MarxMadness

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] -3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

You put coke as an example of a drug that "even doing safety once will absolutely ruin your life." That is word-for-word DARE propaganda.

The research cited above suggests putting even heroin or crack in that category is a stretch. I'm going to put a lot more weight on that than on anyone's anecdotes.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (4 children)

That's just flat-out untrue about coke, not even an argument. Like DARE, the fact that you're wrong on that and lumping it in with scarier-sounding drugs shows (at minimum) you aren't actually knowledgeable about these drugs and their effects.

Even with those scarier-sounding drugs, there's research suggesting they're more demonized than destructive:

Dr. Carl L. Hart, Ziff Professor at Columbia University and former chair of the Department of Psychology, is one of the world’s preeminent experts on the effects of so-called recreational drugs on the human mind and body. Dr. Hart is open about the fact that he uses drugs himself, in a happy balance with the rest of his full and productive life as a researcher and professor, husband, father, and friend. In Drug Use for Grown-Ups, he draws on decades of research and his own personal experience to argue definitively that the criminalization and demonization of drug use–not drugs themselves–have been a tremendous scourge on America, not least in reinforcing this country’s enduring structural racism.

Dr. Hart did not always have this view. He came of age in one of Miami’s most troubled neighborhoods at a time when many ills were being laid at the door of crack cocaine. His initial work as a researcher was aimed at proving that drug use caused bad outcomes. But one problem kept cropping up: the evidence from his research did not support his hypothesis. From inside the massively well-funded research arm of the American war on drugs, he saw how the facts did not support the ideology. The truth was dismissed and distorted in order to keep fear and outrage stoked, the funds rolling in, and Black and brown bodies behind bars.

Drug Use for Grown-Ups will be controversial, to be sure: the propaganda war, Dr. Hart argues, has been tremendously effective. Imagine if the only subject of any discussion about driving automobiles was fatal car crashes. Drug Use for Grown-Ups offers a radically different vision: when used responsibly, drugs can enrich and enhance our lives. We have a long way to go, but the vital conversation this book will generate is an extraordinarily important step.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

The liberal attitude is that constitutions matter. A leftist approach is looking at the material reality created by how a constitution (and other laws) are enforced.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Damn that's bleak haha

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You care more about posting etiquette than you do about Canadian parliament applauding a Nazi.

This story has circulated widely enough (I see multiple articles on BBC and CBS, among other outlets) that they had to issue an apology. I don't believe you haven't heard of it, but if you really haven't, what does that say about where you're getting your news/what draws your attention?

[–] [email protected] 27 points 9 months ago (5 children)

If one doesn't know high school-level history well enough that "this guy fought against Russia in WWII" doesn't set off a million alarm bells, they have no business being in government.

If their defense is "I was told to clap like a seal, I did, and it turns out I was applauding a Nazi," same thing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

Do you have even the slightest problem with Canadian parliament applauding a Nazi? You and a bunch of other people here seem to think litigating how to post is more important than the actual issue.

Here's the news story if you missed the dozen other threads on it and the discussion elsewhere in this thread. Let me know if you need anything else spoonfed to you.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The Canadian parliament gave one of these Nazis a standing ovation within the past week.

The point is that who that guy was should be no surprise to anyone, because this all has been public knowledge since (at least) Windows 95.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (5 children)

This is relevant context to the recent incident of the Canadian parliament giving a standing ovation to one of these Nazis.

Holy shit, read what you respond to

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago

At least three things are required for any mass political change to happen:

  1. A critical mass of people taking proactive, organized action.
  2. A chunk of people who may not be organized, but who will join a proactive, organize action.
  3. A chunk of people who may not take proactive steps, but who aren't going to go to the mat for the old regime.

2 and 3 are probably the most important -- they're essentially the difference between an interest group and a mass movement -- and probably the hardest for modern intelligence to stop. They try (look at social media astroturfing and legacy media influence), but your propaganda line can only deviate so much from reality before people reject it. Other comments address accomplishing 1 despite interference.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

The guy criticizing Canada for knowingly admitting Nazis is somehow a Nazi?

Sharp as a cue ball, this one

[–] [email protected] -4 points 9 months ago

"I'm lazy" is your argument here? Even the blurb from the start of the article says this immigration happened in 1950.

Did history start yesterday? Are we ever allowed to discuss the background of current events?

view more: next ›