3 ms·

You could also say that Silk Road was an E-commerce business that might’ve been used to sell drugs, who knows!

x86x87 4y ago
Not one to defend Silk Road, but pause and think about it for a second: it enabled you to buy something deemed illegal by the authorities (drugs) in a safe manner and the products bought were higher quality than what you could buy on the street. Why was it a problem to begin with and why where significant resources used to shut it down? (Again, not defending it, and the founder was probably a scumbag, I am just asking the question) People were breaking stupid laws from the 70s established after mass hysteria around drugs by one of the scummies US president ever. More than that, the tax man was not getting its cut. Now to put things in perspective let's compare to some things US agencies have done in the past: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_drug_trafficking https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_drug_traf...
- FireBeyond 4y ago
  > it enabled you to buy something deemed illegal by the authorities (drugs) in a safe manner and the products bought were higher quality than what you could buy on the street. Why was it a problem to begin with and why where significant resources used to shut it down? (Again, not defending it, and the founder was probably a scumbag, I am just asking the question) Because there was all sorts of white washing like this. "It's drugs, but safer, and without the violence and crime!" If you think that violence, crime are magically gone because of Silk Road, you'd be considered ignorant or naive. Production still happens in the same places, the poverty, corruption and violence-stricken areas. It's just invisible to you now, because you don't have to worry about your dealer stealing from you, getting mugged, or buying from an unknown source, or being arrested. All those people in Mexican and Colombian villages subject to the tyranny of the cartels... oh well. All good then, I suppose.
  - npc54321 4y ago
    > All those people in Mexican and Colombian villages subject Just go into the frigging villages and arrest the cartel leaders oh wait they are in cohort with the governments of those countries...
    - FireBeyond 4y ago
      Sure. I absolutely agree. But let's not pretend that Silk Road is some panacea saying "Hey, violence-free drugs!" I tend to be on the legalization side of the spectrum but the notion of Silk Road as some humanity-improving place, versus a method of making Ross rich is definitely in need of citation.
  - x86x87 4y ago
    my claim was that buying the drugs was safer (my words: in a safe manner). Everything else in the "pipeline" being equal if one part of it becomes safer the whole thing is safer. Want to eliminate production that happens in places with poverty/corruption/violence? Just make them legal. Seriously. Offer rehabilitation instead of jail. Other countries have done this and it work. People talk a big game when it comes to "our freedoms" but real freedom is to be able to do whatever you want as long as you don't impact your neighbor/other.
    - FireBeyond 4y ago
      I tend to agree on legalization and rehabilitation, more than you know. I just don't think Silk Road (and its brethren) were a means to that end. It just hides a lot of the issue.
  - bruiseralmighty 4y ago
    This is hyperopic viewpoint. Because it would only remove the violence in our neighborhood and not the violence 1000s of miles away. This plan is not worth pursuing. We can grant everything you said that the Silk Road may have only reduced violence in our immediate vicinity. That is still a huge success that should have been continued. Its not a failure for only reducing local violence. That local win could have grown more globalized acceptance; reducing the niche cartels fill. Even if it had merely encouraged greater local production of illegal drugs that alone could have reduced cartel violence in Mexico.

Not one to defend Silk Road, but pause and think about it for a second: it enabled you to buy something deemed illegal by the authorities (drugs) in a safe manner and the products bought were higher quality than what you could buy on the street. Why was it a problem to begin with and why where significant resources used to shut it down? (Again, not defending it, and the founder was probably a scumbag, I am just asking the question) People were breaking stupid laws from the 70s established after mass hysteria around drugs by one of the scummies US president ever. More than that, the tax man was not getting its cut. Now to put things in perspective let's compare to some things US agencies have done in the past: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_drug_trafficking https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_drug_traf...

FireBeyond 4y ago
> it enabled you to buy something deemed illegal by the authorities (drugs) in a safe manner and the products bought were higher quality than what you could buy on the street. Why was it a problem to begin with and why where significant resources used to shut it down? (Again, not defending it, and the founder was probably a scumbag, I am just asking the question) Because there was all sorts of white washing like this. "It's drugs, but safer, and without the violence and crime!" If you think that violence, crime are magically gone because of Silk Road, you'd be considered ignorant or naive. Production still happens in the same places, the poverty, corruption and violence-stricken areas. It's just invisible to you now, because you don't have to worry about your dealer stealing from you, getting mugged, or buying from an unknown source, or being arrested. All those people in Mexican and Colombian villages subject to the tyranny of the cartels... oh well. All good then, I suppose.
- npc54321 4y ago
  > All those people in Mexican and Colombian villages subject Just go into the frigging villages and arrest the cartel leaders oh wait they are in cohort with the governments of those countries...
  - FireBeyond 4y ago
    Sure. I absolutely agree. But let's not pretend that Silk Road is some panacea saying "Hey, violence-free drugs!" I tend to be on the legalization side of the spectrum but the notion of Silk Road as some humanity-improving place, versus a method of making Ross rich is definitely in need of citation.
- x86x87 4y ago
  my claim was that buying the drugs was safer (my words: in a safe manner). Everything else in the "pipeline" being equal if one part of it becomes safer the whole thing is safer. Want to eliminate production that happens in places with poverty/corruption/violence? Just make them legal. Seriously. Offer rehabilitation instead of jail. Other countries have done this and it work. People talk a big game when it comes to "our freedoms" but real freedom is to be able to do whatever you want as long as you don't impact your neighbor/other.
  - FireBeyond 4y ago
    I tend to agree on legalization and rehabilitation, more than you know. I just don't think Silk Road (and its brethren) were a means to that end. It just hides a lot of the issue.
- bruiseralmighty 4y ago
  This is hyperopic viewpoint. Because it would only remove the violence in our neighborhood and not the violence 1000s of miles away. This plan is not worth pursuing. We can grant everything you said that the Silk Road may have only reduced violence in our immediate vicinity. That is still a huge success that should have been continued. Its not a failure for only reducing local violence. That local win could have grown more globalized acceptance; reducing the niche cartels fill. Even if it had merely encouraged greater local production of illegal drugs that alone could have reduced cartel violence in Mexico.