Is it left wing to tolerate crack dealers?

[kyser_soze]

Suppose they dared to try and colonise a newly-liberated area where they were certainly not wanted by the community that was still glad to see the back of the last lot of dealers? Don't you think they'd worry they'd go the same way?

Does an aggressive company avoid entering a market stuffed full of hostile comptition and locals? No. Drug dealing is the same as any other business, as soon as you create a market for it it'll work.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

How long could they do that in the face of a mass uprising (exscuse the hyperbole) against them?

You think there's a will for a violent mass uprising? I doubt it, personally. And I wonder how many deaths you think are acceptable? And in what way the problems crack dealers cause now are worse than gunfights in the street.

And if you think it'll be short term, I'd disagree with that as well. The demand will still be there, people aren't going to stop wanting crack. What would happen is that more ruthless, better armed dealers would start to supply it.

Controlled supply is the only way to deal with the problem IMO.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

You live in some kind of idealised fantasy land if you think that giving local communities of ANY kind legal power over themselves won't lead to vigilante justice - what, you and all your lefty mates are going to be positive and engaging and help ensure that communities police themselves in a fair, balanced fashion? That there wouldn't be victimisation in any class group against others? Sorry, but I just don't share your optimism that humans can self govern in a fair and unselfish manner for any kind of extended period, and that ultimately the Rule of Force, not Law, will come to dominate.

Simply because your fantasy is a violent and alienated dystopia, doesn't make it any less fantasy than the caricature you are attempting to paint, of the proposition that more trust and control at a local level, rather than less, might actually pay some social dividends.

As for your assertion that humans can't 'self govern in a fair and unselfish manner for any kind of extended period', well it may not have occurred to you that for a lot of people a lot of the time, there experience is that they do precisely that. The questions then arise, what is it about those times and places where they can't self govern, that produce that effect, swiftly followed by what can we do to change those times and places?

Lastly, for the moment, even if you were right about humans' capacity for self government, then you'd still be left with the question as to by who and how such incapacity is to be tackled/controlled?

Louis Mac

 

[poster342002]

You think there's a will for a violent mass uprising? I doubt it, personally. And I wonder how many deaths you think are acceptable? And in what way the problems crack dealers cause now are worse than gunfights in the street.

And if you think it'll be short term, I'd disagree with that as well. The demand will still be there, people aren't going to stop wanting crack. What would happen is that more ruthless, better armed dealers would start to supply it.

Controlled supply is the only way to deal with the problem IMO.

Tyrannies of any discription - however well armed - don't tend to last very long in the face of mass popular uprisings.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

Tyrranies of any discription - however well armed - don't tend to last very long in the face of mass popular uprisings.

Who's talking about tyrannies? I thought this was about crack dealers.

 

[poster342002]

Who's talking about tyrannies? I thought this was about crack dealers.

Crack dealers are local tyrannies.

 

[tobyjug]

Who's talking about tyrannies? I thought this was about crack dealers.

And them taking over an area so it makes it a very shit experience just to walk down the street isn't tyranny?

 

[kyser_soze]

Yeah, and you seem to believe that the simple events of human life - infidelity, petty jealousy - are going to dissappear because people are given control over their lives?

You seem to be making the mistake of thinking I believe that as individuals people can't govern themselves, which is wrong. Yes the majority of people self govern on their own, and control their own lives, but we're not talking about indivuduals are we? We're talking about groups of people, about communities and much as individuals are, by and large, capable of governing themselves effectively, groups of humans are a different matter altogether.

My 'fantasy' isn't a violent dystopia - if you actually think I want this think again because I don't, it's a simple case that my life experience, from growing up, travelling to many countries and societies for extended periods, from living where I have in London, have led me to the way I think now. Hey, maybe personal experience isn't worth basing opinions on and I should read more history and theory perhaps?

How should/could such a thing be tackled? I have no idea or solution off the top of my head, but I do know that unless the ideas we're discussing were introduced into society as it is it would be a disaster.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

Not really. They aren't trying to control everything, they're trying to make a lot of money. It's a different thing IMO.

As I said, I seriously doubt there's enough people willing to put their lives on the line in this cause, and I don't think the bloodshed would be worthwhile.

 

[LLETSA]

I don't think PEOPLE can be trusted - I reckon that given the same chances you'd see gun totin' Chelsea and Kensington types out cleaning the streets of homeless people, setting up checkpoints to keep out the poor, arresting anyone walking as opposed to jogging, setting up discriminatory resident's associations to keep 'riff raff' out.

Tell people they can govern their own neighbourhoods and communities and give them authority over the use of physical force and they'll behave exactly the same way any community that's been given such freedom and power and use it as often as possible and in as locale-context a way as they see fit. In the case of a m/c suburb it'd be creating a gated, discriminatory community, in the case of a w/c estate it could be anything from a BNP led group or the vilification of anyone considered different or 'strange'. No doubt there would be people like yourself and many others on Urban the IRL who would try and use such an opportunity to do some good, but my feeling is that populist violence, prejudice, hate and fear would always be the winners.

You are JG Ballard and I claim my fiver!

 

[kyser_soze]

You are JG Ballard and I claim my fiver!

I was thinking about that book to an extent, but my point was more that people were levelling the old 'Oh, so you just don't think the w/c class are capable of governing themselves and need to be looked after by their 'betters'' accusation, which in my case simply isn't true.

Oh, and BTW - the walking/jogging thing happens in LA - when I was there over a decade ago I was pulled up by the LAPD for walking back to the place I was staying in Beverley Hills after they received a call saying that 'Someone is walking down our street'.

 

[poster342002]

Not really. They aren't trying to control everything, they're trying to make a lot of money. It's a different thing IMO.

It's exactly the same thing. It's basic capitalism: drive for profit leads to aggressive tyrrany in order to safeguard those profits.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

It's exactly the same thing. It's basic capitalism: drive for profit leads to aggressive tyrrany to safeguard those profits.

Fine. So what is it about crack dealers that leads to threads like this, when there isn't a thread about driving out your local pub?

 

[poster342002]

Fine. So what is it about crack dealers that leads to threads like this, when there isn't a thread about driving out your local pub?

That's the most bizarre straw man type-argument I've ever heard. I'll leave it oto to others to rebut if they can be bothered.

 

[kyser_soze]

Fine. So what is it about crack dealers that leads to threads like this, when there isn't a thread about driving out your local pub?

That's a good one actually - the local boozers and offies who keep the local drunks in whiskey and Tenants. Are they also a socially dystfunctional element?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Yeah, and you seem to believe that the simple events of human life - infidelity, petty jealousy - are going to dissappear because people are given control over their lives?

You seem to be making the mistake of thinking I believe that as individuals people can't govern themselves, which is wrong. Yes the majority of people self govern on their own, and control their own lives, but we're not talking about indivuduals are we? We're talking about groups of people, about communities and much as individuals are, by and large, capable of governing themselves effectively, groups of humans are a different matter altogether.

My 'fantasy' isn't a violent dystopia - if you actually think I want this think again because I don't, it's a simple case that my life experience, from growing up, travelling to many countries and societies for extended periods, from living where I have in London, have led me to the way I think now. Hey, maybe personal experience isn't worth basing opinions on and I should read more history and theory perhaps?

How should/could such a thing be tackled? I have no idea or solution off the top of my head, but I do know that unless the ideas we're discussing were introduced into society as it is it would be a disaster.

Firstly, where are these place where you live as an individual, disconnected from the rest of humanity? We are social beings, dependent on one another; it's actually what we're good at.

Secondly, 'infidelity and petty jealousy'? We were talking about class A drug dealing and more particularly bearing down on the damage it can do to communities. The not very radical proposition has been made that communities being trusted to identify what is in there own best interests, might prove to have some mileage in it as part of an anti-harm strategy. Where is the disaster?

All you appear to be putting forward is a counsel of despair, which supports the status quo.

Louis Mac

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

That's the most bizarre straw man type-argument I've ever heard. I'll leave it oto to others to rebut if they can be bothered.

It's not a straw man argument, because it isn't an argument at all. I guess from that that you were assuming that I was intending to suggest that the pub should be driven out, whereas what I was getting at was that the difference is the illegality, which is why the better approach would be to legalise and control supply.

 

[kyser_soze]

That's the most bizarre straw man type-argument I've ever heard. I'll leave it oto to others to rebut if they can be bothered.

Well, a publican IS a drug dealer - he sells alcohol, which is an addictive, debilitiating drug which has social consequences that are at least on a par with crack when taken as a whole, and isn't one of the standard arguements on drug prohibition threads that alcohol is a drug like any other?

 

[tobyjug]

Well, a publican IS a drug dealer - he sells alcohol, which is an addictive, debilitiating drug which has social consequences that are at least on a par with crack when taken as a whole, and isn't one of the standard arguements on drug prohibition threads that alcohol is a drug like any other?

To compare a pub to crack dealers is the biggest load of nonsence I have heard in a long while.
A pub is the social centre of a community, and an essential part of it.
Crack dealers are a boil on the backside of society and about as anti-social as it is possible to be.

"Bars, Pubs, and Cafés

We have to recognise, that the gin-palace, like many other evils, although as poisonous, is still a natural outgrowth of our social conditions. The tap-room in many cases is the poor man's only parlour. Many a man takes to beer, not from the love of beer, but from a natural craving for the light, warmth, company, and comfort which is thrown in along with the beer, and which he cannot get excepting by buying beer. Reformers will never get rid of the drink shop until they can outbid it in the subsidiary attractions which it offers to its customers."
William Booth (1829-1912), English evangelist, founder of the Salvation Army. In Darkest England, and the Way Out, pt. 1, ch. 6 (1890).

The Columbia Dictionary of Quotations is licensed from Columbia University Press. Copyright © 1993 by Columbia University Press. All rights reserved.

 

[kyser_soze]

Firstly, where are these place where you live as an individual, disconnected from the rest of humanity? We are social beings, dependent on one another; it's actually what we're good at.

Secondly, 'infidelity and petty jealousy'? We were talking about class A drug dealing and more particularly bearing down on the damage it can do to communities. The not very radical proposition has been made that communities being trusted to identify what is in there own best interests, might prove to have some mileage in it as part of an anti-harm strategy. Where is the disaster?

All you appear to be putting forward is a counsel of despair, which supports the status quo.

Louis Mac

Again Louis, you misunderstand my point - as individuals dealing with other individuals people are generally capable of governing themselves (and it's quite funny you question me bringing up something like infidelity since that's a classic example of how, in inter-personal relationships, humans can't always govern themselves or their emotions) - I'm not suggesting for one second that people are isolated indoividuals, just that when people come together in large groups often that ability dissappears...

And are you saying that interactions like infidelity, deception and jealousy don't contribute to the breakdown of families and small communities? You've clearly never saty through an ep of Trisha and been confronted with what happens to families and groups of friends when it happens, or the mob mentality that seizes the audience when presented with the adulterer.

The propositions that have been made range from what you've said to mass applications for firearems licences to complete self-policing. Slightly wider spread of ideas than simple community involvement in local policing and identifying local priorities for dealing with crime which I would have no problemn with whatsoever.

 

[kyser_soze]

To compare a pub to crack dealers is the biggest load of nonsence I have heard in a long while.
A pub is the social centre of a community, and an essential part of it.
Crack dealers are a boil on the backside of society and about as anti-social as it is possible to be.

"Bars, Pubs, and Cafés

We have to recognise, that the gin-palace, like many other evils, although as poisonous, is still a natural outgrowth of our social conditions. The tap-room in many cases is the poor man's only parlour. Many a man takes to beer, not from the love of beer, but from a natural craving for the light, warmth, company, and comfort which is thrown in along with the beer, and which he cannot get excepting by buying beer. Reformers will never get rid of the drink shop until they can outbid it in the subsidiary attractions which it offers to its customers."
William Booth (1829-1912), English evangelist, founder of the Salvation Army. In Darkest England, and the Way Out, pt. 1, ch. 6 (1890).

The Columbia Dictionary of Quotations is licensed from Columbia University Press. Copyright © 1993 by Columbia University Press. All rights reserved.

Hey, I was being spurious to an extent, but when it comes down to it, a publican sells an additive debilitating drug and many sell to people who are suffering from addiction to that drug - why couldn't a tea or coffee shop or local library be the centre of the local community rather than a pub?

I mean Booth is right and I'm not making an argument for temperance, more making the point that when it comes to some posters, the nature of alcohol as a dangerous drug changes depending on what point they want to make.

 

[kyser_soze]

Incidentally, I don't really give a flying fuck about this, it's just an interesting argument...and as a thread it hasn't descended into the usual class-war name calling which makes a change.

 

[snadge]

Tyrannies of any discription - however well armed - don't tend to last very long in the face of mass popular uprisings.

depends how tyrannical

 

[poster342002]

depends how tyrannical

Well, look at Ceausecu of Romania or the Tsar of Russia. I think it's fair to say those regimes had far more weapons at their disposal than a handful of moronic crack-dealers do.

I think we're drifting off-topic again, though. Basically, it's a case of "the people united will never be defeated". But enough cliches for today.

 

[tobyjug]

Hey, I was being spurious to an extent, but when it comes down to it, a publican sells an additive debilitating drug and many sell to people who are suffering from addiction to that drug - why couldn't a tea or coffee shop or local library be the centre of the local community rather than a pub?

I mean Booth is right and I'm not making an argument for temperance, more making the point that when it comes to some posters, the nature of alcohol as a dangerous drug changes depending on what point they want to make.

Alcohol is only addictive for some people. Alcohol in moderation has beneficial medical effects.

 

[snadge]

Well, look at Ceausecu of Romania or the Tsar of Russia. I think it's fair to say those regimes had far more weapons at their disposal than a handful of moronic crack-dealers do.

I think we're drifting off-topic again, though. Basically, it's a case of "the people united will never be defeated". But enough cliches for today.

I don't think it is off topic, just following on from kysers lead really.

 

[snadge]

Alcohol is only addictive for some people. Alcohol in moderation has beneficial medical effects.

A lot more addictive than cannabis, with more health problems as well, do you agree toby?

 

[kyser_soze]

Don't start him off. It also interesting how it's only additive for 'some' people...I would wager that given the correct circumstances alcoholism is an illness that anyone could have, just as any debilitating addiction is.

But anyway, this thread is about CRACK! no booze or weed.

 

[snadge]

.

But anyway, this thread is about CRACK! no booze or weed.

ok GIVE ME CRACK,

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

ok GIVE ME CRACK,

<resists temptation to post comedy arse shot>