5 ms·

I feel like Ehrlichman admitting the war on drugs was just a pretext for marginalizing Blacks and progressives should have been the end of it. But no, and that'

I feel like Ehrlichman admitting the war on drugs was just a pretext for marginalizing Blacks and progressives should have been the end of it. But no, and that's already 25 years ago: In a 1994 interview published in Harper's Magazine, Nixon adviser John Ehrlichman suggested racial animus was among the motives shaping the drug war. "We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the [Vietnam] War or Black," Ehrlichman said. "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."

chrischen 5y ago
I think the obvious answer often overlooked is that a lot of people are simply still totally fine marginalizing Blacks, Latinos, progressives, and other minorities.
- duped 5y ago
  Not just "fine" with it, it's the current driving force behind the Republican Party.
  - l33t2328 5y ago
    I don’t think that’s true in the slightest.
    - Supermancho 5y ago
      You have to add the bottom 60% or "working poor" to make it true enough.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- csours 5y ago
  And a lot more people are fine with "Law and Order" without really thinking about what that means - among other things it means 'I don't want to see or deal with other people's problems'. It's a really easy position to have until other people's problems become your problems, or your family's problems and they can't get out of a bad situation.
  - x86_64Ubuntu 5y ago
    They know exactly what is meant by Law and Order, and who that entails the state force apparatus harassing.
    - muttled 5y ago
      I think you're possibly ascribing more awareness to a lot of people than they actually have. I'm not sure the thought goes much past wanting to feel safe against something that they were taught was evil early on and never questioned.
damagednoob 5y ago
For me, the slogan in the 90s that I remember was 'think of the children'[1]. People are so often swayed on emotion and the thinking of 'well if we just save one child, it would have been worth it', ignoring all the opportunity costs. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMpiL-JU4jM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMpiL-JU4jM [1999]
handmodel 5y ago
It seems weird to say that is the reason In most states (including CA) the percent of minorities in jail for weapons offenses is as disproportionate to the population as drug offenses. And today in states like CA - 50% more people are in jail for weapons charges than drug charges. Is the reason that drug laws/weapons laws exist to disenfranchise people? Or is a true problem in society that in theory would be good to address - and powerful people are indifferent to people who end up in jail.
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  Drugs can literally rewire your brain so that you feel an overriding urge to go out and find them. So a lot of low level drug offenders(mere possession) I feel sorry for. What's the argument for weapons violations? If weapons laws are designed to disenfranchise people, then shouldn't Europe have way more disenfranchisement than Americans?
  - handmodel 5y ago
    I'm not saying weapons charges were meant to disenfranchise people. I am saying the conclusion that drug charges were put in place to disenfranchise people is a bit silly. There were other reasons (even if they were panic reasons) to ban drugs.
everdrive 5y ago
So many people have cried wolf about the evils of either the government, or previous generations that this quote genuinely shocked me. I too would think that something like this would and should have more weight.
ddlatham 5y ago
It's worth noting that quote was actually first published 5 years ago, and its veracity is in dispute. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ehrlichman#Drug_war_quote https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ehrlichman#Drug_war_quote I do believe the War on Drugs has been a terrible policy, doing disproportionate harm to Blacks and other marginalized people. I'm not convinced that was the intent by most of those who supported its creation and sustained it.

chrischen 5y ago

I think the obvious answer often overlooked is that a lot of people are simply still totally fine marginalizing Blacks, Latinos, progressives, and other minorities.

duped 5y ago
Not just "fine" with it, it's the current driving force behind the Republican Party.
- l33t2328 5y ago
  I don’t think that’s true in the slightest.
  - Supermancho 5y ago
    You have to add the bottom 60% or "working poor" to make it true enough.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
csours 5y ago
And a lot more people are fine with "Law and Order" without really thinking about what that means - among other things it means 'I don't want to see or deal with other people's problems'. It's a really easy position to have until other people's problems become your problems, or your family's problems and they can't get out of a bad situation.
- x86_64Ubuntu 5y ago
  They know exactly what is meant by Law and Order, and who that entails the state force apparatus harassing.
  - muttled 5y ago
    I think you're possibly ascribing more awareness to a lot of people than they actually have. I'm not sure the thought goes much past wanting to feel safe against something that they were taught was evil early on and never questioned.

damagednoob 5y ago

For me, the slogan in the 90s that I remember was 'think of the children'[1]. People are so often swayed on emotion and the thinking of 'well if we just save one child, it would have been worth it', ignoring all the opportunity costs. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMpiL-JU4jM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMpiL-JU4jM [1999]

handmodel 5y ago

It seems weird to say that is the reason In most states (including CA) the percent of minorities in jail for weapons offenses is as disproportionate to the population as drug offenses. And today in states like CA - 50% more people are in jail for weapons charges than drug charges. Is the reason that drug laws/weapons laws exist to disenfranchise people? Or is a true problem in society that in theory would be good to address - and powerful people are indifferent to people who end up in jail.

oh_sigh 5y ago
Drugs can literally rewire your brain so that you feel an overriding urge to go out and find them. So a lot of low level drug offenders(mere possession) I feel sorry for. What's the argument for weapons violations? If weapons laws are designed to disenfranchise people, then shouldn't Europe have way more disenfranchisement than Americans?
- handmodel 5y ago
  I'm not saying weapons charges were meant to disenfranchise people. I am saying the conclusion that drug charges were put in place to disenfranchise people is a bit silly. There were other reasons (even if they were panic reasons) to ban drugs.

everdrive 5y ago

So many people have cried wolf about the evils of either the government, or previous generations that this quote genuinely shocked me. I too would think that something like this would and should have more weight.

ddlatham 5y ago

It's worth noting that quote was actually first published 5 years ago, and its veracity is in dispute. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ehrlichman#Drug_war_quote https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ehrlichman#Drug_war_quote I do believe the War on Drugs has been a terrible policy, doing disproportionate harm to Blacks and other marginalized people. I'm not convinced that was the intent by most of those who supported its creation and sustained it.