We’re asking the wrong question about the campus free speech ‘crisis’ – Washington Examiner

Posted on by

The speech wars are resuming on campus with the new semester. But in the opinion columns, conference panels, and state houses debating the state of free expression on campus, they never abated.

The positions are well staked out. Activists point to the videos of invited speakers shouted down by students who object to what they will say. Skeptics retort that free speech is no more imperiled on college campuses than elsewhere. But this seemingly unending debate misses the point.

Free expression on campus matters not because there is a unique speech crisis on campus, but because universities are uniquely positioned to address broader societal crises. The question isnt whether universities have a problem but how theyre uniquely positioned to solve ours.

There are over 5,000 colleges in the United States, and they arent all the same. But together, they are a critical part of the solution for our growing tribalism and intolerance of other points of view.

More than two-thirds of Americans attend college, and more than 1 in 3 will receive a bachelors degree. As a result, college graduates will disproportionately hold positions of influence in our government and culture. These campuses are where the next generation of teachers, judges, cultural influencers, and community leaders are educated. And college is also the first significant opportunity for many students to experience truly diverse ideas and find ways to resolve differences.

Universities are unique in their mission, their impact and in the centrality of free expression to that end. As a sign prominently displayed over an academic building at my alma mater, the University of Virginia, proclaims: For here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it. Even assuming we know the truth from an error, allowing error to challenge truth helps to guarantee that the ideas we hold true are not accepted as mere dogma. Truth has nothing to fear. It can only be sharpened by conflict.

So civil liberty advocates are not wrong when they raise concerns about the roughly 90% of universities with speech zones, speech codes, and other formal written policies that, however well-meaning their intent, violate the First Amendment. Not only do these policies require taxpayer expense to defend when enforced, but they signal to students that the state can tell you when and where you can speak and what you can say. If 91% of municipalities suddenly enacted written policies unconstitutionally limiting free expression, it seems doubtful there would be much debate about whether this constitutes a crisis in need of resolving.

But skeptics are also correct to note that the focus on a crisis of campus free speech obscures the fact that university students may be no more supportive of censorship than the general population. Almost 30% of adults say that the First Amendment goes too far in its protections, 25% would give the president power to shutter news media engaged in bad behavior, and 50% of adults say that universities should disinvite speakers who will offend some part of a campus population.

So is the crisis really limited to the campus? Hardly.

The necessity of promoting free expression, and eliminating unconstitutional barriers to it on campus, need not be premised on a demonstrated campus crisis. This framing lowers expectations for what our universities should be, grading free speech on campus on a curve with the rest of our society. Yet, free expression is critical to the achievement of the universitys own mission and universities are not just part of our national culture, they graduate the leaders who shape it.

By eliminating speech zones, speech codes, and similar restrictive policies, universities demonstrate that other students and their ideas are not a threat to be managed but an opportunity for growth to be embraced. Supporting debate and other programs that allow students to engage with and even empathize with others with different views is a critical step in ending the tribalism infecting our society.

These ideas are not new, especially to free-speech advocates. But they should pursue these goals not with the aim of simply protecting the rights of combatants in a speech war, but because they enable universities and their graduates better leaders for our future.

Its time we stop focusing on universities as the problem and start treating them as the needed solution.

Casey Mattox is a senior fellow of free speech and toleration at the Charles Koch Institute.

Read the original here:

We're asking the wrong question about the campus free speech 'crisis' - Washington Examiner

NBA Struggles To Find The Balance Between Free Speech And Chinas Sensitivities – Deadline

Posted on by

CNNs Christina Macfarlane was cut off at a Japan press conference after an exhibition game between the Houston Rockets and Toronto Raptors. The Rockets have been at the center of a dispute that started when one of its executives, general manager Daryl Morey, tweeted support for the pro-democracy demonstrations in Hong Kong.

Macfarlane attempted to ask Rockets stars James Harden and Russell Westbrook whether they would feel comfortable speaking out on political and social issues in the future after the uproar from China in reaction to Morey and the events of this week. The unidentified Rockets media relations person stopped them from answering even though Harden appeared ready to respond saying that basketball questions only were the only permissible path.

The incident was yet another stain on the leagues effort to find a balance between placating China and avoiding further outraging those who feel the league has been somewhat mealy-mouthed in its defense of free speech. Tim Frank, an NBA senior VP, later called CNNs Macfarlane to apologize, according to several reports. You can bet the question will be asked again, if not by CNN, then by others.

Despite its attempts to squelch uncomfortable questions on China, the NBA and its Chinese partners face an uphill battle to mend fences on multiple fronts. So far, NBA merchandise has been stripped from Chinese stores, banners touting NBA exhibitions have been taken down, plans to televise and stream games have been halted, and advertising and sponsorships placed on hold. Chinas social media has also voiced its outrage at perceived interference in its domestic problems.

Reports indicate China currently contributes 10% of the NBAs revenue, and represents (or represented) a growing and coveted market. Now, thats in limbo.

The Los Angeles Lakers and Brooklyn Nets (owned by Hong Kong resident and Alibaba founder Joe Tsai) played a game Thursday in Shanghai. But the only people who saw it were ticket-holders, and outside the arena, protesters denounced the NBA. Things were so bad that former Houston Rockets star and Hall of Famer Yao Ming, who helped the NBA build a bridge to China and stoked his countrys enthusiasm for the game, skipped an appearance. Ming is the president of the Chinese Basketball Association and a key to ongoing partnerships.

In the US, NBA Commissioner Adam Silvers lukewarm defense of free speech has won him little support. No less than President Trump noted that the league, which has shunned the White House and been outspoken in its opposition to many aspects of his administration, had no problem previously speaking up. He particularly targeted Golden State Warriors coach Steve Kerr, who refused to answer a question on China.

He couldnt answer the question he was shaking, Oh, oh, oh, I dont know. I dont know,' Trump said. He didnt know how to answer the question, and yet hell talk about the United States very badly. Trump also had words for San Antonio coach Gregg Popovich.I watched Popovich sort of the same thing, but he didnt look quite as scared actually, Trump said. But they talk badly about the United States, but when it talks about China, they dont want to say anything bad. I thought it was pretty sad, actually. Itll be very interesting.

Now, the question centers on how the league can move forward. Prominent game ambassadors like LeBron James, who makes annual trips to China, have yet to make a statement. Will they continue to remain silent? And how will they respond to charges of hypocrisy if they speak out on US domestic problems, but refuse to address China and its human rights issues?

Other businesses beyond the NBA will also be affected. Television and streaming deals, sneaker and apparel sales, transportation companies and marketing/advertising programs will all take an economic hit if the free speech issues continue to simmer.

Its only the first quarter of this particular game, and theres a long season to come. Hollywood already deals with Chinas sensitivities in marketing its products. The NBA will provide yet another test case of how to navigate a global community filled with differing opinions. So far, its shots arent falling.

See original here:

NBA Struggles To Find The Balance Between Free Speech And Chinas Sensitivities - Deadline

China isnt the only country trying to stifle our free speech – The Boston Globe

Posted on by

You might have thought I was going after China, which is using its economic might to punish the National Basketball Association, just because the general manager of the Houston Rockets tweeted support of anti-government protesters in Hong Kong. Remember that Twitter is banned in China, so hardly anyone there ever saw the message. This wasnt about stifling domestic protests, but silencing criticism everywhere else in the world.

While the NBA belatedly stood behind the free-speech rights of its personnel, some of its fans who attended an exhibition game of a Chinese team in Philadelphia this week said they were ejected for showing solidarity with the Hong Kong protesters. Meanwhile, even mighty Apple has been cowed; it pulled an app from its online store at Chinas behest that pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong used to track the movements of police. And Google has stopped distributing a game for Android phones that let users pretend to be a protester in Hong Kong.

The news from Europe isnt nearly as bad as the bullying from Beijing. But precisely because its a matter of law rather than a dictators whim, the Case of the Irritated Austrian may pose a worrisome threat to online freedom for years to come.

The ruling arose out of an incident in 2016, when someone on Facebook wrote that Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek, head of the Austrian Green Party, was a lousy traitor and a corrupt bumpkin who belonged to a fascist party. That kind of babble happens in the United States every day and barely merits a shrug, or maybe just a holla-back Im no traitor! Youre a traitor! But in Austria, such words may be sanctioned as illegal defamation.

Glawischnig-Piesczek sued in an Austrian court and won an order that Facebook must take down the offending words. But the court wasnt content with riding herd on the reading habits of people in Austria. It held that Facebook had to take the message down around the world, so that absolutely nobody could read it.

Id thought the United States had dodged this particular bullet. In 2014, the European Unions highest court declared that citizens of the EU had the right to demand that search services like Google must take down embarrassing information about them if it was no longer relevant being fired from a job 20 years earlier, for instance. Google grudgingly complied. Since then, its received nearly 846,000 takedown requests from Europeans and removed 1.3 million web pages. But since the law applied to the EU, Google didnt delist the pages elsewhere in the world.

In 2016, France fined Google for refusing to delete the disputed information beyond the EU. After all, someone in France could still access that information, simply by going to the American version at Google.com instead of the French edition at Google.fr. But in September, the EUs supreme court disagreed, ruling that Europes right to be forgotten can be enforced only against Googles European sites.

Case closed? Not so fast.

On Oct. 3, the same court, ruling in the Glawischnig-Piesczek case, said that if the message in question is defamatory, the ban can be enforced worldwide. Facebook has to delete the disputed insults against her from its entire network, or it could face sanctions in the European Union, where the company generated about $14 billion in revenue last year. Worse yet, the court ruled that Facebook must also take down equivalent content in other words, posts that say essentially the same thing.

Now, how to enforce such a ruling? Automate the process, the EU court says. Surely Facebooks computers can ferret out every instance of the insults in question. That might work for exact copies of the original post. But Facebook must also ban messages that say roughly the same thing. But what if the words are used in a message that supports Glawischnig-Piesczek, or a news story that merely describes the affair?

Facebook must sort it all out on a global scale, every time an EU court demands a new takedown. That will never work. Either insults will seep through, or the filters will be so strict that even modest criticisms are barred, and free speech is smothered.

Its unlikely this ruling will lead to a torrent of censorship requests, as unhappy Europeans will have to first win a defamation case. And while the EU nations may impose more limits on free speech than the US, they at least recognize the principle.

But social networks might face similar demands from less liberal countries. China doesnt have to since it already bans Facebook, Google, and Twitter. But these companies are in other countries with other nasty regimes. Imagine Russia calling for worldwide takedowns of Facebook messages that defame Vladimir Putin, if such a thing is possible. Now he can use the EU court ruling to give any such demands a veneer of legality.

A few years back, I wrote about the need for an international treaty to set standards on Internet content regulation. We Americans already have the perfect template the First Amendment but most of the world isnt nearly as open-minded. So well have to compromise. And heres where to start: Lets tell the Europeans that well recognize their right to be forgotten law and its nitpicky definition of defamation, but only until we hit the Atlantic Coast. On this side of the water, lets play by our rules.

But the US cant hash out such a deal with China because Beijing wont bend on the issue of censorship. So theres only one question: Will we?

In effect, Americas corporations, desperate for Chinese cash, are negotiating with themselves. And so far, free speech is losing.

Hiawatha Bray can be reached at hiawatha.bray@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @GlobeTechLab.

View post:

China isnt the only country trying to stifle our free speech - The Boston Globe

Betting on free speech at the The League of Legends World Championship – Fox Business

Posted on by

Fox News Headlines 24/7 anchor Brett Larson reports on Fortnite disappearing into a black hole as the games season ends.

Political speech is now something that can be wagered on, at least when it comes to The League of Legends World Championship. One wagering firm is taking bets on if political statements will be made at the upcoming championships in Berlin.

This weekends The League of Legends World Championship could be the next battlefront for the democratic movement in Hong Kong. Last week, Ng Wai Chung, who is known by his gaming handle of Blitzchung,had been banned and stripped of his earnings after an interview on the Asia-Pacific Grandmasters broadcast of Hearthstone. In the interview, Blitzchung made a pro-democratic statement and was summarily stripped of his winnings, and was banned because ofhis statement by the game's owner, which is partially owned by Tencent, a Chinese media company..

Now, political speech inspired by Blitzchung is open to bets. SportsBetting.ag is offering three wagering lines on the topic for this weekends championship:

The case at the center of the betting odds continues to draw more attention to the protests in Hong Kong.

Blitzchung wore a gas mask while conducting the interview,a nod to the protesters in Hong Kong. At the end of the interview shouted "Liberate Hong Kong! The revolution of our times!"

This was deemed by Activision Blizzard to be against the games code of conduct, the games owner and operator. Blitzchung was stripped of his winnings and banned for the statement. Days later, Activision Blizzard caved to pressure and re-instated the winnings while cutting the suspension to six months.

Blitzchung responded to his commuted punishment by posting his appreciation on social media channels, but he has left the question of his future participation in the esports community open.

"Honestly, I have no idea on that yet," Blitzchung wrote about if he will compete again. "Since my next tournament is very likely to be the grandmaster tournament of next season, it's probably at least a few months from now on. I will take this time to relax myself to decide if I am staying in competitive hearthstone scene or not."

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

See the rest here:

Betting on free speech at the The League of Legends World Championship - Fox Business

Bitcoin Is a Weapon for Free Speech in the Face of Government and Corporate Censorship – Bitcoin News

Posted on by

The latest skirmishes in the bruising trade war between the U.S. and China have led to the unlikely politicization of the NBA. But how did the views of a basketball executive become such a political football? And what does Chinas ideological commitment to censorship say about the value of free speech and of free speech money, as bitcoin is sometimes known?

Also read: Berlusconi Admins Disappear Darknet Users Rush to Find Alternatives

The Communist Partys gangsterish demands on private companies is nothing new, but the recent decision by Houston Rockets general manager Daryl Morey to tweet support for pro-democracy protestors amid bedlam in Hong Kong quickly exposed just how fragile the notion of free speech really is. In the face of opprobrium from Beijing, Moreys climbdown, augmented by groveling input from Rockets owner Tilman Fertitta and NBA spokesman Mike Bass, was pitiful to behold. But it hinted at the wider problem of gutlessness among companies that have provoked the ire of the Chinese government.

A curated list of companies that have kowtowed to Chinese censorship requests, maintained on Github, is damning. As well as the NBA, the roll of shame includes Apple, Marriott, Nike, ESPN, several of the worlds largest airlines like British Airways, Qantas and American Airlines, and Versace. With trade talks between the US and China underway in Washington, the specter of censorship, while not on the agenda, will loom large over proceedings.

Both nations have a lot to answer for as far as free speech, privacy, money and other basic human rights are concerned. Chinas persistent assault on freedom seems more flagrant, but the U.S. and, for that matter, other western nations hardly cover themselves in glory. Attorney General William Barr recently squeezed major tech companies to provide government agencies with backdoor entry points for encrypted devices and software. It remains perfectly legal for citizens throughout the world to be fired by their employer or interrogated by customs for something theyve said on social media even when it occurred years ago.

Edward Snowdens expos of rampant state surveillance shows that when it comes to assembling a digital panopticon thats always watching, the Americans are even more ruthless than the Chinese. At least in China you can see the cameras observing you; theres no such courtesy when the U.S. agencies activate your webcam and start recording.

Speaking of surveillance and its insidious incursion into peoples lives, the Washington Post just reported that more than 400 police departments across the U.S. have entered into surveillance partnerships with Amazons camera-enabled doorbell company, Ring. Its yet another way in which the government is utilizing tech, while co-opting big business to bear down upon civil rights and liberties.

In the modern world, digital freedom is everything. The bulk of our lives now unfold online: our conversations, our financial transactions, our very identities. What we are witnessing, increasingly, is free speech being smothered via the deplatforming of certain voices and an attempt by governments to introduce regulatory oversight on financial transactions which goes beyond ensuring proper taxation, but under the guise of crime prevention impinges upon privacy at a fundamental level. When governments seek to blunt-force encrypted devices and software, it requires a stupefying level of naivety to assume that their motivation is cracking down on kiddie porn.

Value and dignity exist in an internet where speech, financial autonomy and other basic rights are not controlled by government agencies or international conglomerates. Where our private data is not commoditized and sold to the highest bidder, and where we have the right to lives that are not the object of constant and unforgiving scrutiny.

Avoiding inference from third parties in the form of censure (deplatforming) and restriction of speech are basic desires shared by all digital citizens. This is why, when the topic of censorship and governmental overreach rears its head, Bitcoin isnt far behind. Being able to process payments on the internet without permission or risk of confiscation is a privilege that provokes a desire to exercise the same level of freedom in other realms. To harness fully open source, secure and private systems of expression that are immune to the tentacles of power.

If the convergence of state and corporate interests continues unchecked, we are all imperilled; Chinese, American, or otherwise. Seized bank accounts, stolen information, frozen assets and ever greater attempts to stifle free speech and freedom of association will become the norm, and not just for those existing on the fringes, but for the masses. Is it any wonder that protestors harness technology to combat the might of the state? Tools such as PGP, Bitcoin, and decentralized networks allow individuals to conduct their affairs without permission from any bank, corporation or government.

While the summit in Washington is focused on matters such as trade imbalances and intellectual property violations, at an individual level we have bigger questions to ask of ourselves. Are we prepared to endure online censorship and a veritable onslaught on our civil liberties? Or are we willing to fight for an internet that does not function as an arm of the state but as an open platform for the free exchange of ideas and value? A censorship-resistant internet benefits everyone. It also benefits Bitcoin, for where theres free speech, theres demand for free speech money.

Do you think free speech and financial sovereignty as provided by Bitcoin are interlinked? Let us know in the comments section below.

Op-ed disclaimer: This is an Op-ed article. The opinions expressed in this article are the authors own. Bitcoin.com is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy or quality within the Op-ed article. Readers should do their own due diligence before taking any actions related to the content. Bitcoin.com is not responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any information in this Op-ed article.

Images courtesy of Shutterstock.

Did you know you can verify any unconfirmed Bitcoin transaction with our Bitcoin Block Explorer tool? Simply complete a Bitcoin address search to view it on the blockchain. Plus, visit our Bitcoin Charts to see whats happening in the industry.

Kai's been manipulating words for a living since 2009 and bought his first bitcoin at $12. It's long gone. He's previously written whitepapers for blockchain startups and is especially interested in P2P exchanges and DNMs.

More:

Bitcoin Is a Weapon for Free Speech in the Face of Government and Corporate Censorship - Bitcoin News

How The War On Drugs Affects Climate Change – Texas Standard

Posted on by

Half a century after President Richard Nixon declared drug use Americas public enemy number one, U.S.-led efforts to combat drug trafficking abroad have had mixed political consequences. Now, new studies show the war on drugs could be having another unintended consequence: contributing to climate change.

Jennifer Devine, assistant professor of geography at Texas State University, describes this phenomenon as narco deforestation. She says drug traffickers will move into remote, protected rainforest areas near international borders, claim territory, clear the trees and erect cattle ranches. From there, they hide their air strips, launder money and to evade military crackdowns.

When people think of drug trafficking activities they normally dont think of environmental impacts, Devine says. They deforest primary rainforests remaining in Central America and plant pasture for cattle ranching, so it is a direct contribution to deforestation.

Devine says illegal deforestation in protected areas is blamed on poor farmers, when the true drivers of this deforestation are drug traffickers. The studies estimate narco deforestation contributes to more than 80% of deforestation in protected areas. She says deforestation is not the only environmental issue affected by drug trafficking.

Environmental impacts differ from country to country and it reflects the different role each country and each protected area plays in the supply route, so were not just talking about deforestation, there are many other environmental impacts, Devine says.

Since the war on drugs inception, $3 trillion has been spent combating the sale and use of drugs, while usage, and the purity of drugs available have only increased, Devine says. She says her team offers alternative solutions to combating this issue, like investing in indigenous and community control over protected lands, which she says have been found to be more resilient against narco land grabs.

Rather than investing money in Black Hawk helicopters for Central American militaries, the U.S. should be investing in indigenous land-titling and community resource management programs which both alleviate poverty. They mitigate migration to the United States and they undermine the territorial grasp of drug cartels in Central America, Devine says.

Written by Savana Dunning.

View post:

How The War On Drugs Affects Climate Change - Texas Standard

Border to Border: The war on drugs – KFYR-TV

Posted on by

Hundreds of thousands of drugs are seized every year nationwide across our borders.

Despite Border Agents and officers efforts and technology, criminal organizations are getting smarter and drugs are still making it into the United States. In the final part of our Border to Border: A tale of two crossings series,we take a look at how drugs from the Mexican border are coming into North Dakota.

In the last year, the Office of Field Operations has found nearly half a million pounds of drugs at ports of entry in the country.

Border Patrol agents have confiscated nearly 300,000 pounds of drugs.

Those drugs include cocaine, heroin, marijuana, methamphetamine and fentanyl.

Our state continues to fight a war on drugs. Local law enforcement is finding more meth, heroin and pills than ever before.

Stopping drug trafficking is like finding a needle in a haystack.

Narcotics seizures are made every day. Anywhere from personal use, we mean just a few ounces to pounds," said Ruben Jauregui, Office of Field Operations spokesperson.

Drugs smuggled across the border are distributed throughout the United States.

We are part of the pipeline, were just the end of it. So it starts like in Mexico and it eventually finds its way here," said a ND BCI agent.

Criminal organizations like the gang La Linea are making a footprint across the El Paso sector.

Whether it be the smuggling of people, trafficking of people, narcotics, hard drugs, its all tied to the same criminal organizations. Nothing happens along the border without the criminal organization being involved," said Mario Escalante, El Paso Border Patrol.

Their m.o. constantly shifts.

Narcotics arent only found in vehicles. But also within merchandise. We also see it taped to the people, you know on their bodies [as] pedestrians coming across," said Jauregui.

All the area on the Mexican side is controlled by criminal organizations. A lot of them are generations of smugglers, said Fidel Baca, El Paso Border Patrol.

Smugglers go to lengths to hide their cargo, so it goes under the noses of law enforcement.

The El Paso sector sees hides often, like marijuana in rims or within the floor board of cars, drugs within car bumpers and meth packaged in homemade wheels.

Some areas are easier targets for the cartelswhere theres only desert for miles.

Were always being observed. So if they see that an agent left an area, maybe to go to the restroom, to go to get a drink at the convenience store, an agent is supposed to come in and fill in that spot. But if in those two minutes there is an opening, theyre going to exploit them," said Baca.

Those tokens of opportunity are examples on how the drugs are coming from Mexico and making it all the way to communities like Bismarck, North Dakota.

"Starts like in Mexico and then eventually finds its way here. And using cities like Milwaukee, St. Paul, Chicagothose type of cities are just hubs. That then they branch out like spider webs to the local areas," said a BCI agent.

He says drug money made off of addiction in our state is funding terrorism in other parts of the world.

Good people who never used to lock their doors to have to deal with narcoterrorism. Who ever thought in North Dakota youd have to worry about a word like that as far as we are from the border," said a BCI agent.

In a room at the Metro Area Narcotics Task Force headquarters is evidence law enforcement is tackling the drug issue head on.

Take away the dealers as they come here. Piece by piece. If we take away 500 pills off the streets, thats 500 pills that arent going to trickle their way down to an addict," said a BCI agent.

Agents say the anecdote for the drug problems is to cut the demand. Law enforcement says this will curve suppliers.

Agents say drugs are killing our community and increasing the violence across the state.

Law enforcement say its difficult to see drug dealers from other areas taking advantage of North Dakotans.

Border Patrol agents and officers, along with North Dakota law enforcement, say theyre using all the technology and strategy in their power to stop drug trafficking.

As our five part series comes to an end we'd like to hear from you.

How do you think issues can be resolved on our borders and within our state?

Join the conversation on Facebook with #BorderToBorder.

We'd like to thank the U.S. Customs and Border Protection for talking to us and our local state agents for the exclusive access they provided us to tell these stories.

Read more:

Border to Border: The war on drugs - KFYR-TV

The Man Who Led Duterte’s Brutal War on Drugs Quit Amid Claims He Took a Bribe From a Drug Trafficker – VICE

Posted on by

The man who oversaw Philippines President Rodrigo Dutertes war on drugs, which has left tens of thousands of people dead, resigned Monday amid allegations he protected police officers who were selling large quantities of seized drugs.

General Oscar Albayalde, chief of the Philippine National Police, tendered his resignation over the weekend, though in a speech Monday he continued to deny the allegations that have been building against him in recent weeks.

After careful deliberation, I have come to the decision to relinquish my post as chief, effective today and go on non-duty status, Albayalde said. He had been scheduled to retire on November 8.

Albayalde rose to power as Dutertes enforcer in the brutal war on drugs the Philippines president has waged since he took office in 2016.

But in recent weeks, Senate hearings have revealed accusations of a grand cover-up by Albayalde when he was Pampanga police chief in 2013.

Albayalde was accused by a former police chief of intervening to prevent the dismissal of officers under his command after they seized 200kg of methamphetamine from a drug suspect, who they then allowed to escape after receiving a $1 million bribe.

The officers were also accused of only declaring 38kg of the total haul of drugs and retaining the rest for use in other operations, or selling it on.

READ: Duterte promises cash prize for capturing felons. But he's also fine if you kill them.

Benjamin Magalong, the retired head of the criminal investigation and detection group, made the allegation accidentally during a Senate hearing on a different topic. A second police general came forward to back up the allegation and said Albayalde told him he got a little of the bribe.

Despite the mounting evidence against Albayalde, Duterte has refused to fire him, saying no criminal charges have been laid against the police chief, and insisting he needed clear proof before firing him.

I can only speculate that maybe [Albayalde] had enough of the according to him false, unfair accusations and innuendos, especially because his family is suffering. Maybe the guy gave in," Dutertes spokesman, Salvador Panelo, told reporters Monday.

READ: Duterte said you must be stupid if you think hell stand trial at the Hague for his drug war

Dutertes brutal crackdown on drug users and dealers has resulted in thousands of deaths. While the Philippines police put the figure at 6,600 in a June report, human rights groups claim over 25,000 people may have been killed.

Cover: In this Oct. 3, 2019, file photo, Philippine National Police chief Gen. Oscar Albayalde gestures as he testifies at the resumption of the Senate probe on the release of hundreds of convicts under the shortened serving of their sentence for good behavior, in suburban Pasay city, south of Manila, Philippines. Albayalde has resigned after he faced allegations in a Senate hearing that he intervened as a provincial police chief in 2013 to prevent his officers from being prosecuted for allegedly selling a huge quantity of seized drugs. (AP Photo/Bullit Marquez, File)

See original here:

The Man Who Led Duterte's Brutal War on Drugs Quit Amid Claims He Took a Bribe From a Drug Trafficker - VICE

This Day In History, October 14th, 2019 – "War On Drugs" – Signals AZ

Posted on by

By Staff | on October 14, 2019

"Talking Glass" Audible Stories on Signals AZ made possible by The Fain Signature Group - Celebrating 60 Years of Community Building

(40th President of the United States of America Ronald Reagan; Image courtesy of Wikicommons, Public Domain)

It was just 37 years ago today, October 14, 1982, that President Ronald Reagan declared the War on Drugs, a serious issue that had long plagued America and the rest of the world. This was not the first War on Drugs that the United States had declared, several Presidents have made attempts to control different types of illegal substances. Real wars have been fought over the control and trade of narcotics and other various stimulants since the dawn of civilization. However, it was Reagans declaration that not only sought to control the trafficking in the United States, but where it was produced as well.

There are various notions on whether or not the War on Drugs has been a success. As long as there is a demand, its hard for the government to control anything. However, though strict enforcement might not have had the greatest affects so far, the question remains, what should we do then? Currently we are still facing the age-old problems, but will there be a solution?

Follow Signals on Facebook to get the latest local events and updates:Facebook.com/SignalsAZ

Subscribe to the Signals Newsletter, events, entertainment, info & news right to your inbox!SUBSCRIBE

Follow this link:

This Day In History, October 14th, 2019 - "War On Drugs" - Signals AZ

Why Scotland can ill afford to ignore Portugals ground-breaking war on drugs – The Scotsman

Posted on by

By a make-shift shack on a wasteland in Bairro da Picheleira, in Lisbon, a man holds out his bloody arms and gestures to me to douse them with water. He has spotted the outreach team from Crescer one of Portugals many drugs agencies making their way down the hill, and staggered over, fresh from injecting, to drop his dirty needle in one of their trademark red and yellow buckets.

On either side of the path, the ground is a mosaic of drugs-related paraphernalia: brightly coloured spoons, tiny plastic bottles, empty packets of citric acid and condoms, which are used as tourniquets more than prophylactics.

The detritus comes from the many kits the outreach workers hand out every day and looks, from a distance, like 100,000 Christmas crackers have been pulled, their contents disgorged. I take the water from the man and pour it over his arms; as he rubs off the still-flowing blood, the track marks become visible.

Behind me, the owner of the shack has emerged from behind some hanging blankets. He is carrying a plastic bottle full of hypodermics; he cuts round the top and spills the needles on to the ground. Argentina, a peer worker, picks them up them one by one and places them in the bin, while psychologist Patricia Cabral hands him clean needle kits and foils (for smokers) and tries to encourage him to sort out a new identity card. Every day, he says he will come; every day he does not, she says.

Further down the hill, we approach another 3D jigsaw of crates and a wizened face appears in the doorway. It is the face of Pablo*, an artist who lives in a house nearby, but uses this precarious structure as a studio. A totem pole featuring a bearded man, a monkey and a snake stands sentinel outside. Pablo has been here for years, Cabral says. He makes art in the studio, but he lets others in to take their drugs. The shack is divided in two: half for smokers, half for injecters. We know he will sell some of the needle kits and the foil we give him, but we accept that because it means they will reach the users we dont see.

As a visitor accustomed to a more punitive approach towards Class A drugs, it is curious to witness this open-air injection site, known for trafficking as well as consumption, accepted as part of the Lisbon landscape in much the same way as the Castelo de So Jorge. But it is the lack of moral judgment, more even than the headline-grabbing decriminalisation, that defines the countrys much-lauded drugs policy.

Every year, agencies like Crescer are inundated with requests from journalists and politicians desperate to know how Portugal did it; how it rescued itself from the drugs epidemic of the 80s and 90s, reduced its death toll, and turned itself into a world leader in recovery and harm reduction.

As the country with the highest number of drugs deaths in the EU, Scotland is desperate for answers. In the same period, its mortality rate has risen from 369 to 1,187 more than 30 times that of a country with almost double its population.

The proportion of people affected by drugs in Scotland now stands at 1.1 per cent higher than in Portugal at the height of its crisis.

One oft-quoted statistic is that twice as many people died drugs-related deaths in Dundee last year (66 out of a population of 148,000) than in the whole of Portugal. Dundee and Lisbon: two cities with stunning waterfronts, one on the Tay, the other on the Tagus. Two cities keen to market themselves as tourist destinations, both with visible drugs problems. Why should the death tolls be so very different? And what can Dundee, and the rest of Scotland, learn from Portugals success?

The first thing that strikes me when I arrive in Lisbon is the mind-boggling panoply of drugs-related organisations and approaches. The Porto-based NGO APDES has set up dozens of interviews across the two cities. Over four days, I will visit policy-makers, treatment centres, harm reduction centres and employability programmes. I will go out with three outreach teams and spend time in both low-threshold methadone dispensing vans and the countrys first mobile safer consumption unit; and even then I will only have scratched the surface.

The second thing that strikes me is how seamlessly all these organisations appear to fit together. Despite their many differences in approach and funding structures, each one appears to understand its place in the whole. They are bound together by a shared ethos . At the centre of Portugals drugs policy is a belief in users as individuals, with a range of interconnecting problems childhood trauma, unemployment, mental health, homelessness which must be tackled holistically rather than in isolation.

Of course other countries make the same claims; but in Portugal the philosophy does appear to be at the heart of the system. All the drop-in services and outreach teams are made up of a range of professionals: doctors, nurses, psychologists, social workers and peer workers people with lived experience of drugs use, who are crucial in building trust with those wary of do-gooders.

We understand that poverty, mental health and drug use are all linked and that many drug users find it difficult to attend appointments in different places so we offer as much as we can under one roof, says Adriana Curado, project manager at GAT an activist organisation for those living with HIV.

Curado is taking me on a tour of IN-Mouraria, GATs low-threshold harm reduction centre in Lisbon. Its outside walls are decorated with a futuristic black and white mural, its internal walls with posters reading: No More War on Drugs.

IN-Mouraria has an area for socialising, a small office for private interviews, facilities to test for HIV, Hep C and TB, a computer where clients can fill out benefits forms, a counter full of clean needles, foils and crack pipes, a stock of shower gel and toothpaste, which clients can take to nearby public showers, and a room full of second-hand clothes. It sees 70 people a day and serves sandwiches from 5-8pm. It is, in short, a soup kitchen, benefits office and health clinic rolled into one.

GAT is also spearheading a pilot safe consumption project in an adjacent building. The pilot project, involving 40 users, is being run in advance of two fixed sites opening in the city next year. Safer consumption rooms are a source of great controversy in Scotland. Glasgow City Council would like to open one in the city centre to tackle spiralling HIV rates, but cant because drugs policy is reserved to Westminster and Westminster has said No. Though it has been legally possible in Portugal since 2001, the local authorities have dragged their heels. Lisbon City Council is acting now because the crash in 2008 led to a relapse among some ageing heroin users and a slight spike in deaths. It is also funding the mobile safer consumption unit which began operating in April.

The drug user comes in and sits here, says Curado, gesturing towards a steel counter where needles and other equipment are set out like toiletries. Sometimes people prefer to inject in private, but mostly we will stay with them. We can give them advice; help them find a vein in a safe part of the body. The only thing we cannot do is help them inject.

Curado is no PR officer. She complains about budget cuts and the governments failure (so far) to give outreach workers Naloxone the antidote to a heroin overdose. They are allowed to take it on the safer consumption van the first time this has ever happened but it is not yet provided in other settings.

We have anyway. We order it in from Spain and other countries as disobedience, Curado says. What would happen if the authorities found out? Oh, they already know, she shrugs.

In the drop-in centre, peer worker Jo Santa Maria tells me he wishes GAT had been around when he started taking drugs in the 80s. A wilful boy, who smoked and drank, he left school at 15 to work in construction. I was earning so much money, he says. More than my mum and dad put together. He followed a well-worn route from cannabis to smoking heroin to injecting it.

Then a friend encouraged him to try a speedball: a mix of heroin and cocaine taken intravenously. Thus began my tragic career, Santa Maria says. Over 13 years, I lost everything: my home, my job, my family.

Those were the years when everyone seemed to be on drugs. The years of Casal Ventoso: a vast open-air market where people like Santa Maria came to buy and consume, and never left.

Casal Ventoso was pulled down in 1999, its inhabitants decanted to projects like Bairro Quinto do Carbrinho a series of Duplo blocks in clashing colours; like Balamory on acid. But it has left a painful scar. Everyone I meet mentions it. They conjure up a scene of Bosch-like horror; the Garden of Earthly Delights cum The Fall of the Damned into Hell. A place where you might stumble over corpses; a place where souls were lost.

Its not clear exactly when Santa Maria began to get his life together; but the catalysts were becoming an activist and encountering GAT. And having a baby too, although not immediately. His son with a fellow addict (now his wife) was given medication to prevent the transmission of HIV. He was born Hep C, which was cured after treatment .

Santa Maria, too, was also cleared of Hep C and started working for GAT. Now his wife and son work there too. He still uses cannabis, but not heroin. I feel I have a normal life, he says. I dont have all the cravings and anxiety I had when I used other drugs. I took MDMA for the first time recently, but I informed myself about the risks first. I just wish Id had access to such information in the 80s,

Elsa Maia is also haunted by the Casal Ventoso years. The daughter of a doctor and a teacher, she was never tempted to try anything other than cannabis, but others were. Three of her friends died of overdoses while she was a teenager. Back then, heroin use cut across all classes. One fatality was the daughter of the justice minister.

My mother had a colleague from a very wealthy family who started selling silver cups, says Maia who now works in the international relations division of policy body SICAD. It turned out her son was an addict whod started stealing and she was trying to help him.

Portugals drugs epidemic was rooted in its history. Under dictator Antnio de Oliveira Salazar, the country was very closed. Our news was controlled by the state, Maia says. We missed out on flower power and the student riots.

At the same time, it was a country with a high level of emigration and a number of colonies. Many of its men were sent out as soldiers to South America, Asia and Africa. As a doctor, Maias father spent some time in Mozambique.

When Salazar died in 1970, things moved very quickly. Portugal agreed to give up its colonies, so settlers and soldiers, who had used cannabis abroad, moved home. Gangsters moved in. Portugal was suddenly awash with drugs, but unlike other countries, where the increase in drugs use had been gradual, it had no policy or structures to deal with the consequences. Very quickly there was no difference between recreational and problematic drugs use. And we had all the comorbidities that went with addiction too: HIV, and the onset of Aids, TB and all the different types of hepatitis, Maia says.

By the 90s, around 1 per cent of the population or 100,000 people was using heroin. It was almost impossible to find a family which hadnt been touched by it.

Portugals drug problem became a domestic obsession and an international embarrassment. Something had to be done. In 1999, a socialist government led by Antonio Guterres now general secretary of the UN came into power. Guterres invited a panel of medical, legal and academic experts to come up with new ways of thinking.

The result was a radical two-pronged strategy. The first involved decriminalisation. Under the new law, possession of small amounts of illegal substances enough for ten days consumption would become a civil rather than a criminal offence, to be dealt with by newly created Commissions for Dissuasion. These commissions have the power to refer users to treatment centres and to impose sanctions such as fines and community service on those unwilling to attend.

The decision to decriminalise caused international controversy, but in Portugal it was readily accepted. What you have to understand is how desperate everyone was for change, Maia says.

I lived near Casal Ventoso and I remember participating in some of the public consultations. On the one hand you had the mother of a huge family complaining that all her kids were already using, on the other shop-owners saying: We are being threatened.

The other less sensational, but arguably more important change was the adoption of an integrated approach encompassing prevention, treatment and harm reduction. We realised we needed to look at each person as an individual in need of care and treatment; as an individual who is part of society and not an outsider, Maia says.

In the intervening years, a political consensus has formed around this approach. In the UK, where drugs policy is a political football, the country has bounced from recovery to harm reduction and back again. But Portugals drugs strategy has survived both left-wing and right governments. Sure, there have been arguments over funding and the structure of organisations. But the basic principle that drug use is a health rather than a criminal justice issue appears to be inviolable.

So what impact has it had? Well, it hasnt eradicated drug use. You can still see dealers and users in open air sites like the one in Pescheleira and on the city centre streets. Out in Porto with a team from Medicos de Mundo, I climbed some steps off the busy Rua Mouzinho da Silveira, with its thronged restaurants and artisan delicatessens. They led up to a hidden courtyard where a dozen addicts were smoking and injecting. In one corner, there was so much smoke it caught in my throat. Bent over their gear, the huddled users barely looked up as the team handed over new foils .

In fact, some claim there has been a slight rise in drug consumption. But drugs-related deaths and rates of HIV infection have plummeted, and there has been an increased uptake in treatment. Such details speak for themselves . So too do stories like Argentinas.

Argentina is a long-term cocaine user who spent ten years living on the streets in one of the areas the Crescer outreach team visits. Last Christmas, the organisation found her a flat through its Housing First initiative.

As we drive from stop to stop, she enthuses about her new home. Muito lindo, muito lindo, she cries excitedly. Very beautiful. Argentina talks about her fridge and her microwave, and how she hasnt taken cocaine for two months now. She still needs support, but her new job gives her structure. I like being out with the team, she says, because then I worry about work and not about drugs.

It is with the outreach teams that the humanity at the core of Portugals drugs policy is most palpable. Parked under a flyover near the Praa de Espanha, the citys mobile methadone unit could pass for an ice cream van, albeit with the drugs handed out openly through the hatch, as opposed to under the counter a la Glasgow in the 1980s.

The early evening clientele is a mixed bunch: those prematurely aged by long-term use knock back their methadone from plastic shot glasses alongside professionals stopping off on their way home from work.

One woman arrives on the back of her partners scooter. She is wearing a long floral skirt and stilettos. Removing her helmet, she shakes out her hair, as if filming a shampoo ad; then she swigs her methadone, gets back on the bike and va va vooms into the distance.

The methadone van is a low-threshold service aimed at those who might fall foul of mainstream services. Users do not have to prove they are clean to register, nor will they be sanctioned if they fail to turn up several days in a row. Most importantly, with a doctor on board, it is possible for a user to start taking the methadone on their first visit.

There is an important social aspect to all the outreach services too. Gaggles of homeless, isolated men cluster round APDES GiruGaia (Around Gaia) van, hungry for conversation, at every stop on its route through the city.

Social worker Joana Vilares, who works alongside nurse Nuno Lourinho, is tiny, but manages the men like the landlady of a rowdy boozer, allowing them to lift her up as a demonstration of their strength, encouraging their chat, and diffusing any hint of tension with semi-flirtatious humour.

At the first stop, Vilares pets a toddler perched on her mothers hip; at another she laughs when a man castigates her for not giving him a kiss before closing the van door in preparation for moving on. Shame. On. Me, she says in English for my benefit.

Vilares knows the mans story. He was a former Porto football player who lost his career to his addiction and a leg to a car accident. On being introduced to me, another regular Manuel reveals he was once married to one of the countrys most famous news presenters. In the car she and Lourinho google the glamorous presenters picture to show me what she looks like. Do you believe him? I ask. He is not the sort of person who generally makes things up, she says.

Manuel, 56, has been coming to the van for methadone for two years; after decades of addiction, he now consumes just a tiny amount of heroin and cocaine. He has a job at a beachfront bar, is clear of Hep C and has reconnected with his estranged son who works nearby. I like coming here, he says. It has changed everything.

What Fiona*, the mother of a Scottish user, would give for a touch of that humanity. Sitting 1,800 miles away in Dundee, she tells me of her desperate struggle to get her son David back on the methadone programme after he failed to pick up his prescription. He had blood clots and fatigue and was suffering the symptoms of withdrawal so he missed several days in a row, says Fiona, who gave up her work to look after Davids son, Ryan. But the danger of taking drug users off the methadone is that they will go looking for street drugs and that those street drugs will kill them.

David was already known to services so there was no reason he shouldnt have been able to start again immediately on a lower dose; but it took her months of wrangling to sort out. I worry about David dying every day. The worst is when I wake up at 3am and wonder what he is doing, she says.

Fiona was part of the Dundee Drugs Commission, a body of experts tasked with looking at what could be done to tackle the citys drugs deaths toll. The commission discovered almost all of Dundees drug users were being funnelled through one NHS service: the Integrated Substance Misuse Services (ISMS), which is stretched and focused almost entirely on the prescribing of methadone. The commission also found there was little collaboration between ISMS and the citys myriad third sector and community organisations, to the point that it seemed to believe there was no alternative service to which patients could be referred or discharged.

As a result, there were only 22 planned discharges from ISMS last year and 452 unplanned discharges (where users have simply fallen out of the programme). A greater proportion of those who died drugs-related deaths were in treatment than in other parts of Scotland.

Dealing with drug users has become a specialism, says Andy Perkins, director of the Figure 8 consultancy contracted to run the commission. Because there are medical issues with prescribing, ISMS sees itself as the only organisation that can deal with this population. Its partly territorial, partly that they dont trust anyone else. But the idea that its a speciality leads mental health services to turn people away. They say: Oh no we cant help you. You need to be seen by the drugs service.

Its not just mental health services that are the problem. Fiona recalls the stress of trying to sort out Davids benefits. He was in crisis and wanted to stop his joint claim with his partner, so I put him in a B&B, got him his own bank account and took him to the benefits office, she says.

As we walked in, he saw the words universal credit and went white. He said: I cant do this because he was frightened of having to cope with daily life. I managed to convince him. I said: Look, just take a deep breath and ask the question and he did and it was sorted out but that was with me by his side. What happens to those who have nobody?

Chair of the commission Robert Peat says the ISMS focus on prescribing means there is little time for outreach initiatives. Thats why we should be using the third sector more. You dont need a nurse or a social worker for that type of work. You need support workers who will treat the user with kindness and compassion.

Nationally, the Scottish Government has set up a task force, headed by Professor Catriona Matheson, which is looking at the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and gathering evidence on good practice elsewhere. Last year, much of the debate focused on the safer consumption rooms, with SNP MPs calling for decriminalisation or a one-off exemption to allow it to happen. But many of those who work in the sector believe there is plenty that could done without Westminsters help.

The commission hopes the Scottish government and the Dundee Partnership will act on its recommendations. If the city wants to attract people, it needs to be a good place for those who live here, Peat says. Everyone must be valued.

Portugals drugs policy is not perfect. As Curado points out the government has been slow to fund both Naxolene and the safer drugs consumption rooms. Many working on the front line would also like to see the introduction of drug-testing facilities.

At a semi-derelict property in Porto, I meet Rui Coimbra Morais, president of CASO, the local drug users union. With his grey beard, thick-set glasses and rakish scarf, there is a touch of Jeff Goldblum to Morais, who must be a thorn in the side of those trying to sell the Portuguese model to the world.

Morais is a former heroin addict. He still smokes it occasionally. He would continue to inject on special occasions if he could, but he no longer has any veins he can inject into. Injecting heroin gives me a sense of unity I cannot achieve with any other substance, he tells me. It brings the broken pieces back together. In its place, he takes MDMA or snorts cocaine about once a month.

Moraiss biggest gripe with Portugals drugs strategy is the Commission of Dissuasion which he has appeared before several times. It is better than going to court, he says , but it is still patronising. It is saying to people: You dont know how to take care of yourself. It also encourages game-playing. If I go to the psychologist because I want my life to change thats one thing, but if the police or the Commission of Dissuasion sends me, I am going because I dont want to pay a fine.

The irony is that Morais and the secretary of his local Commission for Dissuasion see each other regularly when they drop their children off at the same nursery. She treats me like everyone else, he says. But making people appear before a committee, it is stigmatising I would not like to see Scotland replicating this.

Morais insists that, despite the spin, stigma is woven throughout the system. If there is no stigma, then why are psychologists who work with outreach teams paid so much less than those who work in hospitals? he demands. And he is impatient with the various governments for not progressing from decriminalisation to regulation.

So, is the Portuguese system not all its cracked up to be? Oh Im playing devils advocate, Morais says. When I go to conferences and see what other countries are doing, Im glad I live here.

When I look at whats happening with drugs deaths here, I wish I lived there. Or at least I wish we could tap into some of Portugals vision.

Imagine a Scotland where drugs policy wasnt prey to the whims of each new government; where no-one spoke dismissively of being parked on methadone and where the most vulnerable had easy access to the support they required.

Fiona often imagines what life might have been like for her son if he had been given more support. David, now in his late 30s, started struggling emotionally when his father died. He became addicted to over-the-counter painkillers and began using cannabis. His transition from soft to hard drugs came when he was placed in a hostel after serving a short prison sentence.

Fiona believes there were lots of moments where wrap-around support or even just someone who listened might have pushed him further towards recovery. She would like to see more outreach work, and the forging of one-to-one relationships with long-term users. If you have someone to talk to and are treated with kindness, everything else will follow, she says.

While she lobbies for change, she has to bear the pain of losing the essence of the son she once knew and the worry of trying to keep what is left of him alive. There was so much joy in having David and seeing him develop and knowing that he was IS such a good person, although I dont see so much of that side of him any more, she says.

He is stuck in a hole now. I just want someone to reach in and pull him out.

*Some names have been changed

Read more:

Why Scotland can ill afford to ignore Portugals ground-breaking war on drugs - The Scotsman

The US War on Drugs Is a War on the Climate – Gizmodo UK

Posted on by

The US War on Drugs has a troubled history riddled with racism, propaganda, and failure as the country remains one of the top markets for illegal drugs. The US crackdown on drugs is, unfortunately, also driving deforestation throughout Central America according to new research.

As cocaine traffickers try to avoid detection, they venture further into remote rainforests to hide, often cutting down key protected areas along the way. In fact, they often launder their drug money by posing as loggers and ranchers who are still illegally cutting down precious rainforest. The natural and cultural resources lost a year in the region amounts to some $214.6 million (172.8 million), according to the new research.

A team of researchers from the US, Costa Rica, and El Salvador presented their findings Tuesday in three separate papers at the pre-COP, an event the Costa Rican government hosted as part of the build-up for the Conference of the Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP25) in Chile in December. They monitored criminal activity in protected areas in Petn, Guatemala; northeastern Honduras; and Costa Ricas Osa Peninsula by taking trips to the region in 2015 and 2016, followed by fieldwork in the three areas in 2018. The scientists conducted a total of 45 interviews with Costa Rican protected area administrators and other stakeholders from the public and private sectors from Guatemala and Honduras.

These drug-trafficking practices have been ongoing since the early 2000s, but with the climate crisis reaching a fever pitch, researchers are focusing more attention on the growing invasion of narcos in Central American rainforests. Per the new research, this environmental devastation doesnt just look like fallen trees; it includes destroyed mangroves, drained wetlands, and poached flora and fauna.

The research presented on Tuesday also points to the value of letting local communities manage their forests. It turns out they do a damn good job. Costa Rica, which has higher rates of community forest management, narcotics-related activity is not as pronounced as it is in Guatemala and Honduras. The findings also show that letting communities manage their forests could help address climate change. The findings show that carbon stored in community forests in southern Mexico and Central America is enough to help the region meet its Paris Agreement goals.

Thats only if governments give them the power and resources, however, to properly manage these lands. Thats the main takeaway from all this research, author Jennifer Devine, an assistant professor of geography at Texas State University,told us in an email.

Communal and indigenous land rights are the most effective strategy to combat the negative impacts of drug trafficking and climate change simultaneously, she wrote. The War on Drugs approach to fighting drug traffickers has to end. Rather than engaging in military-based approaches, governments and donors should invest in community and indigenous land rights and governance systems to curtail the power and proliferation of [drug trafficking organisations], mitigate climate change by slowing narco deforestation, and to recognise the rights of Indigenous and peasant communities.

Otherwise, dangerous and violent drug-dealing organisations often enter the remote rainforests where there is little to no human activity or settlements and essentially claim them. Once that happens, it makes protecting those lands close to impossible with park rangers facing death if they retaliate against the narcos. Clashes like this have been unfolding in the Brazilian Amazon as criminal gangs look to convert the forest to cattle pastures and farms.

Those are just some of the unintended consequences of this issue. The world is losing valuable, sometimes centuries-old forests, but people are also dying as a result of this infiltration. And those who survive do so by escaping to foreign lands where theyre treated as the other.

Drug trafficking and its environmental and social impacts are contributing to the refugee crisis at the US-Southern border that is mistakenly referred to as a migration crisis, Devine said.

World leaders need to step up to both protect these rainforests and the communities under siege by narcos. Thats one way to stop climate change and help the communities that live there.

Featured image: AP

Here is the original post:

The US War on Drugs Is a War on the Climate - Gizmodo UK

Where Canada’s Political Parties Stand On Marijuana And Drugs Ahead Of The Election – Marijuana Moment

Posted on by

Canadian voters will decide on Monday whether Prime Minister Justin Trudeaus Liberal Party will retain control of the federal government, or if one of several competing parties will get a chance to take over.

The result of the election could have a variety of implications for marijuana policy about one year after the country legalized cannabisa reform move that Trudeau campaigned on in 2015.

But its not just marijuana positions that separate the parties, as broader drug policy issues have also exposed differences in the direction Canada may take depending on which party controls the House of Commons.

Heres a breakdown of where each party and their respective leaders stand on drug policy.

During his first campaign for prime minister, Trudeau pledged to legalize cannabis nationwide if electedand while it didnt materialize as quickly as hed anticipated, marijuana prohibition was officially ended for adults in October 2018.

But while the prime minister scored points with advocates for making good on his promise, hes disappointed others with the specifics of its implementation and for repeatedly declining to give his support to broader drug decriminalization efforts.

Trudeau was asked in February 2018 whether his administration would consider lifting criminal penalties for opioid possession as a means to combat the drug crisis. He responded that the policy is not a step that Canada is looking at taking at this point.

Its not part of the plan, Trudeau, who admitted to using cannabis while serving in the House of Commons, said. There are many steps we can and have taken.

He made similar comments when he was asked about the same issue the previous year, stating that the country is not looking at decriminalization or legalization of any other drugs other than what were doing with marijuana.

The reasoning, Trudeau said, is because theres a lot of other tools that we are using right now instead.

We are going to focus on getting the control and regulation of [the] marijuana regime right, and thats quite a handful right now, he said. Were not looking at any other steps.

Trudeaus views on the issue dont necessarily align with those of his party, however. Liberal delegates voted in favor of a resolution that sought to remove criminal penalties for drug offenses at a convention last year, hoping to put the policy on the partys campaign platform for this upcoming election.

The Government of Canada should treat drug abuse as a health issue, expand treatment and harm reduction services and re-classify low-level drug possession and consumption as administrative violations, the measure stated.

Following the vote, however, Trudeau said at a press conference that its not part of our plans.

The party did ultimately adopt a formal platform backing certain harm reduction policies such as safe consumption sites and stipulating that first-time non-violent drug offenders should be diverted to drug treatment court in order to help drug users get quick access to treatment, and to prevent more serious crimes.

During a debate with Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer last month, decriminalization came up again. While Trudeau initially said it wasnt on the partys agenda at the moment, he later clarified in a press scrum that we will not be further decriminalizing any drugs other than cannabis.

Bill Blair, the parliamentary secretary to the minister of justice, said in April 2018 that the government had no plans to legalize or decriminalize any other drugs besides marijuana.

But despite opposition from the administration, some Liberal lawmakers have been undeterred. MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith introduced a bill in July that would repeal sections of federal drug law that concern possession, effectively decriminalizing the controlled substances.

And the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health, which is controlled by the majority Liberals, issued a report in June recommending the government work with provinces, territories, municipalities and Indigenous communities and law enforcement agencies to decriminalize the simple possession of small quantities of illicit substances.

All but one member of the Conservative Party, including Scheer, voted against legalizing marijuana last year. However, if elected to the majority, Scheer said lawmakers wouldnt seek to overturn the law.

We will maintainthe fact that cannabis is legal, we are not going to change that and we do support the idea of people having those records pardoned for prior cannabis offenses, he said in June.

While hes pledged to uphold the legal marijuana program, the Conservative leader said during a debate with Trudeau that hed use funds for cannabis tax revenue to increase enforcement against the illicit market. Scheer also accused the prime minister of promoting a secret agenda to decriminalize and legalize hard drugs.

The party also pushed advertisements on Facebook that falsely accused the Liberals of seeking to legalize hard drugs.

This is yet another example of Conservatives copying the American right-wing playbook, spreading false information to scare and mislead voters, Liberal Party spokesperson Joe Pickerill said in response to the ads.

Conservative Senators visited Washington, D.C. to meet with then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions in April 2018. The purpose of the trip, according to a press release, was to investigate the predictable consequences of legalization for Canadians traveling to the United States by discussing the matter with the anti-marijuana official.

Though Scheer and other Conservative lawmakers have derided drug policy proposals from the Liberals, their official party platform does stress the need to craft drug laws that treat addiction as a public health issue.

To help more Canadians recover from addiction, we will revise the federal governments substance abuse policy framework to make recovery its overarching goal, the platform states. We will reorient the Canadian Drugs and Substances Strategy towards ensuring that every addict has the opportunity to recover from their addiction and to lead a drug-free life and that all policies that fall under the Strategy have recovery as their objective.

Conservatives also voiced support for expanding drug treatment facilities, funding education campaigns that encourage young people to avoid illicit substances and partnering with school districts and other institutions to clean up used needles.

All NDP lawmakers present for the vote on the cannabis legalization bill supported it. The party has not shied away from broader drug decriminalization, and members have emphasized the need to promote restorative justice in Canadas marijuana program.

New Democrats believe that there is much more we can do to save lives and support those struggling with opioids, the partys platform reads. In government, we will declare a public health emergency and commit to working with all levels of government, experts and Canadians to end the criminalization and stigma of drug addiction, so that people struggling with addiction can get the help they need without fear of arrest, while getting tough on the real criminalsthose who traffic in and profit from illegal drugs.

The platform voiced support for expanding overdose prevention facilities and investigating the role of pharmaceutical companies in the opioid crisis and ensuring that the public is compensated if the industry is found culpable.

We will also proactively expunge criminal records for Canadians convicted of minor cannabis possession, NDP said. With cannabis now legal in Canada, too many people are still burdened with criminal records for simple possessionrecords that mean real hardships that affect their employment opportunities and their ability to travel. These records for minor cannabis possession will be completely erased, allowing people to get on with building their lives.

Singh has repeatedly proposed decriminalization as a solution to the countrys drug problems.

I can tell you from personal experience, but I can also show youand Im sure you all know that theres a preponderance of evidence when we look at those folks that are being charged with personal possession of a controlled substance people that are being arrested and incarcerated, these are folks that are struggling with issues of mental health of addiction and poverty, Singh said in November 2017. To me poverty, mental health and addictions dont sound like criminal justice problems. They sound to me like a social justice problem that should be dealt with like a social justice problem.

Thats why Im calling for the decriminalization of all personal possession offenses when it comes to drugs, to make a difference in the lives of people and actually bring real change, he said.

During a debate as Singh was competing to become leader of NDP, he emphasized his decriminalization proposal.

I would call for the immediate decriminalization of all personal possession offenses when it comes to drugs. Period, he said.

NDP has also been critical of the rollout of Canadas legal marijuana law, with the party writing in September that Justin Trudeaus Liberals had plenty of time to get this right and its not enough, referring to the limited number of pardons for cannabis convictions that the government had issued.

The NDP is going to keep fighting for criminal records for Canadians convicted of minor cannabis possession to be expunged, they said.

NDP MP Don Davies unsuccessfully tried to get unanimous consent for a measure to immediately provide pardons for those burdened by criminal records for cannabis offenses that will soon be legal shortly after the legalization bill passed.

For some people in Canada, and in some places, pot has been effectively legal for years, Singh said in October 2018. But depending on who you are, the color of your skin, and where you live, theres a different set of rules.

A private member bill introduced by NDP MP Murray Rankin to expunge criminal records for cannabis possession was rejected by Liberal lawmakers in May despite agreement that minority communities have been disproportionately impacted by federal drug laws.

In May, NDP urged their Liberal colleagues to answer questions about the impact of medical cannabis taxes on patients.

The Liberal tax on medical cannabis is unfair and damaging to the health of patients. It shows that the Liberal government is out of touch with the reality of people, NDP Deputy Leader Alexandre Boulerice said. So far, my questions to the Minister have gone unanswered. But this time, I hope that he will finally justify the stance taken by the Liberals.

Medical cannabis must be treated just like other prescription drugs. Its price must be reviewed and untaxed in order to allow patients to treat themselves properly, Boulerice said. Some patients are forced to pay hundreds or thousands of dollars each month to get their medication. This is wrong!

May voted for the cannabis legalization bill, and the Green Party platform backs decriminalizing all drugs, pledging to address the opioid crisis as a health-care issue, not a criminal issue, by declaring a national health emergency.

Drug possession should be decriminalized, ensuring people have access to a screened supply and the medical support they need to combat their addictions, it says.

The platform includes several provisions aimed at reforming the current legal marijuana regime.

A year into the legalization of cannabis, the flaws in the regulatory framework for cannabis production and sale are evident and a reform agenda is emerging, the party said, adding that the governments regulatory approach treats the production of cannabis as uniquely dangerous and thats contributed to the ongoing presence of an illicit market.

To combat the issue, Green Party said it would lower the federally set price of marijuana to be more competitive with illicit sellers, eliminate excess plastic packaging requirements, remove excise duties and sales tax on medical cannabis products, allow outdoor cultivation, impose organic production standards and allow CBD to be marketed as a natural health supplement.

Security requirements mean growers must use more energy and water and deal with diseases and pests that thrive in greenhouses, increasing costs and hobbling their ability to meet production expectations, the platform says.

Other policies the party supports include expanding funding of community-based organizations that test drugs for safety and increase the availability of the overdose reversal medication naloxone.

We must stop treating drug addiction as a criminal issue and start treating is as a health-care issue, May said in a press release last month announcing her partys support for decriminalization. This is a national health emergency.

The opioid crisis is a national tragedy that is devastating communities and families across Canada, she said. We have to abandon old notions of the war on drugs and join the battle that really mattersthe fight to save Canadian lives.

Its hard to stand up as a national party leader and say its time to decriminalize all illicit drugs, May said during a press conference. Its what we have to do.

We have to take emergency steps in an emergency situation, and its far too dangerous to allow people, whether theyre living on the streets or living at home with their parentsto have illicit drugs that are not thoroughly screened for fentanyl contamination, she said.

Members of the Bloc Qubcois, which is primarily focused on advocating for Quebec sovereignty, voted against the marijuana legalization bill.

The partys leader, Blanchet, doesnt appear to have extensively discussed cannabis or drug policy issues.

Former Bloc Qubcois Party Leader Martine Ouellet was more outspoken about the need for reform and said in 2017 that the country should nationalize a legal cannabis market.

With the legalizationit creates a brand new market and [it] is a market that is currently occupied by criminal organizations, she said. The choice we have, do we want it to go from criminal organizations to private firms, big corporations, or if we want these profits to go from criminal organizations to all citizens?

Ensuring that individuals provinces have the jurisdiction to allow or ban home cultivation for personal use was reportedly a key policy the party supported.

Bernier, voted against the cannabis legalization bill as a Conservative lawmaker but said that he would not reverse it if elected. However, he pledged to remain watchful of the industry.

In the longer term, my main worry is to make sure that we see the illegal market significantly reduced and ideally disappear, he said through a spokesperson. That was one of the key justifications for cannabis legalization.

If [the illicit market] stays large, we would look at regulatory and tax changes to ensure the legal market is better served, he said. We do not have any specific proposal for now. Same thing for edibles.

According to Burnaby Now, Bernier has said that hes in favor of marijuana legalization in principle and that the country should review the impact of safe consumption sites.

When running as for the leadership of the Conservative Party in 2016, Bernier welcomed an endorsement from Marc Emery, the so-called Prince of Pot who has since faced allegations of sexual misconduct. Emery said at the time, I dont even know what his position on marijuana is and I dont care because for me Maxime Bernier represents a long-term future on all the issues during a radio interview.

Days before Bernier formally launched the PPC last year, Emery told The Toronto Star that he totally endorses the candidates policies.

Ive never seen anything I disagree with, Emery said.

Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson, a PPC candidate, said earlier this year that the party does not have an official stance on cannabis policy but expressed personal opposition to legalization.

Analysts expect voter turnout to be down for the Liberals, as enthusiasm for Trudeau continues to suffer amid controversy over revelations that he wore blackface and brownface. Thats presented an opportunity that some of the lesser parties such as the Greens intend to take advantage of, with May urging voters to elect enough of her party members to the House of Commons to prevent the Liberals from winning an outright majority.

That situation would mean that the Greens and other smaller parties would hold the balance of power, possibly even including the Bloc Qubcois, The New York Times reported.

But regardless of the outcome, what appears certain is that Canadas legal marijuana law will survive no matter which party holds power, though the specifics of how the program will continue to roll out could depend on the electoral results.

A bigger question is whether the country will build on the momentum of cannabis legalization and pursue broader drug policy reforms such as decriminalization or if that movement will stall under unsupportive leadership.

Presidential Candidate Wants To Let Americans Legalize Marijuana Through National Referendum

Photo courtesy of Christopher Policarpio.

The rest is here:

Where Canada's Political Parties Stand On Marijuana And Drugs Ahead Of The Election - Marijuana Moment

History Rhymes: From The War on Drugs to The War on Guns – The Libertarian Republic

Posted on by

Somebody f*cking do somethingscreamed Kacey Musgraves at Lollapalooza music festival.

Gun control is fashionable at the moment. But in reality, it is just another government program that will grow bureaucracy and diminish individual liberty. The same knee-jerk mob reaction that pleads for the government to f*cking do something about gun control is the same mentality that started the Drug War.

Musgraves passionate plea was in response to two mass shootings in the same week in America. She was pleading for something like governmental regulation to solve the heinous tragedy of mass shootings. Its not the first time that America has faced scary situations and reacted by asking the government to solve it.

Through the 1970s to the 1990s, America struggled with drug abuse never seen before. The public clamored, somebody f*cking do something. What was the policy response? Massive law enforcement campaigns that spent tons of money and incarcerated countless people for answering consumer demands.

The hysteria of the time wasnt completely unfounded. Americans were dying of overdoses all over the country. However, as most panic-induced government solutions do, the fix was too expansive and had some nasty side-effects. It created a system that harassed, arrested and sentenced people to long prison terms for marijuana charges. Even though, the plant has never caused an overdose death by itself.

Republicans played a role in perpetuating the war on drugs boondoggle, but it was far from ONLY a Republican mistake. Many Democrats played their part in it too (looking at you, Joe Biden). Some of them have owned up to their past and helped in bipartisan criminal justice reform.

Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill) recognized that he played a role in creating the disparity between sentencing for crack cocaine versus powder during the 1990s. The disparity was created in a hysterical rush and inadvertently caused a disproportionate number of non-white offenders receiving harsh sentences for drug offenses.

For example, in 1994 at the age of 25, Alton Mills was sentenced to life without parole for a low-level nonviolent drug offense. Senator Durbin started arguing on Mills behalf and in December of 2015, he was released from prison after serving 22 years.

There are numerous similar cases where unduly harsh sentences were given to offenders, and that is why there is bipartisan dislike of the Drug War. That should remind us how panicked government action can be dangerous, and result in toxic solutions that have long-lasting repercussions.

Drug overdoses are terrible just like gun violence. Blindly begging the government to f*cking do something isnt the answer, whether its drugs or guns.

See the original post here:

History Rhymes: From The War on Drugs to The War on Guns - The Libertarian Republic

Is it time to legalise heroin and cocaine to win the war on drugs? – 702

Posted on by

A new think-tank is calling for the legalisation of all recreational drugs within a specific regulatory framework.

The South African Drug Policy Initiative (SADPI) is made up of some of the country's leading professors of medicine and believes the criminalisation of drugs and drug users causes greater harm than drugs themselves.

Dr Keith Scott is one of the co-founders of SADPI.

It should be a fundamental right for people to use any drugs they want.

Scott says politicians have consistently got it wrong when it comes to trying to win the war against drugs.

Every new official who comes in wants to be tough on crime and they start with drugs and then they make the same mistakes and the consumption of drugs goes up and the supply goes up and the crime goes up.

The group believes legal regulation is the only solution to an escalating problem.

We want to use similar regulatory platforms as we use for alcohol to regulate these other drugs from heroin to magic mushrooms.

Find out more about SAPDI's objectives by listening to the full interview below:

This article first appeared on CapeTalk : Is it time to legalise heroin and cocaine to win the war on drugs?

Read the original post:

Is it time to legalise heroin and cocaine to win the war on drugs? - 702

Drugs and the death penalty – Inside Indonesia

Posted on by

Puri Kencana Putri & Aghniadi

In 2018 there were 39 new death sentences for drug-related offences in Indonesia, accounting for a staggering 81 per cent of all new death sentences. By comparison, only 17 per cent were for murder, and the remaining 2 per cent were for terrorism.

The popular-but-hard-line war on drugs has been vociferously condemned by the international community. But the Indonesian government remains committed to it, motivated in a large part by a moral panic around a national narcotics emergency which has resulted from data now known to be dodgy.

Indonesias National Narcotics Agency has claimed, for example, that there are around 4.5 million people in the country in need of rehabilitation for their drug use at any one time, but this figure is in fact a projection of the total number of people in Indonesia who have used drugs even if only a few times ever not just those unable to manage their drug use.

More than 30 people die from drug-related causes every day in Indonesia, and as part of the war on drugs the government has also restored the death penalty and executed 18 drug traffickers since 2015, including 15 foreigners eight from Nigeria, two each from Australia and Brazil, and one from each of Malawi, the Netherlands and Vietnam.

Meanwhile, it is common knowledge that some law enforcers in Indonesia rely on questionable legal grounds and do not always follow procedure. The legal process is at risk of being marred by arbitrary or discriminative practices, and law enforcers can, of course, make mistakes, but the death penalty cannot be reversed, unlike other severe punishments.

A sleuth of executions in 2015 drew attention to how Indonesias legal system is not well-equipped to make sure criminal proceedings against drug users and traffickers are fair. On 29 April of that year 43-year-old Rodrigo Gularte from Brazil was executed after being convicted of smuggling cocaine into Indonesia back in 2004. But his lawyers say that his case should never have gone to trial in the first place because, as Amnesty International reported, he had been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. Rodrigo had lived with this mental illness from the age of 16, and throughout the 10 years he waited on death row in Indonesias prison system, his illness was not recognised. Indonesias penal code ought to prevent people with mental illnesses like Rodrigo from ever standing trial. But the revelation was not enough to save him from the firing squad.

In a more fortunate case, 30-year-old Mary Jane Veloso from the Philippines avoided execution at the eleventh hour. She had been working in Malaysia as a domestic servant but was convicted of carrying drugs on her first visit to Indonesia back in 2010. Since then Mary Jane has languished in an Indonesian prison on death row without much support even from the Philippine Embassy in Jakarta. Her family in the Philippines was never informed about her case, and it has since come to light that the Indonesian police did not even provide her with a translator so she could properly defend herself. Her planned execution in 2015 was only stayed after the president of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, provided evidence that Mary Jane had been manipulated into carrying the contraband.

The Draft Criminal Code proposes to change things for the worse. One severe proposal is that the death penalty be made final, meaning that the president would not have authority to grant clemency. But the Indonesian government seems to have backtracked, asking instead that any death sentence be able to be commuted to life imprisonment for good behaviour on death row, and that the death penalty be re-categorised as an alternative punishment. Lawmakers from both the governing coalition and the opposition admit that the death penalty has been an ineffective deterrent, particularly for drug-related crime, as the number of cases has risen rather than fallen.

The current war on drugs can only be won if the Indonesian government shifts its focus from punishment and the disproven deterrent of the death penalty to the important battle against the underlying causes of drug use. At the heart of the new approach, there needs to be a greater commitment to protecting the human rights of everyone, including drug traffickers and drug users who have borne the brunt of Indonesias punitive war on drugs.

Puri Kencana Putri (puri.kencanaputri@amnesty.id) is campaign manager at Amnesty International Indonesia.

Aghniadi (aghniadi.adi@amnesty.id) is a campaigner at Amnesty International Indonesia.

See more here:

Drugs and the death penalty - Inside Indonesia

Best of the 2010s: Pitchfork Readers’ Poll Results – Pitchfork

Posted on by

A few weeks ago, we launched the Pitchfork 2010s Readers Poll, in which we asked you to tell us your favorite songs and albums of the past 10 years. Tens of thousands of you did. (Thank you!) Below, find the results, and compare them to Pitchforks own list of the best songs and best albums of the 2010s. And check out all of our 2010s wrap-up coverage here.

1. Kanye West: My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy2. Kendrick Lamar: To Pimp a Butterfly3. Frank Ocean: Blonde4. Kendrick Lamar: good kid, m.A.A.d city5. Frank Ocean: Channel Orange6. Kanye West: Yeezus7. Vampire Weekend: Modern Vampires of the City8. Sufjan Stevens: Carrie & Lowell9. Arcade Fire: The Suburbs10. Lorde: Melodrama11. Tame Impala: Currents12. Bon Iver: Bon Iver13. Radiohead: A Moon Shaped Pool14. Beyonc: Lemonade15. LCD Soundsystem: This Is Happening16. Joanna Newsom: Have One on Me17. Tame Impala: Lonerism18. Beach House: Teen Dream19. David Bowie: Blackstar20. Death Grips: The Money Store21. Carly Rae Jepsen: EMOTION22. Kendrick Lamar: DAMN.23. Deerhunter: Halcyon Digest24. Bon Iver: 22, A Million25. Fiona Apple: The Idler Wheel...26. Kanye West: The Life of Pablo27. Beach House: Bloom28. The National: High Violet29. DAngelo & the Vanguard: Black Messiah30. Tyler, the Creator: Flower Boy31. Daft Punk: Random Access Memories32. The War on Drugs: Lost in the Dream33. Solange: A Seat at the Table34. Grimes: Art Angels35. Father John Misty: I Love You, Honeybear36. Fleet Foxes: Helplessness Blues37. Danny Brown: Atrocity Exhibition38. Beyonc: Beyonc39. Car Seat Headrest: Twin Fantasy40. Charli XCX: Pop 241. Kacey Musgraves: Golden Hour42. Destroyer: Kaputt43. Lana Del Rey: Ultraviolence44. Taylor Swift: 198945. Grimes: Visions46. Sun Kil Moon: Benji47. Robyn: Body Talk48. Jamie xx: In Colour49. Swans: To Be Kind50. Sufjan Stevens: The Age of Adz

1. Kanye West: Runaway [ft. Pusha-T]2. Frank Ocean: Pyramids3. Kendrick Lamar: Alright4. LCD Soundsystem: Dance Yrself Clean5. Robyn: Dancing on My Own6. Grimes: Oblivion7. Tame Impala: Let It Happen8. Kanye West: Ultralight Beam [ft. Chance the Rapper, The-Dream, Kelly Price, and Kirk Franklin]9. Carly Rae Jepsen: Run Away With Me10. Bon Iver: Holocene11. Beyonc: Formation12. Kanye West: POWER [ft. Dwele]13. Vampire Weekend: Hannah Hunt14. Arcade Fire: Sprawl II (Mountains Beyond Mountains)15. M83: Midnight City16. Lana Del Rey: Video Games17. Frank Ocean: Thinkin Bout You18. Mitski: Your Best American Girl19. Kendrick Lamar: King Kunta20. Kanye West: Monster [ft. Justin Vernon, Rick Ross, Jay-Z, and Nicki Minaj]21. Lana Del Rey: Venice Bitch22. Sufjan Stevens: Should Have Known Better23. JAY-Z / Kanye West: Niggas in Paris24. Daft Punk: Get Lucky [ft. Pharrell]25. Kendrick Lamar: The Blacker the Berry26. Solange: Cranes in the Sky27. Kanye West: Blood on the Leaves28. Frank Ocean: Nikes29. Beach House: Myth30. Kanye West: New Slaves31. Radiohead: Daydreaming32. Frank Ocean: Ivy33. The National: Bloodbuzz Ohio34. Lorde: Royals35. Lorde: Green Light36. Sufjan Stevens: Fourth of July37. Kendrick Lamar: Bitch Dont Kill My Vibe38. David Bowie: Blackstar39. Tame Impala: Feels Like We Only Go Backwards40. Mitski: Nobody41. Radiohead: True Love Waits42. Charli XCX: Track 1043. Vampire Weekend: Step44. Future Islands: Seasons (Waiting on You)45. FKA twigs: Two Weeks46. Ariel Pinks Haunted Graffiti: Round and Round47. Taylor Swift: Style48. Lorde: The Louvre49. Fleet Foxes: Helplessness Blues50. Death Grips: Ive Seen Footage

Go here to read the rest:

Best of the 2010s: Pitchfork Readers' Poll Results - Pitchfork

When it comes to NZ drugs, better safe than sorry – Stuff.co.nz

Posted on by

OPINION: Last year the Global Commission on Drug Policy reported that the international "war"on drugs has been a complete failure.

The evidence from around the world is clear hard-line drug policies don't reduce the demand or supply of illegal drugs.

Instead these policies put people taking drugs completely in the dark. Their MDMA(ecstasy) might have five doses in one pill.

ROSA WOODS/STUFF

Moralising doesn't change people's behaviour or keep them safe.

Or it might have been padded out with cheaper, more dangerous drugs.

READ MORE:*How Kiwis' drugs are being tested before they do harm* Summer of love tinged with danger as MDMA reaches new peaks at NZ festivals * Call for urgency on 'life saving' drug tests before summer music festival season starts* Drugs tested covertly at a NZ festival: 57 per cent not what partygoers expected

It's all well and good shrugging our shoulders and saying people shouldn't do drugs if they don't want to risk overdosing or being poisoned.But moralising doesn't change people's behaviour or keep them safe.

ROSA WOODS/STUFF

Testing illegal drugs at festivals is worthwhile, say Wendy Allison, Managing Director of KnowYourStuffNZ, and Samuel Andrews, Harm Reduction Project Advisor for the NZ Drug Foundation.

I agree with the commission that we need to move away from prohibition and punishment and reduce the risk of drug users coming to harm.

KnowYourStuffNZ is a not-for-profit social enterprise that works in partnership with the NZ Drug Foundation to set up drug-checking tents at festivals and events.

Funded entirely by donations, the KnowYourStuffNZ volunteers use spectrometers to let people check what's in their drugs before deciding whether to take them.

Importantly, after testing, the volunteers talk to people about the risks of taking whatever it is they've identified.

They also let event medical staff know what drugs they've come across so that the staff have a better chance of dealing with any medical issues that may arise.

This is vital, as KnowYourStuffNZ have found more than 70 different types of substances being sold as the main three or four illegal drugstypes.

The good news is that according to their latest data, almost two thirds of people choose not to take their drugs if it turns out they weren't what they thought they were.

Right now, it's unclear whether festival organisers could be prosecuted for "knowingly" providing drug-checking at their events.

Or they could lose their event insurance for keeping people safer.

That's why the Green Party are calling on Parliament to amend the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 so that drug-checking can be made more widely available.

With the weather warming up and our summer festival season approaching, I hope Parliament gets behind this initiative and drug-checking becomes the norm.

Dr Siouxsie Wiles MNZM is an Associate Professor at the University of Auckland and a Deputy Director of Te Pnaha Matatini, a New Zealand Centre of Research Excellence.

Follow this link:

When it comes to NZ drugs, better safe than sorry - Stuff.co.nz

Drugs and drug policy – Inside Indonesia

Posted on by

Claudia Stoicescu & Wayne Palmer

For much of its modern history drugs have been legally produced and consumed in Indonesia, largely in response to demand at home. As far back as the 10thcentury, the use of cannabis (ganja), mostly cultivated in North Sumatra and used for medicinal, recreational and culinary purposes, has been documented across the archipelago. Opium (candu), thought to be initially introduced by Arab traders, was already a significant import when the Dutch arrived six centuries later. Capitalising on a thriving local market, Dutch colonial powers gradually monopolised the import and distribution of candu in Java from the late 17thcentury, with imports reaching an average of 56,000kg annually well into the late 18thcentury, according to official estimates. In the early 1900s, international demand for cocaine for medical, therapeutic and casual uses grew, spurring the legal cultivation of coca in Java. By 1912 Java had become the largest coca exporter in the world, outdoing its rivals in South America with annual shipments of 1000 tonnes of coca. Interestingly though, local consumption of coca derivatives never took off in the Dutch East Indies.

The Dutch East Indies resisted the growing United States-led international movement against the narcotics trade, which saw many other states restrict the production, use and distribution of certain substances from the 1920s. But following Indonesias independence, an international drug control system emerged in the second half of the 20thcentury. It was propped up by three United Nations (UN) conventions that specify how different types of illicit drugs should be regulated. Indonesia ratified the UN conventions on drug control passed in 1961, 1971 and 1988. Subsequently, the Indonesian government (like many others) has adopted some of the harshest penalties against drug use, possession and trafficking in Asia.

For the last two decades, Indonesia has waged an unforgiving war on drugs. The majority of its contemporary drug laws were enacted in 1997 and further amended in 2009. Severe sanctions against the use and supply of controlled drugs are justified by real and imagined harms associated with illicit drugs: health problems, crime, unemployment and poverty. Nowadays, cannabis and heroin, along with newer substances like crystal methamphetamine (sabu-sabu) stir desire, temptation, fear and hatred in equal measure. Broad public support for harsh punishments meted out for drugs offences in Indonesia including capital punishment are stoked by national fears of societal collapse and corruption of the new generation. But despite control efforts, Indonesias drug markets continue to grow, involving millions of people from all walks of life. Indonesia needs a much more sophisticated approach to ensure that the most vulnerable amongst them get the support they need to navigate the terrain safely.

In this special edition, we showcase a range of perspectives on the social, structural, and environmental factors that shape drug-related policy and drug use in Indonesia. The first two articles offer insights into the daily lives of people who use drugs. Laura Nevendorff and Ignatius Praptoraharjo reflect on the dominant lens of the Indonesian government that tends to view any and all drug use as a dependency or criminal issue, while in fact many users of crystal methamphetamine in Indonesia manage their use while leading productive lives. We also learn that using sabu-sabu enables them to negotiate the challenges of life and work. Through her photo essay, Alexandra Radu offers a rare glimpse into the daily life of women undergoing voluntary rehabilitation for drug use at Rumah Singga Peka. Not only does the centre cater to the needs of women, but it is also unique because their approach to drug treatment focuses on harm reduction when most other programs in Indonesia promote abstinence.

Emily Rowe draws our attention to the fact that the Indonesian government prefers to spend its limited budget on expensive and largely ineffective drug control activities instead of financially supporting public-health oriented programs that are proven to save lives. Lex Kuiper hones in on an uncomfortable contradiction in government rhetoric on drug policy. On the one hand, Indonesian officials see themselves as tasked with the responsibility to protect the people against the perils of drug use. On the other, they want to save people who use drugs from drug use. Here, so-called protection also criminalises and punishes the very people the government wants to save.

Puri Kencana Putri and Aghniadi draw our attention to Indonesias use of the death penalty to punish drug trafficking. They show how Indonesias stance hardened in 2015, as the government sought to project an image that it was tough on drugs. Ricky Gunawan and Raynov T. Pamintori provide a heart-wrenching frontline account of how Indonesias criminal justice system is too flawed to mete out irreversible punishments like the death penalty, and offer helpful reflections on how to improve the situation.

The edition concludes with an article by Dania Putri on the growing support for decriminalisation of cannabis in Indonesia. Given the current governments commitment to its war on drugs, decriminalisation in the near future is a pipedream. But the new Criminal Code has not been passed yet, and Indonesias legislators might just surprise us again.

Claudia Stoicescu (claudia.stoicescu@icloud.com) is an Associate Member in the Department of Social Policy and Intervention at the University of Oxford, and a Visiting Fellow at the Atmajaya University HIV and AIDS Research Centre in Jakarta.

Wayne Palmer (wpalmer@binus.edu) is an Associate Professor in the Department of International Relations at Universitas Bina Nusantara in Jakarta.

Go here to read the rest:

Drugs and drug policy - Inside Indonesia

How will AI and robotics transform jobs of the future? – Big Think

Posted on by

Image: Lear21, CC BY-SA 3.0

East and West Berliners on top of the recently opened Berlin Wall, early November 1989.

Image: TD Architects

The rich world, developed world, first world or Western world by another name: the walled world.

Image source: Korean Culture and Information Service (Jeon Han), CC BY 2.0

The Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) between North and South Korea.

Image: ngel Gutirrez Rubio, CC BY 2.0

The 'Valla' in Melilla, where Europe touches Africa.

Image source: Duke Human Rights Center, CC BY 2.0

One of the 99 "Peace Walls" in Belfast, Northern Ireland.

Image source: Cedric31, GFDL

The expansion of Morocco's Berm, in six phases from 1982 to 1987.

Read the original here:

How will AI and robotics transform jobs of the future? - Big Think

Realtime Robotics Scoops Up $11.7M in Series A Funding – Robotics Business Review

Posted on by

BOSTON Realtime Robotics, which is developing responsive motion planning for industrial robots and autonomous vehicles, today announced it raised $11.7 million in Series A Funding. Led by SPARX Asset Management, the round included participation from Mitsubishi Electric Corp., Hyundai Motor Company, and OMRON Ventures.

Existing investors Toyota AI Ventures, Scrum Ventures, and the Duke Angel Network also participated in the round. The company said the new funding will be used to accelerate the development of more commercial product releases and expand the team to support key customers and partners across the globe.

The company said its solutions can help eliminate obstacles to widespread adoption of advanced automation in the industrial, agriculture, food service, construction, healthcare, and consumer markets. Despite the growing demand for automation, todays robots are not safe or smart enough to navigate in dynamic, unstructured environments without costly safeguards and oversight, the company said in a statement. Realtime Robotics solutions eliminate these challenges and enable robots to work at a productive pace.

The companys specialized computer processor and software enables machines, including industrial, collaborative robots, and autonomous vehicles, to evaluate millions of alternative motion paths to avoid a collision and choose the optimal route before making a move, all in milliseconds. Realtime released its first commercial system, RapidPlan and RapidSense, earlier this year.

Peter Howard, CEO, Realtime Robotics

The commitment garnered from strategic investors reflects both the need and the demand for smarter robots, said Peter Howard, CEO of Realtime Robotics. Our technology transforms the way machines interact with both people and other machines. Robots will now be able to take on a wide range of new tasks, and manufacturers will finally benefit from the productivity and efficiency gains that increased automation has promised, but failed to deliver.

Realtime Robotics was founded in 2016 by Duke University professors Dan Sorin, George Konidaris and researchers Sean Murray and Will Floyd-Jones. The company was based on its groundbreaking DARPA-funded research in motion planning.

Read more from the original source:

Realtime Robotics Scoops Up $11.7M in Series A Funding - Robotics Business Review