Did the US government really start the war on drugs to subjugate the black man?

cheap prison labour and free money for private prisons.
In the Mexican-American border there's private prisons that do nothing at all to deter migrant flow because they benefit from it just liek the American businesses that profit from Illegal workers..

black people have never being relevant enough regarding to drug trade so no

>There are people who unironically believe this

then talk to me about black cartel kingpins
pro tip: they do no exist and they never have
retail dealers count in drug trafficking as much as small business count in wall street capitalism

Free labor doesn't require incarceration of specific minorities. Wouldn't the government just increase incarceration rates throughout? Is it just a simple case that blacks were more likely to be in economically poor conditions and prone to arrests, or is it actually something racial?

Let me begin with a story, and see what you think about it. A man named Flip owned a computer. Flip, however, took very bad care of his computer. He often ate and drank over the computer, which resulted in his spilling Coke on the keyboard on three occasions, ruining the keyboard each time. He installed software that slowed the machine's performance and caused the operating system to become unstable. Flip thought these programs were "cool", but most industry experts considered them shoddy products whose drawbacks far outweighed their usefulness. Finally, three weeks ago, Flip got angry at his computer and threw it on the floor. The motherboard and several other components were fatally damaged, so that Flip no longer has a working computer. End of story.

Now you may have picked up, this isn't a story about a man and his computer. Consider if it was a story about a man who destroys his body, with the use of illegal drugs. Both are examples of property, after all, what can a person own more authentically than their own body? So it should then come as some surprise that we would criminally penalize someone for harming their body, but not their computer. You can read more about America's unjust drug war below:

owl232.net/drugs.htm

This.

Us spics run this shit. Russians run some shit too, but the blacks and white trash re strictly retail.

BMF is an anomaly.

In some states having a criminal record even prevents you from voting.

We've been coming up with alternative ways of enslaving people for funsies since tenant farming.

It helps that a lot of white people in america don't really give a shit if minorities get locked up. That's an us-them kind of thing. Politicians and intellectuals have been playing that shit since racial science first dawned its ugly head. People get locked up for decades for small drug charges, they're off the streets, and they aren't our problem.

Remember, southern strategy was more or less blacks==crime.

In the USA, every state with the exception of Maine and Vermont prohibits felons from voting while in prison. Nine other states disenfranchise felons for various lengths of time following the completion of their probation or parole. However, the severity of each state's disenfranchisement varies.

Two states, Kentucky and Florida (Gov. Rick Scott reverted to the old policy in 2010 that had been changed by Gov. Charlie Crist), continue to impose a lifelong denial of the right to vote to all citizens with a felony record, in the absence of a restoration of civil rights by the Governor or, where allowed, state legislature.Florida law is somewhat unique, in that the individual must be pardoned by the Governor and a majority of the publicly elected State Cabinet (with the Governor's vote being the tiebreaker, if necessary).

Well, you see friendo, a rapist destroys the life of one or two families, a drug dealer destrys hundreds of families.

nytimes.com/2015/10/31/us/heroin-war-on-drugs-parents.html?_r=0
white statistically do however given their admitted rate of usage vs arrest rates and imprisonment

This argument is utterly retarded. A computer is a tool used for a variety of jobs or passtimes. Forgetting about hacking or anything involving the internet, how a person treats their physical computer is irrelevant to the government. However, how a person treats their ability to be productive directly affects the government's ability to function, and is thus rightly spared from legislation. Always remember, a government's ONLY concern is with people, and insofar as it is concerned with objects or actions, it is ONLY concerned with how these objects or actions will affect people.
For example, the government doesn't care about trade or the economy for their own sake. It cares about them because of the ways in which these things are linked to the behavior and quality of life of its subjects.
Similarly, the government doesn't care whether or not the drugs you do harm your body. Here's what the government cares about
Is this drug likely to cause a number of people to become unproductive welfare recipients?
How much might this drug's legality cost me in emergency services?
Is this drug's illegality going to assist in the maintenance of the prison-industrial complex?
A government's rational response to drugs is prohibition, given the way that the incentives are set up in a modern "diverse" nation.

No. Despite "The New Jim Crow" being taught in colleges everywhere, the author uses no primary sources to advance this argument.

It's stats and appeals to emotion, and no evidence of a centralized conspiracy to destroy blacks with TWOD.

Funny enough, conservative states had the harshest drug laws, even when they had virtually no blacks to punish. See: West Virginia.

Yes, because attitudes towards the war on drugs haven't been shifting for the past 20 years and whites never did heroin before.

It's almost like this thing called Vietnam, which got tons of whites hooked on opiates, never happened.

doesn't change the shifting of opinions varying in large part do to the increased incarceration of whites and not some empathy for the blighted black and brown urban communities specifically targeted.

>the shifting of opinions varying in large part do to the increased incarceration of whites and not some empathy for the blighted black and brown urban communities specifically targeted.

do you have a single fact to back that up?

>US government
Democratic party*

You seemed to have made a typo there OP. And the answer is yes.

nytimes.com/2016/01/17/science/drug-overdoses-propel-rise-in-mortality-rates-of-young-whites.html?login=email&mtrref=undefined

nytimes.com/2016/01/19/opinion/campaign-stops/just-saying-yes-to-the-politics-of-drugs.html

nytimes.com/2016/01/25/us/massachusetts-chiefs-tack-in-drug-war-steer-addicts-to-rehab-not-jail.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0?login=email

Go back to pol faggit

>blighted black and brown urban communities specifically targeted.
It's more with the fact that blacks and browns are often below the poverty line. If both communities had a very large middle class that voted, things would be very different.

>increased incarceration of whites
Yes but where? The suburbs. They never gave a shit about poor inner city whites that have it as bad or worse than blacks.

You have instantly convinced me of your standpoint. What a wonderfully succinct, well-structured argument. Bravo.

Drug arrests are stupid. Theres no reason for the government to interfere with what I can and can't consume. If they care so much about the well being of the nation, they should decriminalize drugs and crime will go down, not to mention the taboo will be erased and there will be less usage

Sweet rebuttal of my post dog

Nothing wrong with that. If you don't follow a society's laws you don't get a say in how it operates.

No, they did so because of an increasing fear of drugs.

Ah OK. In some countries however we have state-provided healthcare, so that would be like destroying a computer that was entrusted to you and then asking for another one.

I don't know of any popular illegal drugs which are likely to make you more successful in life, most of them seem to have the opposite effect. If anything the enforcement of drug laws ought to be helping blacks.

Seeing as how blacks compose about 13% of the us population and have a smaller percentage of drug users yet compose most of the prison population, then yeah, there is more leniency with whites

Yes but the people who bought drugs were probably consenting to their purchase right? And I don't think people turn to rape because there isn't anothrr job to be found in the city.

>have a smaller percentage of drug users

This is false.

It is well known that blacks underreport their drug habits, for fear of persecution

You are forgetting that Flip might damage others while in in an inebriated state

I understand bro, but please, how many families has liquor, tobacco, McDonalds and prescription medicine destroy? Millions more than my uncle did.

"3 men are in a room: a capitalist, a white man and a black man. There are 10 cookies on the table, the capitalist takes them, keeps 9 for himself, then gives one to the white man and says 'look out, that black guy is out to get your cookie!'".

This is how the capitalist, bourgeoisie ruling class divide the people along racial lines. The war on drugs was just an extension of it.

Haha ok /leftypol/

>New York Times
>any kind of decent source
heh