martin wrote:
>
> On Jul 19, 2008, at 1:00 PM, Miles Jackson wrote:
>
> > I'm speaking more broadly about how attitudes tend to follow changes
> > in social conditions (e.g., transformations in the economy,
> > religion, education, mass media, family structure).
>
> Can you apply your standard to drug prohibition ?
If some 5%-10% of the populatio began to hold frequent and (at least to some extent) disruptive public demonstrations; if this were accompanied by a visible scattering of more "far-out" activities (Boston Tea Party or assassinating a mayor -- that kind of thing); if there were also increasingly visible internal communication and consultation among the various groups conducting the agitation, if heavy repression tended to draw some public sympathy to those repressed, if the fuss drew international attention where it disturbed, however slightly, if quite a few of the groups begin linking this struggle to other issues, threatening to spread the "plague of disturbances," if increasing numbers of "good [=reactionary] folk" begin began demanding that "something be done to restore order" (and if such restoration was not easily feasible), THEN there is a high probability that drug laws would be sharply curtailed -- short probably of a "repeal" of prohibition, but strongly tending that way, and easing various pressures.
Unless the movement had in the meantime triggered more central areas of activity (tending towards class struggle) the struggle would then fade away, until such time as new groups took it up and developed it t a similar level.
The partial change, plus the general feeling created by the disturbance that "things were different," would percolate the general public and there would THEN and ONLY THEN, be (to some extent the change of public attitudes that is so dear to Julio.
The core function (only partly udnerstood by those who implement it) of the Democratic Party, of the AFL-CIO, of the NAACP, of NOW, progressive neoclassical economists, the AAUP, and in the event of the events I hypothesize some similar organization advocating drug prohibition exist to channel, control, and ultimately stifle such periods of threatening activity.
Carrol