and was increasing most quickly in the 80s and 90s. From 1969 to 1974, while Nixon was in office, the incarceration rate was actually lower than any time since the 1920s. At least, that's what your source says. I can't vouch for its accuracy.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- leereeves 6y agoThe US collectively (cite, state, and federal) spends over $100B per year on policing. The DEA and its $3B budget isn't driving the incarceration rates.