this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2026
1419 points (99.7% liked)

Curated Tumblr

7558 readers
12 users here now

For preserving the least toxic and most culturally relevant Tumblr heritage posts.

Here are some OCR tools to assist you in transcribing posts:

Don't be mean. I promise to do my best to judge that fairly.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Apytele@sh.itjust.works
ethaver@kbin.earth
1419
Harm reduction in the Netherlands (feddit.dk)
submitted 3 days ago by stenAanden@feddit.dk to c/curatedtumblr@sh.itjust.works
171 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The conspiracy theory is that it was to keep poor people down

Which it was, however directly or indirectly.

The reality is that they didn't directly sell drugs

Yeah they did. Bought drugs too.

they just protected people who did to financially support terrorists

And right wing foreign governments, and right wing guerillas. And to combat left wing governments, and left wing guerillas.

it wasn't an attack on the poor

Yeah it was. A coordinated worldwide mission to oppress the left wing is a coordinated worldwide mission to prevent the poor from rising up and taking what's rightfully theirs from their rich oppressors.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The implication was that they sold drugs to poor communities in America to keep poor communities in America surpressed. Recasting it by saying CIA activities in opposition to anything left of Pinochet are a directed attack on the poor is both shifting it to where I don't think the statement was intended, and also reducing the complexity of their objective.
They didn't give a shit about poor people. They cared about supporting the power structures that employed them. Hurting poor people was just an expedient means towards that end.
Yes, the power structures they supported were largely aligned with financial means because obviously they were, this is America.

I lumped right wing dictators and guerilla groups under the umbrella of terrorism. If the shoe fits and all that.

Citation needed on the CIA directly buying and selling drugs.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The implication was that they sold drugs to poor communities in America to keep poor communities in America surpressed

They did that too.

CIA activities in opposition to ~~anything~~ everything left of Pinochet

Fixed it for you.

are a directed attack on the poor is both shifting it to where I don't think the statement was intended, and also reducing the complexity of their objective.

On the contrary. I'm saying that attacking the poor was one of many goals of a multifaceted strategy, not the only one.

They didn't give a shit about poor people.

That's not quite true. They had no love for them, but they were not stupid enough not to fear them.

They cared about supporting the power structures that employed them.

And to do so is to actively suppress dissent from and agency of the poor

Hurting poor people was ~~just an expedient means~~ an absolutely crucial factor towards that end.

Fixin'

Yes, the power structures they supported were largely aligned with financial means because obviously they were, this is America.

Yet you refuse to acknowledge that this necessarily means that they were opposed to poor people, or you're just denying their awareness of it.

Citation needed on the CIA directly buying and selling drugs.

Here's an overview

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 days ago

Do you have anything more specific than a category page, or did you intend to link to a general pile of vague references that generally surmise

Their investigations have generally noted that there is no clear evidence CIA itself had ever directly engaged in drug trafficking, although there may have been instances of the organization being indirectly complicit in the activities of others.

Or from one of the journalist pieces the spurred more investigation:

In most cases, the CIA's role involved various forms of complicity, tolerance or studied ignorance about the trade, not any direct culpability in the actual trafficking ... [t]he CIA did not handle heroin, but it did provide its drug lord allies with transport, arms, and political protection. In sum, the CIA's role in the Southeast Asian heroin trade involved indirect complicity rather than direct culpability.

Which is a whole hell of a lot of "exactly what I said".

The cutesy correction of someone else's words isn't persuasive, and is nonsense when you don't even change the meaning.

You see money as the source of an entrenched power structure. I see money as the side effect. It's an efficient way to exert power

They don't need cocaine to surpress the poor in America.