It is a conspiracy theory to believe that drug criminalization has a strictly for-profit motive despite near universal adoption as a policy. That is to say, you believe a conspiracy theory casually.
It is a conspiracy theory to believe that drug criminalization has a strictly for-profit motive despite near universal adoption as a policy. That is to say, you believe a conspiracy theory casually.
I think this is an interesting thought. As a recreational drug user myself (I drink alcohol sometimes), I do indeed feel like drugs should be legalized, so as to enable regulation. But I don't feel like me dealing with the subject in my day to day life should have a bearing on whether I'm able to have an informed opinion on the matter. It's like saying rape victims are too close to rape and therefore their opinions on rape legislation are skewed.
No...no.
Drug users are not the victims
Obviously, in the application of a logical argument, you need to respond to logic with logic.
That being said, it's also obvious that a criminal isn't really a good authority on the justness of the crime they commit -- we implicitly understand that this is part of the rationalization process for antisocial behaviors.
Also, yeah, the rape "analogy" was both socially awkward and horrible, a double whammy. Generally, rape isn't a great topic for conversation.
How is that obvious? It's not at all obvious to me that, for example, MLK Jr was not an authority on the justice of civil disobedience because he himself practiced civil disobedience.
If we disregard the opinions of people who think doing X is justified and therefore proceed to do X, then we bias ourselves toward the opinions of people who oppose X, as they will be overrepresented in the sample of people who choose not to do X.
Such cherry picking is not a logically sound method for developing an honest, unbiased worldview.
Not interested in making comparisons to someone that you can't separate from a type of neo-sainthood.
Anyhow, having an unpopular opinion isn't antisocial or illegal.
Buying heroin is.
If you can keep your life balanced while on drugs, good for you. But you're still toying with the risk of you getting addicted and losing control; to even take that risk is selfish.
But let me try again without making an analogy:
Some percentage of people do X and therefore try to justify doing X.
But another percentage of people think X is justified and therefore do X.
You do not appear to make a distinction between these two cases. You lump the latter in with the former and then dismiss their views out of hand.
This is such bad logic that I am beginning to suspect that you are are actually being a hypocrite here: that you dislike drug users emotionally, and so you are trying extra hard to justify that dislike intellectually, even when it requires blatantly fallacious reasoning. (And, dammit, here I ended up making another analogy, albeit hopefully subtly enough that you don't accuse me of comparing you to a criminal.)
An estimated 1 in every 16 men, and some non-zero percentage of women, seem to be pretty cool with it (at least as perpetrators).
If low drug prices is what you want, we should legalize the production and sales of drugs, but keep usage illegal.
So, execution for drug use in Malaysia has a root cause of racism.
This just goes to show you that these people have absolutely no intellectual rigor applied to any of their ideas.
Their fake ideology is built strictly on a convoluted set of shibboleths that apply only loosely as semi-believable just so stories in a Western (specifically American) context.
This article is a good introduction to the history of US drug enforcement: https://timeline.com/harry-anslinger-racist-war-on-drugs-pri...
Racism theory is a Rorschach test.
Suffice it to say, it's really tough to interrogate reality when you have nothing but contrapositive indications and your response is "yes, this only applies to this one instance though".
This is why studying things systemically rather than through a collection of historical anecdotes you've picked up is a vastly superior system for modelling reality. This argumentum ad collection of ad hoc historical anecdotes that reify my pseudoscientific ideas is less interesting intellectually than Horoscopes.
We don't need to discuss this further as it is highly incendiary and you're not allowed to have arguments about topics that make people upset, so any polemicist is basically unchecked.
Not very intellectually curious. Where's my friend?
"racism is one of the many motives for drug criminalization" is thoroughly documented and not debatable by serious people.