4 ms·
And here come the bullshitter prohibitionists, to argue for the same essential policy that has been a CONSISTENT failure for going on 60 years now in a war wit
by southernplaces7 3y ago
And here come the bullshitter prohibitionists, to argue for the same essential policy that has been a CONSISTENT failure for going on 60 years now in a war without end that has been the root cause of this entire cartel industry, trillions in spending and untold numbers of murders.
Yes, the cartels diversify, yes, they can make money from other things, but no, the profits of these other revenue sources will simply not match the backbone of support and systematic, prolonged institutional corrupting power that the illegal drug market provides in the long run.
Half-baked and half applied legalization7decriminalization models are not the answer, and when they very sparsely get applied, full of regulatory hurdles (never mind the outright global prohibition that still exists for the sale of most hard drugs and even marijuana) you simply can't make a fair argument for how any existing policy has failed at legalization and that thus the only answer is some variation of continuing the immensely destructive prohibitionist model that has spent decades bringing things to their present state.
How stupid, intellectually dishonest or bloody-minded does one have to be to continue advocating for anything except complete legalization and regulation in a practical, broadly-applied, responsible way?
- hombre_fatal 3y agoIt's an emotionally charged topic, but one of the reasons it's bad to call others names is that they can turn around and do the same thing to do. "You're too dumb and stupid to see the right answer". It adds nothing and worsens the convo.
- atdrummond 3y agoWhat is intellectually dishonest is mischaracterizing my beliefs, which you have done to an impressive degree. I’m an opioid addict and formerly homeless person who has spent thousands of hours advocating for, and working with, the unhoused. I am the furthest thing from a 1980s drug warrior. In fact, I have always argued that American drug policies are an unequivocal failure. All I have stated, and continue to believe, is that one cannot emulate successes such as those in Estonia, Switzerland, Portugal and other jurisdictions by picking only the policies that are most politically feasible or attractive. These are holistic approaches that require changing the incentives of all agents interacting in the illicit drug economy. If one only focuses on a single element of the trade (say, the users, as has been done in many American metropoles) then the policy is bound to fail.
- southernplaces7 3y agoIf this is the case than I do seriously apologize. I assumed you were arguing for prohibition and a return to tendencies in this direction that are only just now, finally being reevaluated in favor of at least debating legalization. To me that essential prohibitionist stance is disgusting, and especially so after so many years of abject failure. I agree, a holistic approach is a good idea, but at least in my assessment, it absolutely needs to include a serious move towards practical legalization while investing in support for addiction problems among users. The latter is important, but the formar is the very major missing piece. Multinational drug trafficking organizations will diversify, but without that huge central source of revenue, they'll be walking on a much weaker path in their attempts to dominate entire regions and national governments.
- atdrummond 3y agoWe seem to be in agreement here. I apologise that these discussions have to become so heated; I understand this only comes from a place of compassion and frustration on your part. I appreciate your enthusiasm for change and obvious love for people who are - and have been in - my former position; there’s absolutely no anger on my side for the accidental friendly fire. Thank you so much for speaking up. The necessary changes in this space are only going to happen with continued pressure to abdicate the status quo.