Incisive
Wolf is back, and
right on track:
I find it intersting that the path of action to take was to pressure the stores, rather than to pressure the individual buyers. ...
It would seem to me that the need to pressure the stores stems from a failure of the activists to pressure the people individually. Since they can't (or won't) tell their women not to buy certain articles of clothing (or the women won't listen to such instructions), they feel that they must remove the opportunity to buy them.
Of course, however, that, too, is a failing proposition. ...
In short, if you want any sort of ban to succeed, you have to first win over the will of the people.
Elsewhere:
I'm Ha'aretz brings us this sad and important post: Infertility, shidduchim, and the question of Full Disclosure. On a related note, SaraK notes today's NYTimes asks a similar question.
WildTumor cites a fascinating and interesting Dennis Prager piece on religion and the United States; see the comments there as well.
Finally, Ha'aretz follows up on charedi women and education. (via DB)
It's been a pretty slow day in the J-blogosphere, otherwise... or maybe that's just me.
Thanks for the link, Ezzie.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I've never been gone. Admittedly, I'm not the most active of posters, but I've never retired and come back and retired and come back and retired and come back... like some other bloggers we know. :)
The Wolf
It's been a pretty slow day in the J-blogosphere, otherwise...
ReplyDeletePhew! Then it's a good thing I posted ;-) (I don't know how regularly I will be posting anyway)
And thanks for the link.
Since they can't (or won't) tell their women not to buy certain articles of clothing (or the women won't listen to such instructions), they feel that they must remove the opportunity to buy them.
ReplyDeleteHow many other things does that apply to? The El-Al boycott, the war on drugs, etc.
JA - That's a good point, actually. At the same time, I'd say drugs is a bit different than the rest, and needs to be outlawed in addition to just telling people not to buy it.
ReplyDeleteEzzie:
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point, actually.
!!! Wow. :-)
At the same time, I'd say drugs is a bit different than the rest...
Agreed...
and needs to be outlawed in addition to just telling people not to buy it.
Disagree. Outlawing it has been a catastrophic failure turning millions of nonviolent people into criminals and prisoners, supporting organized crime and terrorism, causing death by e.g. accidental overdose, all while completely failing to do the one thing it's intended to do -- reduce drug usage.
How many decades into the War on Drugs are we? And marijuana is still easier for kids to get than alcohol?
!!! Wow. :-)
ReplyDeleteEvery once in a while... :)
Disagree. Outlawing it has been a catastrophic failure turning millions of nonviolent people into criminals and prisoners, supporting organized crime and terrorism, causing death by e.g. accidental overdose, all while completely failing to do the one thing it's intended to do -- reduce drug usage.
How many decades into the War on Drugs are we? And marijuana is still easier for kids to get than alcohol?
Firstly, I think we need to separate marijuana from the rest of them. As for the rest... no time to write now. I'll try to get back to this over the weekend.
I agree that marijuana should be separated as it's incomparably less dangerous, but the objections I listed above stand for all drugs.
ReplyDeletePlease email me when you respond so I don't miss it. :-)
Outlawing it has been a catastrophic failure turning millions of nonviolent people into criminals and prisoners, supporting organized crime and terrorism, causing death by e.g. accidental overdose, all while completely failing to do the one thing it's intended to do -- reduce drug usage.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure you could prove any one of those, especially the "millions of nonviolent people" part (especially once you separate marijuana from the equation.
Most drugs are incredibly addictive - cocaine, heroin, etc. Should those be available in any way whatsoever?! [They're far more addictive than alcohol or cigarettes, bans of which are simply impractical.]
I'm not sure you could prove any one of those, especially the "millions of nonviolent people" part (especially once you separate marijuana from the equation.
ReplyDeleteI agree that most of the jailed nonviolent people are there for marijuana, but I don't see how one could dispute that the illegality of drugs supports organized crime and terrorism. The fact that drugs are illegal prevents them from being regulated so people don't know how pure their drugs are and may overdose accidentally with tragic consequences.
Most drugs are incredibly addictive - cocaine, heroin, etc. Should those be available in any way whatsoever?!
They should be regulated like alcohol and tobacco. Alcohol is probably more dangerous than all the illegal drugs put together.
[They're far more addictive than alcohol or cigarettes, bans of which are simply impractical.]
This is flatly false. Most sources have nicotine as addictive or more addictive than all other drugs and alcohol more addictive than all except heroin. Bans on nicotine and alcohol are impractical for many of the same reasons that bans on other drugs are.