Another good book on the subject is Chasing the Scream by Johann Hari.

We desperately need to decriminalize all drugs. The war on drugs is a dangerous farce.

Aaaahahaha.

Another Bobesque tantrum post? How lovely.

Trying to equate the slight disappointment the international community has with Biden as president to the abject horror of Trump as president as if the disdain were equal. LMFAHS!! Ridiculously asinine.

As usual, right wing apologists can't read. Some gaps were left when construction halted after Biden halted funding, funding the courts had deemed illegal btw, but others were not. Some were planned, some were due to failures of the fence Trump chose, some were due to contractors doing half assed jobs or being incapable of the work, some due to topography, there were many excuses but in the end, it wasn't a wall, it wasn't complete, it barely extended border barriers, and many places were left less secure...none of which is Biden's fault. They knew full well the next administration wasn't continuing this plan. You don't think they should have planned for that maybe? Finished the parts they dismantled at least before the only supporter left power? Nope. Guess not. Perfectly reasonable to leave it half done and expect the next guy who campaigned against it to finish it or take all the blame for all it's failures. Didn't Donny promise to have it done his first term anyway?

🤦‍♂️

I read a few articles from multiple sources on both sides before responding...not just the one particular cherry picked one you linked...i know better.

Not half ever wanted the wall, and likely under 1/3 want more poorly built fencing now that we've seen how horrible it is. Over half want the border secured, but that's not the same as support for the dumb wall/fence. Border security isn't just a fence, it comes in all flavors. Indeed, many agree that the best way to stem immigration is not building barriers both physical and institutional, but to increase anti narco terrorism funding in central America and end the war on drugs. Starve the drug gangs of money, they'll lose power and stop driving families out.

It was absolutely NOT paid for, Trump had to use an executive order to redirect funds that were earmarked by congress to pay for military family housing, because he couldn't get congress to pay for his boondoggle, much less Mexico as promised. If it had been fully funded, it would have been fully built.

Biden is not doing well at immigration. In his defense, he was left a clusterfuck, but he hasn't solved any major problems yet. As an adult, I'm capable of admitting that easily. The level of incompetence between him and Trump, however, are worlds apart, and the approaches are as well. One dehumanized and demonized immigrants, the other seems to be at least trying to get a working immigration and refugee system back in place, but is moving slowly. Your implications that they're both equally awful indicates either a strong bias for Trump, or strong break with reality.

I and others have clearly said many times on other threads, Biden is failing at immigration, and failing at being prepared to accept immigrant children. As a seeming right wing apologist at best, you seem blind and deaf to those complaints from the left and pretend we are childishly hypocritical instead....so no, you're far from getting it right, you're getting it totally backwards and twisted. Derp.

Another empty complaint/accusation. What fake news did I spread? Pretty easy but also completely meaningless to shout "your wrong" with no explanation, no correction, no specifics. Very Trumpian of you sir.

Anybody who writes what you did about Biden must be a hypocritical and douchey Trump supporter or just a plain brown wrapper nutjob. Even with his speech impediment, Biden is clear, thoughtful, and coherent...unlike Trump who never said a complete sentence or even complete thought in four years. Your hyper biased characterizations and factless, pointless, non sequitor, insult ridden tantrums masquerading as an argument are what paint you as a Trumpster, not your baseless accusations of hypocrisy.

Now I remember why I had you on ignore. Thanks for the reminder.

Wait....I drink a line by the gallon? Probably better if you don't try to use metaphors, buddy. You don't know how.

Trump's plan? Working? Which one?
His plan to start a depression and epidemic concurrently, making America less appealing?
Or his plan to deny entry to even unaccompanied minors, leaving them alone in Mexico, ripe for abuse with no protections?

You know Biden is continuing the rest of the Trump plan so far, only letting unaccompanied minors across into refugee camps....like Trump did until he caught flack for caging them and denying it....don't you? Probably not. OANN isn't telling you that, and you abdicated your ability to think for yourself long ago.
No one opened the border. You're being lied to again by the same asshats that convinced you of the election fraud fraud. Why do you keep begging them to mislead you? Why do you so enjoy being a misinformed idiot, Bob?

It's odd you aren't complaining about caging them in over crowded camps (which I see as an abject failure by Biden's administration)...perhaps you can foresee the ridicule you might get for complaining about the same thing you defended Trump over?

If Trump's failed fence worked at all, there wouldn't be any making it....but it doesn't work at all....it's usually less secure than what it replaced. It can be cut through in minutes with battery operated grinders and takes days to repair. Some fell down from wind. Almost any section can be pulled down with a car and a chain in seconds. He removed imperfect barriers in favor of useless fencing, making it easy to drive truckloads of anything across the border at will. Thanks Trump....great plan.

I would admit, Biden isn't doing better at preparing for the numbers of refugee children, and he hasn't changed policy much beyond not abandoning children to the cartel sex trade, but treating refugee children like refugee children and not like criminal lowlifes is a step in the right direction. Now we need the infrastructure to handle them. For the money wasted on Trump's legacy fence we could have built it already and could have a functioning immigration system, but Trump had to have that fence....that Mexico didn't pay for.

Note, the main reason people are coming is narco terrorism, created by the war on drugs and made exponentially worse when Trump cut international funding to fight it when his ass wasn't properly kissed by other country's leaders. End the failed war on drugs and use that money to fight organised crime in central America and the flood will be a trickle overnight. Of course, the right has no interest in that, and ignore the evidence of how well decriminalization works.

🤦‍♂️

Well, we had to make money off of something, and the Cold "war" was winding down, so, they had to pump up the war on drugs. And crack was wack so it became the poster child for our new war. Always about making money for the rich off the backs of the lower classes.

I'm pretty sure that if the tables were turned and somehow Hillary ran as a Republican, the Democrats would have voted for Trump as well. We tend to overlook things like reason and sanity in the USA when it comes to people/teams/etc that we hate.

Plus Trump was selling a message that a lot of people bought into, that they were somehow going to go back to a time when factory and coal jobs were a thing for middle class union type people. People who didn't work in those fields knew it was bogus from the get go, but when you live in a shitty area and desperately want to scroll back progress so that you can get your guaranteed 30+ an hour job/lifetime pension without a college education, you tend to overlook small things like guys grabbing pussies.

You are right, in a sane country Hillary probably would have been elected. She also probably wouldn't have been eligible to run because she would have beaten out Obama in 2008. She didn't because people were so desperate for something, anything to change in our fucked up government that they went with Obama. Hell, I even voted for him the first time. But, we lost our sanity sometime around the period when elected an actor over a generally 'nice guy' kind of president. Said actor/governor then instituted the following amazing things:

* The War on Drugs - utter failure
* Reaganomics - depends on who you ask, but it pretty much fucked us for years to come.
* Wonderful changes and cuts to education - See previous. They are still trying to undo the fuckery that was done to education in the 80's.
* Increased military spending to astronomical levels - pretty much fucked anyone not working for defense contractors.
* Destabilized Nicaragua and pissed off Iran worse at us - yeah, that didn't work out for us.
* Largely ignored the AIDs epidemic - tragedy on multiple levels.
* Etc

That fucker is still viewed as one of the best presidents and Carter as one of the worst.

Disclaimer: I am actually in favour of legalising drugs, but to answer your question....

The state does have a responsibility to protect you, even from yourself. Hence things like warning labels, etc.

Also, for most countries, there is a social and economic cost associated with drugs. Even leaving aside criminal activity (i.e. committing crimes to feed a drug habit), there is a cost for healthcare, lost productivity (heavy drug users are often unemployed) and in social welfare.

This is the same argument applied to increasing controls on smoking (taxes, plain packaging etc).

However, my main problem with all this is that it just doesn't work. The "war on drugs" is a total failure. People continue to use drugs.

The War on Black people / War on drugs satisfies the needs of too many americans who profit and wish to continue the implementation of New Jim Crow. Portugal's Drug Decriminalization Policy worked, but private prisons, drug treatment centers, police departments, DEA and a host of other entrenched institutions would be laying off 100's of thousands of employees the moment real legalization and treatment initiatives become standard nationwide. Simply put the cure is a profit and job killer and the free market can't have that.

Seriously, he's taking a shit on "purist liberals"?

Remind me again, who was speaking up loud and clear about the danger of running another corporatist against a right-wing populist? Who was that again? Was it the strategists and consultants of the DNC? Was it all the celebrities who were „with her“?

Or was it maybe those liberal idiots whose candidate is, I don't know, the most popular politician in the country? Sanders gets cheers from Trump voters at townhalls in red states, and you're putting the blame for Trump's election at the feet of purist liberals?

Honestly, mate. You want to know what a neoliberal disaster looks like? Look at at the White House. Neoliberal policies are the breeding ground of right-wing populists. You think someone like Trump gets elected because of his convincing policy proposals? Right-wing populists are the answers to „centrist“ policies that enrich the few at the cost of the many. Everyone knows the effects, from widescale poverty, historic inequality, the opioid epidemic, all the way to the two-tiered justice system with fraudsters and torturers running free while not being able to pay a parking tickets gets you jailed.

Too abstract for you, Bill? Then look at Detroit. Look at Cleveland. Is that enough of a visual representation of what a neoliberal disaster looks like?

In this situation, they decided to run a corporatist, with the message „America is already great“. How was that supposed to resonate with the working stiff, Bill? The people whose despair is the main driver behind the opioid epidemic, as Case-Deaton has shows us in such detail. Who had the glorious idea to run exclusively on identity politics and ignore the economic plight of the lower class?

Was that the purist liberals, Bill?

Did the purist liberals run a campaign whose own people, if „Shattered“ contains any truth at all, described it as nothing short of a disaster? Even Clinton's own people didn't seem to know why she was running, and were toying with the idea of just going with „it's her turn“. Seriously, the way they describe Clinton's paranoia and refusal to interact with her own staff makes it sound like her campaign was not much less of a clusterfuck than Trump's presidency, from an organizing point of view.

But yeah, go ahead and blame the purist liberals. And Comey, while you're at it. And Russia. And Jill Stein. And fake news. And WikiLeaks. And sexism. Anything but the DNC and their corporate candidate.

Let me know when you're done, maybe then we can have a proper post-mortem of how the Democrats managed to lose the White House, Congress, most state legislatures and Governorships. And we'll start from the top, because we have a saying in German: „der Fisch stinkt vom Kopf her“. Maybe you can get an option to vote against Wall Street, against the war on drugs, against big pharma, against the MIC, and against the destruction of our biosphere. Because you sure as hell didn't have one this time.

@Stormsinger

i can agree with the intent of your comment but i think it ignores a far greater,and possibly more dangerous facet of this current election cycle.

look,
when the DNC began it's political play to nudge sanders out,and was changing the rules of application to keep laurence lessig off the ballot.it became obvious (to me anyways) that clinton was tagged for the run,and the DNC was attempting to steal sanders thunder,which was shockingly impressive,and redirect it to boost clinton.

but the DNC had failed to successfully execute this plan because they didn't understand the true nature of those sanders supporters.so their plan backfired.

the RNC did almost the EXACT same thing with trump.they hated the man,wanted nothing to do with him,but they saw how powerful his campaign was picking up steam and they attempted to play the long con.for a year they allowed trump to do and say whatever he wanted,with little rebuttal or regard.they watched as trump got bigger,and bolder,and more brash.they watched his numbers climb consistently..and they waited.and after a year,they attempted to step in and steal trumps thunder by offering a more "reasonable" candidate.

ok ok...enough with the trump.
you want cruz?...nope.
how about ben carson? he is a sweet guy and BLACK....nope.
marco rubio?he is spanish with immigrant parents...nope
john kasich?...nope

because the RNC didn't get it either.they too,attempted to steal trumps thunder and their plan backfired.

liberals didnt get it.
conservatives didnt get it.
corporate media didnt get it.
political pundits,who get PAID to get it,didnt get it.
pollsters didnt get it.
suzy mcprettyface who reads the teleprompter didnt get it.

but the americans who lived in those dead midwestern towns got it.they may not understand neoliberalism,but they could see the effects by the boarded up stores,closed banks and the only jobs to have were the night shift at the one fast food joint left in the entire town.

these are the very same people who may not fully comprehend what the bank bailouts meant,or how austerity affected them,but they understood that the biggest industry in their town was no longer coal,or steel,or fishing but production of meth.they saw small shops close and crumble under the weight of a walmart superstore,and chains of pill mills.

they watched as construction jobs dried up,and private prisons expanded.there are some towns in texas and florida that literally survive on the incarceration of other americans.so they may not have fully understood that the "war on drugs" is actually a war on people,but they certainly could see the after-effects.

and these people were being told..everyday..that the economy was doing great.
that unemployment was at an all time low.
that the american dream was still attainable.
and at the very same time they were also being told that if you were on food stamps you were a loser,and a leech.
that if you lost your home it was YOUR fault.
that if you couldnt find a job you were lazy.
and if you DID happen to find a job,but it paid minimum,well then you should have gone to college or made better choices.

and since when did it become a virtue to exploit the hopeless and the desperate? to take advantage of someones misfortune and pay them pennies to do a job,but god forbid someone actually demands what they feel they are worth,because then you are accused of being a rip off artist!

when did THIS tactic become and american ideology?

and that really is the core nugget of this tale.
the ideology of america.
the amercian dream.
it was dead,and those people finally got it.
and there is NOTHING more fanatical or zealous than a defeated idealist.

so you can judge them for voting trump,but i think we should also understand WHY they voted for trump.

chris hedges wrote a truthdig piece that is far more eloquent and illuminating than anything i could ever put to paper.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/we_are_all_deplorables_20161120

ok... but doesn't everyone except the DEA know about these facts and realize how dumb the war on drugs is? Pretty obvious, but I guess this is the same country that voted Trump into office LOL.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3115310-179126374670.html

District court to police: dafuq are you doin?!

"The principal casualty of this war [on drugs] has been the Constitution."

Well, first off, the part about sterilising and killing was pretty obviously tongue in cheek, although I take your point that some Trump supporters might make the same point seriously.

That said, I have an expectation that the people on this site are smart enough to read what I said as comic hyperbole. As for it being in poor taste, that's up to the listener. I certainly found it in much better taste than Jim Jeffries bit on Bill Cosby, but as you quoted Reginald D Hunter "take it from the rest of us who did laugh--it was fuckin' funny."

All comedy aside, I was being 100% serious when I said that if you really believe in something so much that no evidence will change your mind, then you shouldn't be voting let alone running for office.

As for getting the same response at the DNC.... you're almost certainly right. It would be about different issues (probably vaccines, GMOs and the like), but they would be just as wrong as the Republicans.

That anger is real and not at all misguided. Woolly thinking has held the human race back for millennia and caused untold suffering and horror: racism/slavery, sexism, homophobia, the "war on drugs", climate change, alternative medicine.... do I need to go on?

I'm not saying you can't have a firmly held belief, and I'm not even saying that everything you believe must be fully supported by evidence, but everyone (myself included) should be willing to at least question their own dogma.

"Would you reconsider in the face of new evidence?" should be the simplest question to answer for anyone.

Okay, Libertarians stand for:

End to the endless wars: This is much more important than any social policies they might hate. Those programs will fail if we cannot control this bullshit, and then what? Austerity.

Gay rights: (Liberal view.) Not just marriage, but all gay rights. Get the government out of the marriage / contracts etc. and give full rights to people who are different.

Abortion: (Small government, get out of a woman's right to choose. Liberal/conservative point of view.)

Gun rights: Let the States limit gun rights. What works for California might not work in New York. Not my style, but less than conservatives want, more than liberals want. Honestly we have a shit policy out there now. With terrorism building, getting rid of all handguns is seeming ominous, as they will have access to guns despite bans. They have that support in droves, unlike the average criminal would. However, conservatives want ASSAULT rifles for everyone, which is stupid and dangerous. The paradigm has changed. Liberals taking guns from average people (who are most often responsible) and yet not preventing assault rifles from terrorists hands.

Libertarians won't solve the problem but at least their view that states, not an open-access ordered by the Federal Government, would put more restrictions than most conservatives would, and still offer handguns since times have changed.

War on drugs: Failure, stop punishing people, limit laws that predominantly punish minorities, and reduce prison population.

Where the fuck have liberals gone that they no longer support a party that supports their positions so much? Oh social programs...would suffer. Get over it. Programs will suffer from every party. And conservatives shouldn't complain either. For fuck sake people, change with the times. Stop viewing this party as the party of 1920....

@Asmo , @enoch , @Jinx --

I appreciate what you're saying and I know that I *should* feel the way(s) you suggest. ...But I have a hard time actually getting there.

At some point, we are all responsible for our own actions, and the consequences of our own actions. Even though these people may not have any of the sort of opportunities that I take for granted, even though circumstances well outside of their control might push them into the direction of addiction, at some point they made a choice to start up with this crap. And they make a choice to continue with the drugs, even if the physical and mental addiction makes it nearly impossible for them to choose anything else.

There's a lot of problems in the world. There's a lot of people who unjustly have to contend with major problems that are absolutely 100% in no way their fault. Addicts are at least partially at fault for getting themselves into the mess that they are in. That puts them way down the line on my empathy list, that's all I'm saying.

Asmo said "To fix a problem, you first have to understand it. That does not require sympathy or empathy." That in particular helps me look at the issue from a different angle. Just because addiction is not a problem on my personal priority list, I 100% agree that it *is* a problem, and it is a problem that affects *me* also, indirectly if not directly. I live in a society of people, and helping each individual person in the society can help *everyone* in the society.

The war on drugs and its approach of mass incarceration, etc. pretty clearly doesn't work well to alleviate the problem. The part of me that (mostly jokingly, but not entirely) would tag this as EIA might be happy to take the approach of letting these people all shoot themselves up with krokodil or whatever else until they kill themselves. But rationally, I know that wouldn't fix anything. I'm not convinced that it would be worse than the war on drugs, but it definitely wouldn't be ideal.

So rationally, I know that social systems to help people break those addictions and whatever situations or psychological problems contributed to them are probably the optimal solution, from a society-wide sort of view. But I don't want to be at the front lines of any of that myself, because I think that it *does* require some empathy to the situation to be an effective contributor there, and I simply recognize that I personally can't scrounge any up.

So by all means, STOP taking my tax dollars and spending them on the war on drugs, and START spending them on social programs that experts and scientists who study addiction believe will do a better job of actually fixing the problem. But that's the extent of the personal involvement that I want to have.

just to add what @Asmo rightly pointed out,is that addictions are a symptom of internal and external forces.

when we consider the state of our society and it its inherent social structures,and we compare addiction rates and suicide rates,i feel there is sufficient evidence for concern.

just look at americas suicide rates.
http://afsp.org/about-suicide/suicide-statistics/

we can see a steady increase.
when we factor in military suicides,which have been averaging one,to up to 22 a day since 2009.the larger picture becomes incredibly disturbing.

my point,which is right with asmo,is that while one group kills themselves due to hopelessness,emotional stress or an inability to cope or adapt in these trying times.

the addict is doing the same thing,for the exact same reasons.just on a slower and more precipitous path of self-destruction.

when asked as a child what they wanted to be when they grow up.no child ever answered that their desire was to become an addict.

the "war" on drugs,
is a war on people.

and treating this as a legal/criminal problem is missing the point entirely.
this is a social issue,that can be treated by providing social solutions.

dr bruce alexander discovered some amazing results in rats you may find interesting @MilkmanDan:

http://www.brucekalexander.com/articles-speeches/rat-park/148-addiction-the-view-from-rat-park