What can we do to fight petty criminals on our streets...

drug legalization is a capitalist tool and just harms the working class

people are going to do drugs regardless of what the government does about it. is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. just join the police if you want to beat up brown people so bad.

Samefag

Then why have so few places actually legalized it?
How does increasing control of the drug market and ensuring the drugs aren't cut up with a fuckton of cheap shit harm the working class? All data suggests that legalizing drugs does not create a drug addicted population.

Also, stop samefagging or I'll ban you.

Fucking fed, get off leftypol

>>/liberalpol/ is a better fit for you

Because those that have legalized it or decriminalize it have expanded their markets.
I have a shop next to here that sells this shit, makes me want to shell that shit. Just because it's stigmatized like alcohol was in prohibition doesn't mean it's proletarian. How is drug legalization not bourgeois as fuck?

Drug users should probably not be persecuted as they are just harming themselves really. However drug producers and distributors are lumpenbourgs and should get gulag at the very least.

Whether you like drugs or not you have to recognize that prohibition doesn't work. It didn't work for alcohol and it isn't working for other drugs.

are you saying that market expansion happens all at once? Capitalism has been growing since its inception and will continue to

this assumes ANY of that will actually happen
also the free sale and promotion of drug use

all data also suggests drug use goes up with legalization

lol someones angry

this is a meme
prohibition works fine In fact it did work well for alcohol. Most people tend to follow the law

drug users create a market and are just as much lumpen as the dealers

You can't know if there would not be even more drug use if it was not prohibited. Anyway the main ways of fighting it would not be a simple prohibtion, but going after the profiteers so the drug business stops being attractive.

As long as Capitalism is the hegemonic economic system fighting drug related problems is as idealistic and mistaken as fighting poverty within capitalism.

The only drugs that should be legalized are performance enhancing drugs and uppers
Creating a culture of coked out working class juice heads will yield positive results

Attached: 1492615574363.jpg (750x725, 235.97K)

no its not lmao

No, but clearly this isn't something that's being pushed by capitalists, and particularly not pushed by big pharma. Why?
And also, why shouldn't we legalize drugs in the future socialist society?
Sure, there needs to be regulations that follow and a lot of education. Portugal thankfully provides a nice example to follow with a great record on decrease in HIV from 1.000 in 2001 to 50 in 2012 and drug related deaths decreasing from 80 in 2001 to 16 in 2012.
Clearly drugs that don't come from the asshole of a hood rat cutting it up to make extra money aren't as dangerous.
No one is promoting drug use.
Source? Not talking about weed here.
You trying to samefag to pretend your position is widely accepted is kind of pathetic.

Well, shooting the drug lords seemed to work like in the Philippines and that didn't result in a new market and a new form of opium for the people.
The Boxer Rebellion did nothing wrong, anglo druglords deserved it.

Come on, the bodies aren't even cold yet. Give it 5-10 years.

it is being pushed by capitalists? who do you think finances drug legalization efforts? Are the people who own marijuana and dispensaries not capitalists all the sudden?
"Capitalists" are not a single person and they do not always agree.
What is happening right now is capitalists pushing for drug legalization to expand markets and big pharma capitalists pushing pills.

A socialist society would affirm life not worship death. A future socialist society would purge all harmful elements

well you're assuming that is likely to happen. Also, a single data point of a country with 10 million people does not mean it can be applied everywhere or even most places.
funny how you're purposely citing old statistics
emcdda.europa.eu/countries/drug-reports/2019/portugal/drug-induced-deaths_en
drug related deaths in Portugal is much higher now
Portugal is not a good example

no but more people end up dying apparently.

this goes hand in hand with capitalism. Any product will be promoted to increase sales.

post your source first then

lol butthurt

With the falling organic composition of capital, the surplus population the petty criminals, that is, tge rabble are the only horizon of possibility for anticapitalist action. That aside, the distinction between narcotics and other substances is unstable and incoherent

Finances it? What kind of finance is needed? But tell me, who is funding them? All I see are hippie activists, are you telling me they're plants for drug lords?
Deep fam, but I asked about drugs.
Anti-marxist as fuck. We Marxists do not see the need to purge everything we don't like, we understand what dialectics means, we understand that drugs and religion will wither when the conditions that give rise to them are abolished.
Of course. Why wouldn't it?
I wasn't doing that on purpose, those were from the article I found.
Why does scale matter here?
Still among the lowest in Europe.
Well it isn't, because it isn't actually completely legalized, but the effects of the decriminalization are obviously good.
Right, so you outlaw commercials for them, like we should big pharma, and like some countries have banned commercials for cigarettes and alcohol.
Well, Portugal is the only place I know of that this has happened, and all stats I've read have been positive.
Echs Dee.

(me)
Forgot to add; and lower than it was at the point of decriminalization.

yes because murder and smoking fucking weed are the same thing

Attached: 88913366dbff2474566ef1f35ca82900122ed0737c5940143ea0549a1378c781.gif (220x152, 558.4K)

do you not understand how money and politics work?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cannabis_companies

A socialist society would affirm life not worship death. A future socialist society would purge all harmful elements

nope

you're arguing against a point I never made
however this is the opposite of what every socialist regime has done

"it will happen because I want it to"
gonna need to prove it bud

Drug deaths are up since 2001 try again

why is it irrelevant?

that wasn't the original point you were making.
Drug related deaths were already low when prior to legalization

so you're admitting you're wrong?

this reeks of liberalism

except they're not positive. Maybe by your cherry picked stats from 2012 but drug related deaths in Portugal are up since 2001. Sorry but you were wrong on that one.

not an argument

Portugal. All the states that legalise weed. You are literally turning "criminal" jobs into legitimate jobs. I.e you give the lumpen something to do. Your police force can focus on pedos and capitalists. Your prisons can empty a little. Mental health overall can improve. The homeless can stop being demonised. The cycles can be broken

This shouldn't be a question by now. ALL the evidence supports this view. It doesn't expand any market, the market already exits and is one of the biggest markets in most developed nations. All you are doing is putting it to your uses.

vox.com/2016/3/22/11278760/war-on-drugs-racism-nixon

Also this, the entire prohibition effort was an attempt to criminalise the working class

agreed and what's more, labor vouchers would eliminate the formation of unregulated markets since it functions as a credit system and nothing is really exchanged

This is such obvious bullshit. Why do drug companies get their shit even legalized then, spending gorillions on lobbying the government and plenty on "studies" to proof how harmless and beneficial they are?
What are your thoughts on porstitiution?

And the feds introdruced drugs to poor people to keep them that way. So what, anything can get instrumentalized, that does not make it bad.

You need to prevent them from bartering/"gifting" though.

give me an example then.

Several people have told you to look at Portugal you are blatantly ignoring that.

so cut off one half of the pincer movement, porky introduced them, at least now you can be poor without being arrested all the time, make it easier to get off drugs.

Also what you gonna do with these people you are arresting>? Put them in prison? Cos you can't get drugs in prison right.

LOL

Prostitution shouldn't exist and probably wouldn't post revolution. There is no reason really why drugs shouldn't exist for people to take recreationally. This is how most people use them and thats fine. Stress kills. Socialising is good for you.

I just addressed this Portugal's drug legalization led to more deaths from drug use.
so you support capitalist market expansion and the exploration of the proletariat. ok

no it doesn't

why not?
none of it does.

you literally said it does in the beginning of your post

legalizing drugs increasing drug uses thus an expanded market.

...

true but wouldn't there be a substantial reduction in the scale of operations?

I addressed Portugal and what you are saying about it is wrong.
see

Not an answer
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cannabis_companies
Not an answer
Yes
Drugs were legal to posses in the USSR up until 1974.
In the only country that has decriminalized drugs, it happened. It would be part of any package deal to decriminalize it, because that would OBVIOUSLY be the center of the debate.
The latest numbers we have from the site you linked are from 2016, where they were at 30, compared to 80 in 2001.
Another interesting stat is that Portugal has 4 deaths out of 1 million citizens, compared to the average of Europe at 22 out of 1 million.
Nonono, you made the argument that Portugal is somehow a super special case because they have X million citizens. You're supposed to make an argument for why that would change anything. I see absolutely no reason why the size of the population would matter here, so you make the case.
My point hasn't changed. Drug related deaths are down from 2001. Even the worst year of 2015 was lower than 2001.
No, this is the only case we have in that direction. Decriminalization is obviously not the same as legalization, but the people aren't even being fined for possession.
Of course it does, we're arguing about policy under liberalism. But the debate would have been more interesting if it had happened within the framework of a socialist society.
No, what the fuck are you talking about?
Look at the graph. At which year does it surpas 80? (You can tell that it doesn't by looking at the numbers on the left side, they only go up to 60).

Lenin endorses killing of prostitutes

Attached: thot patrol.jpg (923x785, 119.83K)

The only source here is emcdda.europa.eu/countries/drug-reports/2019/portugal/drug-induced-deaths_en
which shows a massive increase when everything already was legalized, but it does not go that far back, feel free to find one that does. In literally everything else legalization increases the market, including prostitution, so you have to prove your claim.
They will never get off drugs as long as others benefit from supplying them.
I would put the producers and distributors in labour camps, not private retardation like in the US.

Why? It would legitimize jobs. Also prohibition doesn't work anyway and actually reduces incidence, so why do it? Do you not regognize your hypocricy?
This is the sexually priviliged version of "just walk in and give the boss a firm handshake.

Yes it would be. Take the perspective of those who make drugs and distribute them and make their lifes as hard as possible.

*actually increases incidence

youre the one with the non argument backed by violence

The data you posted that I have been debating the tank over does not show an increase. Even in 2015 the numbers were lower than at the point of decriminalization.

go look it up that is just the easiest to hand place to get that very well known piece of information from.

theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it

leafly.com/news/politics/portugal-drug-decriminalization-statistics look at this for example, which gives a pretty balanced look.

However there are things they left, for example that homocides and other crimes generally went up across europe after the 2007 recession and austerity. They have given no evidence to actually connect the rise in crime with drug use. Correlation does not equal causation

transformdrugs.org/drug-decriminalisation-in-portugal-setting-the-record-straight/

all of these provide and overveiw of the situation, pointing to disagreement in certain batches of evidence and certain studies etc. Most however agree on the basic, drug use is down, drug related deaths are down etc.

Yours are the sources which disagree with most of the others.

which is why you nationalise and regulate supply. Show me any evidence that getting arrested makes it easier to get off drugs.

so your prisons would be different from every other prison on the face of this planet. Doubt it.

see above

prohobition of drugs doesn't work. Prohibition of prostitution also doesn't work but that isn't what i said. I said it shouldn't exist, because of its degradation of women, but that it probably wouldn't exist when all peoples basic needs are met, drugs on the other hand, could be considered a basic need. Everybody likes to go for a drink on a friday, there is nothing really wrong with that provided you are responsible.

orite so you are some no fun allowed incel. How on earth is this sexually priviledged? Stress literally does kill, socialising is literally good for you. Where does sex even come into it?

it is get over it

>>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cannabis_companies
Not an answer
you asked who are the capitalists there is a list for you.

not an answer

half right
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_the_Soviet_Union

and it isn't working out too well for them

yeah thats just one year,
Since legalization there has been an increase in drug related deaths.

well you failed to make the case for Portugal's polices to work in any place that isn't Portugal.
I see absolutely no reason why Portugal's drug polices would would matter here, so you make the case

source?

then what are you even saying

no you're arguing FOR liberal drug policies

not an argument

cite something other than a blog post and I'll humor you

Socializing is stressful if you are not neurotypical. I also doubt that using drugs to deal with stress increases our life expectancy.

I cited actual statistics not opinion pieces

Also it needs to be said that Portugal does in fact have large drug enforcement. They target supply side though.
emcdda.europa.eu/countries/drug-reports/2019/portugal/drug-laws-and-drug-law-offences_en

If you're trying to say drugs are completely legal in Portugal you're dead wrong

lol go back to >>>/liberalpol/

Legalize drugs. Problem solved.

Gang leaders are outlaws porkies.

Kill addicts and dealers
problem solved

forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2016/03/23/nixons-drug-war-an-excuse-to-lock-up-blacks-and-protesters-continues

tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08854300.2014.974983

most people are neurotypical. Obviously we should have services for disabled people.

you could look at statistics for people who use a moderate amount of alchohol, who tend to live longer.

all of those articles cited studies

im not. they are not even legal they are decrininalised.

i am a liberal for saying people enjoy socialising and that stress is bad for you?

You haven't even connected how it was about sex, or explained at all how you think its sexually priviledged.

I want to nationalise drugs, you want to ban them based on your fee fees whose the liberal.

thats why its best to have strict punishment for dealers

been doing that since the 60's buddy drugs are more prevalent then ever.

Then there is the disucssion of how criminalisation has devastated the third world disproportionately and how the war on drugs has been consistently used ot justify imperialism

show me any evidence of this being true

>forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2016/03/23/nixons-drug-war-an-excuse-to-lock-up-blacks-and-protesters-continues

what are you even arguing here?

Okay, and funnily enough these companies did not exist prior to legalization in their respective areas. So who lobbied for the legalization?
Which part was wrong?
…
No, that's the LATEST year, we have data for MANY years. I'm getting a little mad right now gotta be honest.
transformdrugs.org/drug-decriminalisation-in-portugal-setting-the-record-straight/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal
Two different numbers here, one claiming 80, the other claiming 131. Both obviously higher than after decriminalization.
Don't care what buzzword you want to slap on it. It is a sensible policy.

...

I never said this.
I said you're a liberal for promoting the free exchange of drugs through markets and capitalism

you want to nationalize drugs based on your fee fees whose the liberal

Maybe the suppliers who were doing it illegally before but saw profit in going legal.

Street dealers are like retailers, usually they sell drugs for their boss, the problem with gang leaders is the same problem with legal bourgeois, the relations of production.

moving the goal posts now?

read what I linked. Drug enforcement started in 1922

lol you're getting mad because you don't have a solid argument

yeah ok bud

please post source for 2001 and earlier

No its not its a liberal policy. >>>/liberalpol/

thats why its best to have strict punishment for dealers

Does this include sexual services?

Op here. Nice you guys are having a discussion about legalisation but how can the community deal with small time gangs who aren't caught, and if, only temporary taken away only to soon be out again?

Maybe AAD graffiti triggered wrong associations but there must be other cases of working class communities themselves solving issues like this.

You will only punish the bottom, never the top of the pyramid, street dealers are just lumpenproles. Their relations of productions comes from their material conditions, punishing them is just reactionary capitalism.

but im not im promoting nationalisation and decommodificaiton of drugs.

but it isn't

you remind me the retard who thinks Rojava is imperialist, are you him?

people aren't entitled to sex, being disabled doesn't change that

why do you think any decent drug enforcement policy will only target street dealers?

Yes, and they didn't criminalize possession before 1974. Read your own source, faggot.
I'm getting mad that you ignore statistics like this and just keep spouting the same lies over and over again.

Attached: Portugal.jpg (866x450, 90.67K)

Build militias, denunciate the thugs, pressure the government.

You give them deals for telling on their superiors.

you just said you want to nationalize drugs

It very well can be.

Just like how a socialist society would have universal healthcare but it can also be used by capitalists like in europe for example.

no I don't care about One big US military base

Why are they entitled to drugs then? It's liberal frame anyway, what matters is that people have sex/do drugs or not. "Entitlement" is a bourgois metric worse than legalism.

Because that's what happen for every "war on drugs", gang leaders getting caught is rare as fuck because they don't go on the streets, use corruption, relations, etc. Fucking Al Capone get caught because of tax evasion, not drug trafficking. If the war on drugs was effective it would already be over, just like "war on terrorism".

Alcohol trafficking* but it's the same shit when it's illegal.

now you're moving the goal posts faggot

but you haven't provided statistics

the years 1989-1994 had the lowest drug related deaths even after drug legalization.
So what your stats have provided is evidence that during criminalization (1989-1994) drug related deaths were at the lowest they've ever been even after legalization.
Thanks you've proved my point.

lol no thats just the US
American's can't seem do to anything right.

The Philippines are winning their war on drugs

You think Duterte is a good example? He's borderline fascist, he will crush any socialist movement in the Phillipines with the same hate of drug dealers.

nationalisation done correctly is decommodification

its decomodied if you dont pay for it like in the UK. obviously there is creeping privatisation etc, but if you get it because you need it and it isn't produced for exchange. The services will be built on commodities, but the health service itself is not consumed as a commodity. Obviously we want communisim but we are not anarchists, and decommodification comes about through nationalisation, socialisation, etc

because you only need one consenting person to do drugs its barely even comparable. Sex is mostly not a commodity even if it can used as such.

no it isn't. The workers are entitled to their surplus labour, by virtue of their power as the most numerous class and their power to withdraw labour, therefore withdrawing the surplus.

?
???
I've never witnessed this level of dishonest discourse even from Nazis.

'#Want'' matters too of course, you clearly want drugs and just use "entitlement" as a tool to to get what you want and to deny others what they want.

Yes gutting the economy for private investment while you use smoke and mirror "tough on crime" rhetoric to keep everyone in line. So good for working class, very commie

Then just have a explicitly Communist movement for the liberation of the proletariat from capital and all of its forms of opium.
I honestly don't care how brutal it is, it works.

if you imagine a world without commodities, where the people decide what they consume, consider a Cockshott system of cybersyn where you basically vote for what is produced, most people would vote that they want some form of drugs as a way to relax, booze, but also other things. There is no reason they should not have something to unwind with after work or on holiday

this literally exists in the Philippines. Mao at it again.

Consent is a myth. What worker really consents? They would not do it if they were not being pressured economically.

ok but that doesn't mean he has an ineffective drug policy