Government and Jewish Control of the Drug Supply in Ghettoes

Over the past 40 years, as black men have become more socially prominent in the wake of civil rights, they haven't integrated completely into the suburbs. Since the revolution ending in increased civil rights put the black community on equal footing with whites, the question is raised about what factors prevent them from moving into family-friendly suburban areas and outside of crime-ridden urban hotspots. Even in the wake of civil rights, blacks find themselves 'stuck' in low-rent and dangerous areas while substance abuse rates climb higher and higher. This raises important questions about the failure of government programs dedicated to improving the lives of black men by moving them and their families to the suburbs; is it possible that recreational substances (e.g., drugs) are being chemically modified by the government to control the black community?

The social theorist and cultural studies professor Dr. Andre Young has hinted at this in his work, noting that certain substances known to be commonly used for recreational purposes are often used without full knowledge of the physical and chemical consequences; in the professor's words, "[there is no] telling what the side effects could be." He further indicates that they tend to act as aphrodisiacs, to such an extreme that subjects of affection become not peers but the Other, mere objects in the eyes of the user. Further contributions by Dr. Young's peers imply that such activity is more common in urban areas of Southern California than it is in the suburbs of Southern California.

Besides his powers of perception, the value of Dr. Young's observation lay in his position as the anthropologist. Rather than simply observe from afar, Young has incorporated himself into urban culture and experienced it firsthand and that should be considered during a reading of his 2001 texts.

It is clear from Dr. Young's work that substances are powerful and capable of strongly human behaviour. As with anything having results like this, it is most important to ask cui bono? [who benefits?]

Social spending in urban areas has been reported by neutral-agenda institutions such as the Cato Institute to actually increase poverty. Yet the details of the social spending are seldom readily available. Is it possible that government money is going into putting harmful and mind-altering substances into urban areas to prevent the black community from moving to the suburbs? Let's consider the financial implications.

Prudent advice from long-time students of politics often includes the phrase "follow the money." The Western finance capitals are London in Europe, and New York City in the United States. Consider this: given that much of the financing in politics comes from old banking money in the United States, and from old royalty money in the United Kingdom, it seems irrefutably likely that the financiers are involved directly. More prudent advice from long-time students often includes the phrase "Nothing in politics happens by accident." Therefore, the depressing but irrefutable truth is that Western financiers are involved in keeping the black community out of the suburbs, using the means of forcibly injecting harmful and addictive substances into urban areas through financial power.