War on Drugs = Voter Disenfranchisement?

[trof]

Am I the last one to know about this?

This past week-end I was talking to a former prosecutor, now in private practice.
I wondered how many billions of dollars we have wasted on THAT fruitless 'war'?

The attorney said "You DO know why that was started, don't you? It was voter disenfranchisement. Began under Nixon. The vast majority of those targeted are the poor, blacks, and especially poor blacks. The very ones who demographically generally vote Democratic."

"Like the purging of 'felons' from the rolls in Florida in 2000?"
"Exactly, but much more widespread."

Well kiss my grits. Now it all makes sense, in an underhanded Rovian way.

Did everybody else already know this?
Crap.
I feel so stupid.
:dunce:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

1. I doubt you're the last one to know.

[EFerrari]

2. That's right. And that's the same reason Republicans

do their level best to block and to slow down Latino immigrants becoming citizens. Chertoff is sitting on 100k people who should get their citizenship papers by November and won't.

[trof]

3. It finally dawned on me in 2000...

that the only way repugs can win national elections is to keep our voters away from the polls.
There are just more of us than there are of them.

[EFerrari]

4. That's right. When I was a kid, I used to think the Voting Rights Act

was needed because a few white supremicists were mean to black people in the deep South. It wasn't until 2000 that it was clear to me that it happened all over the country and especially in the swing states or states that could turn into swing states with a little PR.

[Fumesucker]

5. Perhaps then you can explain

Why Democratic politicians enthusiastically support a policy that leads to one in six of their single most loyal voting bloc being disenfranchised?

One in three black men will lose their right to vote, in large measure thanks to the drug war.

[trof]

6. I can't Fume.

Makes them look 'soft on drugs'?
The repugs have very successfully framed that argument.
Welcome to DU.
:hi:

[Fumesucker]

9. Thanks for the welcome..

I have my own theories as this is something I have been pondering for nearly two decades now..

I'll wait and see how the thread plays out before I offer my own thoughts though.

[trof]

7. Conversation with a black friend.

Andy is close to my age (60s) and has been a close friend and 'drinkin' buddy' for about 5 years.
He's a mover and shaker in his community. People respect his opinions and listen to him.

The black neighborhoods are pretty much segregated from the rest in this south Alabama red county.
Not by law, of course, but still by custom.

I talked with him about helping to get out the vote in his neighborhood and church during the 2004 campaign.
He told me the biggest problem is that many of the young men he knows are former felons who lost their voting rights while incarcerated.
And the great majority of those convictions were for...you guessed it. Drug possession and/or sales.

I told him that we could get their voting rights restored.
He said he knew all about that and had been successful in a couple of cases. "But most of them don't want to fool with the paperwork and going to the courthouse and filing. And besides, many say this is the white man's government anyway, and they want as little to do with it as possible. It's got nothing to do with them. I tell them that's not right, but they see different. They've been on the 'bad' receiving end and I can't change their minds."

And now I see that it all fits perfectly with what I put forth in the OP.
Damn.

[trof]

8. Kick for the worker bees.

:shrug:

[calimary]

10. Don't feel bad! Precious few bother to try to connect the dots extensively.

But it does make sense. A majority of Americans shares Democratic, progressive, and liberal views on most of the issues. But the minority of extremely squeaky wheels always seems to get its way. I thought we discouraged tantrum-throwing in our wee ones.

But look, the good part is this is being brought up and talked about. And I firmly believe that if we're talking about it here, somebody else somewhere else is doing so, too. And that's what we need - to have this stuff out there, being discussed, being looked at, being kicked around a little. Far better's the chance to spread the idea so other people see/hear the subject being brought up and perhaps start thinking about it, themselves.

[trof]

11. YEAH! What she said.

Get it out there and get people aware of it.

[calimary]

13. It's really importanat. More important that you'd think.

Don't forget the dire words of warning issued by none other than Nancy Reagan (at the time Mrs. President) to then White House uber-insider Donald Regan, whom she didn't like because she thought his ineptitude and arrogance was making her precious ronnie look bad: "People are talking." She warned him of that when she thought things were starting to get out of hand. As it shook out, it appeared she herself was one of those "people" doing the "talking" as in - whisper campaigns, rumor-spreading, death by a thousand cuts, the stealth stiletto wielded by an expensively manicured hand. When people start talking, your head could well be on its way to the guillotine. As his was. She didn't like him, thought he was serving her darling hubby poorly, and she wanted him out. And she went about it very deliberately. You drop hints, you get your friends to drop hints, you put the word out with strategically and shrewdly hand-picked messengers, and it soon becomes a done deal. Which is what he turned into. As done as a Thanksgiving turkey.

So it's important to start generating that verbal drumbeat. It needs to be said, read, and spread. Used to be called the over-the-back-fence talk, and then around-the-water-cooler talk. And it all counts. Even on a low-grade level like ours. You just keep putting it out there. Keep passing the baton. Keep poisoning the well little by little. Plant the seeds one by one. Seeds of REASONABLE DOUBT that you start planting in people's minds. Erode the status quo bit by bit. Eventually, it's turkey time!

[Uncle Joe]

12. First they came for the illegal drug users and the blacks but many people didn't care

because they weren't illegal drug users or black.

They've allowed prisons for profit, naturally the more prisoners, the more profit, it doesn't take much imagination to wonder what type of laws the for profit prison industry lobbyists would be advocating as they grease the American People's "Representative's" palms. A harsh and draconian law against personal behavior only serves to benefit the for profit prison industry and I don't believe laws against illegal drug use will be the end of this dynamic. In short they hate us for our freedoms and I believe the "War Against Drugs" is only the beginning of a surreptitious war actually aimed at the American People; them selves not an inanimate object.

The Orwellian "War Against Drugs" by it's very definition can never be won, only endured for all perpetuity with the inevitable result of increasing American causalities by this ludicrous and illogical policy.

Non-violent drug addiction should be a medical and or educational issue, not a criminal one; which only serves to disenfranchise the American People from their democratic republic. I believe when the people are disenfranchised from their government, the weaker that government becomes and so I view the "War Against Drugs" as an ultimate threat against our national security.

[formercia]

14. Many well off whites have to go to the city to buy drugs

You would think the drug cartels would wise-up and ship their drugs to where the money is instead of to the inner cities where there is little money to be had. The drugs are going there for the reason stated in this thread,

How do you think GHW Bush was given the nickname 'Poppy'?

Skull and Bones was started by people who made their fortunes during the Opium Wars. They're still in the same business.

[progressoid]

15. You silly libruls. The govamint is saving us from...

REEFER MADNESS!!!11!



Seriously though, it is rather odd that Nixon did an about face on the drug issue. At one point he was ready to support treatment as a solution to the drug problem but ultimately endorsed the criminalization of drug use instead. It's hard to say if there were ulterior motives behind this but...well, it's odd.