Comment by m101

2 days ago

There is not that much difference between the state and a mafia. The fact that the mafia has successfully managed to keep out fentanyl shows just how much democratically elected states are failing their citizens. This outcome is not surprising.

It’s way easier to keep fentanyl out of drugs when you are distributing the drugs.

The government can’t regulate a black market.

  • The government can’t regulate a black market, but they could stop the charade of illegal drugs, convert the black market into a regular market, and regulate that. Suddenly you get less fentanyl overdoses, better outcomes for addicts (they're not criminals anymore), AND you remove the power of drug cartels (they'll still exist, but will compete with each other through less murder-y means, like any other capitalist company). Plus, stabilize a lot of third world countries where illegal drug production and export is a big part of the economy, which is what allows the cartels to fight and corrupt the state.

    Or, just keep doing what they're doing. It's bound to work eventually, right? Drug cartels are definitely growing less powerful every year, the war of drugs is being won, rate of addiction is going down.

    • You would like to state to be in the business of permitting the sale of cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, et al?

      Or perhaps selling it directly?

      Has this ever worked? Do you have any evidence whatsoever that this is a good idea?

      2 replies →

Lot of democratically elected states are also good at "keeping fentanly out".

This is a bit of a straw man “do the ends justify the means” statement, with hints of anarchism read between the lines.

Western democracies haven’t really prioritized “war on drugs” (for lack of a better term) over the last probably 10ish years. Yeah there’s still funding and initiatives and some lip service.

Instead the focus has been largely infighting and major political factions fighting for political power in the next generation (“tech bros” political class for one)

So it’s no surprise state-sponsored (and just demand driven) drug trafficking into the US hasn’t received much action.

There is some hope though. With rare earth mineral access being a major national security priority, and many cartels controlling those areas in SA, the converging interests may produce some net positive. Background: https://youtu.be/q_n-74ifBZs?is=nw5g-mmPmKphGH2W

  • A war on drugs can only be won through heavy penalties on the users and the political classes refuse to come down hard on the users (themselves, their children) but rather come down hard on the dealers (poor people) or traffickers (foreigners). For this reason we never really had a war on drugs, just lip service towards one, hence a failure of government.

This is a false equivalence, which means equating two things based on surface similarities while ignoring key differences.

The Mafia keeping fentanyl out isn't a public service. It's a cartel protecting its own drug market, which says nothing about whether democratic states ( globally ) are failing their citizens.