Deep thoughts with interchange (Vol 1)

[agent00f]

I don't think that's really accurate.

Practical policy approaches happen all the time. Remember what happened with prohibition?

Unfortunately, there's another factor as well.

When it was blacks and crack, the response was 'cops and jail'. Now, it's whites and opiates.

You answered your own concern. As long as it largely punishes the disenfranchised, the people who matter don't have to give a shit.

 

[Craig234]

Saying there is a racist history to the drug criminalization isn't saying that the polices can't be changed because a majority of the public are religiously dedicated to them and not interested in rational policies.

 

[agent00f]

Surely you can see why practical policy is difficult when much of the population doesn't consider policy in practical terms.

 

[Craig234]

Surely you can see why practical policy is difficult when much of the population doesn't consider policy in practical terms.

I don't think that's really the issue. It's more that there are agendas misrepresenting what's practical and ignorance getting in the way.

For example, take a classic of modern American politics. How do rich people sell the rest of the people on giving them most of their money?

Enter the 'trickle down idea'. By cutting taxes on the rich, you can quit getting in the way of their investing more in the economy making everyone richer - big bad government taxing!

Now, that was nothing but a false argument for just that - taking people's money - but it sounded reasonable enough to fool many Americans for decades, and still does.

But it has a whole industry pushing it on the public, with credible-sounding spokespeople saying it, all to 'sell' it so the rich can laugh all the way to the bank. That's one type of 'practical'.

 

[agent00f]

A key observation here is a plurality if not majority of democratic citizens are arguable too stupid to discern this, so you're arguing for a distinction without a difference.