3 ms·
No, it's fact, not conspiracy theory. "You want to know what this [war on drugs] was really all about? The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House af
by bongodongobob 3y ago
No, it's fact, not conspiracy theory.
"You want to know what this [war on drugs] was really all about? The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying?
We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, 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. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news.
Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
~ John Ehrlichman, Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs under President Richard Nixon
- onlyrealcuzzo 3y agoYou're missing the point. All that was popular as well. This wasn't some evil mastermind scheme to enrich the military industrial complex. It was run-of-the-mill everyday politics. The world isn't fair. That doesn't mean we're all being fooled by some evil genius mastermind pulling the strings we can't see. It just means that people don't care about what's right or wrong, mostly - just what they want.
- coeneedell 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ehrlichman#Drug_war_quote https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ehrlichman#Drug_war_quote
- bongodongobob 3y agoThis is one of many many sources. I'm not willing to put together a comprehensive list of something that is so well known.
- Supermancho 3y agoFamilies often raise a concern about how they never knew member X to be a baddie (eg The Golden State Killer). This is not a compelling refutation. Whether anyone can be wrong or lying about anything, is equally weak. The man said it. I have no doubt.
- astrange 3y agoThe part about "enriching the military industrial complex" is certainly a conspiracy theory though. The MIC has only ever shrunk in importance in the American economy, and giving people their used products is like the opposite of enriching them.
- DANmode 3y agoNormalizing the use of the equipment guarantees additional future domestic purchases, subscriptions, and other support revenue.
- Levitz 3y agoDoes it really? Do people really think "Ah but of course the military needs more money, it's given a good use, since the police get it afterwards"?
- DANmode 3y agoThat’s not even an uncharitable interpretation of what I wrote. I was talking about the domestic law enforcement continuing to use the stuff they got for cheap/federally subsidized, or free, because “it’s effective.”
- astrange 3y agoThey generally don't actually use it or have a use for it though, that's part of the problem. And I don't think buying replacement tires for an MRAP is a lot of subscription revenue.
- dessimus 3y agohttps://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/01/28/pentagon-tells-congress-to-stop-buying-equipment-it-doesnt-need.html https://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/01/28/pentagon-tell... Please tell me more about Congress spending money on equipment the military doesn't need or want isn't corporate welfare for Defense Contractors. Eisenhower even warned us to such actions in 1961, and literally if there was ever someone who would know: it would be a man that was on both sides as a high-ranking general and President. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenhower%27s_farewell_address https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenhower%27s_farewell_addres...
- ecommerceguy 3y agoNixon was certainly an enigma compared to other US Presidents: Advocated for "Universal Healthcare" by basically mandating the Federal government to provide stop loss reinsurance to employers and creating a marketplace for poor people with income adjusted premiums... sounds familiar. Created the EPA Warmonger but hated by the CIA/FBI