Cigarettes as a catalyst for social unrest

[ellipsis]

Now this may seem wacky but hear me out. In reading about worker-controlled textile mills in Allende's Chile, I saw something interesting about how shortages(artificial?) caused people to become dissatisfied with the regime. Specifically people interviewed complained about a lack of bread and cigarettes. This got me thinking, if most people in a city can't get their nic fix, they would be pretty pissed off and irritable. I thought that this had to be a major contribution to the creation of a significant opposition to allende within the chilean populace. Does this make sense? Do you think allende's opponents created artificial shortages of all goods but specifically cigarettes for this reason? Any other examples of cigarette shortages preceding social unrest?

[Raúl Duke]

I think shortage of resources in general, specifically food, have a tendency to cause this. From what it seems the Russian Revolution and maybe even the French Revolution got their start from a shortage.

Although many things can be a spark for revolution

[ellipsis]

Yah but (most) people aren't addicted to food. Cigarette withdrawal is a harsh mistress.

[#FF0000]

Yah but (most) people aren't addicted to food. Cigarette withdrawal is a harsh mistress.

Starvation can be pretty bad too. Just saying.

[ellipsis]

Starving can take a while. I am not trying to downplay the impact of starvation, merely stating that the brain chemistry of addiction and starvation are very different. Additionally, the impact of hunger on social order(food riots, etc.) is well documented and well known. But the effect of cigarettes on social order is as far as I have seen completely absent in any analysis, academic or otherwise.

Case in point, how many people do you think are mad at Obama for raising cigarette taxes dramatically. I know I am.

[RedRise]

Obama has raised cigarette taxes to encourage people to give up smoking. In case you didn't know, it is bad for you and can put you at high risk for some serious health issues. Along the same track, the amount of unrest a lack of nicotine causes really depends on how many of the population are addicted. In Australia where I live not many people smoke now days so I don't think it would have much effect on the general population. In places in Europe where they smoke like chimneys it might be different.

[BOZG]

Yah but (most) people aren't addicted to food. Cigarette withdrawal is a harsh mistress.

I'll give you a fiver to do a test run of which makes you feel worse!

[bcbm]

In case you didn't know, it is bad for you and can put you at high risk for some serious health issues.

i don't believe you.

[FSL]

Obama has raised cigarette taxes to encourage people to give up smoking.


Actually, he did it so every worker will pay through an indirect tax the cost of supporting banks.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

working people don't have the right to smoke and get sick because they're a burden on the public healthcare system

[ellipsis]

Obama has raised cigarette taxes to encourage people to give up smoking.
Just like how the bourgeois drives the cost of living higher as a means to encourage people to give up living.


In case you didn't know, it is bad for you and can put you at high risk for some serious health issues.
What do you mean in case I didn't know? They put labels on the package and teach you in school that they are bad. In case I didn't know.....

Back to the issue at hand, I was just thinking that in really comes down to social contract theory, if there is the perception that the government hasn't ensured the material well-being because goods like food, gas and cigarettes are in short supply, the government failed to uphold its end of the social contract in this regard and therefore has lost legitimacy in the eyes of its citizenry.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Bread riots have been the harbinger of revolution quite a few times.

Although since only working class people still smoke in the US, maybe there could be a connection. A cigarette shortage would be the class opposite of the tea-boycott of the American revolution. The poorer classes didn't give a fuck about tea because it was too expensive and too hard to make, so they knew the boycott would fuck-over the colonial elites. Today, rich people and professionals don't normally smoke (they get their kicks from prescription drugs - workers too, but yuppies and the rich do it legally) but workers do, so if there was a ban or whatever, the upper classes wouldn't even know the kind of anger they were stirring up.

[ls]

I think there are more important things than cigarettes, like, a lot more important things really, perhaps fairly directly, they have at times disaffected people and been the last weight on a camel's back (then again, there are so many more things which ahve done this), they are not the amazing thing you appear to be making them out to be..

[Jimmie Higgins]

In the US it would have to be a food shortage or gas shortage. Food for obvious and historical reasons - gas because they way cities are here, most workers do not have access to easy public transit and live a 1/2 hour (probably more) driving commute to work as it is.

The gas crisis in the 70s helped swing people to the right and I think a lot of Republicans gave up on Bush when there was all the crazy price fluctuation for gas.

[Angry Young Man]

Having to give up smoking is the most annoying thing to me personally in my stakes, even though I can't afford food, cleaning products or cider either, and in WWII, tobacco was the biggest expenditure of the British military because it was so important to morale. A bloke once said to me 'as long as you can have a fag or a brew, you're ok

[Jimmie Higgins]

God I miss em. If only there were non addictive cigarettes, I'd smoke every day!:lol:

[Os Cangaceiros]

Starving can take a while. I am not trying to downplay the impact of starvation, merely stating that the brain chemistry of addiction and starvation are very different. Additionally, the impact of hunger on social order(food riots, etc.) is well documented and well known. But the effect of cigarettes on social order is as far as I have seen completely absent in any analysis, academic or otherwise.

Case in point, how many people do you think are mad at Obama for raising cigarette taxes dramatically. I know I am.

I'm sure you're right about there being no academic studies about ornery smokers. :lol:

Besides, libertarians tend to have ideological hegemony over this subject/debate. Anything in regards to the rising price of cigarettes, smoking in bars etc. invariably gets funneled into "getting the government out of our lives" and "resisting the nanny state". It's a political sideshow at best.

[Steve_j]

My tobacco comes via Spain and Poland. If they rise their taxes any more then i will happily join any uprising in revolt. Too late for the UK im affraid :( they already have alienated me and extorted millions of people like me to fill their piggy bank.

[ellipsis]

I'm sure you're right about there being no academic studies about ornery smokers. :lol: Why not though? Is it such a ridiculous idea? People are talking like I am crazy, yet cannot present any counter-evidence. My statement is made by actual statements made by chileans at the time. Yes hunger and food shortages cause most unrest. This does not mean that cigarette shortages have no impact; the two are not mutually exclusive.


Besides, libertarians tend to have ideological hegemony over this subject/debate. Anything in regards to the rising price of cigarettes, smoking in bars etc. invariably gets funneled into "getting the government out of our lives" and "resisting the nanny state". It's a political sideshow at best. Great I made no argument to that effect. In fact doesn't what you are saying support my argument? Government control of cigarettes leads to people angry at the government.

[ComradeRed22'91]

Obama has raised cigarette taxes to encourage people to give up smoking. In case you didn't know, it is bad for you and can put you at high risk for some serious health issues.

But that's my gotdamned descision. that completely goes against everything that is left...i want to smoke. i should be able to smoke. they raise taxes on cigarettes and that opresses me. it's not their fuckin' business if it's bad for me, coca-cola is bad for me, but there's no higher tax on that.

i have news for you: Abortion can cause health problems - but you're not against that, are you?

[ComradeRed22'91]

My tobacco comes via Spain and Poland.

Oh yeah? which brands?

[Os Cangaceiros]

Why not though? Is it such a ridiculous idea? People are talking like I am crazy, yet cannot present any counter-evidence.

I shouldn't have to prove that cigarettes don't cause social unrest...I shouldn't have to prove a negative. So far the only evidence you've brought is stating that you read somewhere that people in Chile were dissatisfied with commodity shortages, specifically food and cigarettes. That's great. I'm just saying that I've never come across an account of cigarettes providing a "catalyst for social unrest" before, and reading about social unrest is a bit of a hobby of mine.


Great I made no argument to that effect.

I never said that you did...


In fact doesn't what you are saying support my argument? Government control of cigarettes leads to people angry at the government.

That doesn't necessarily help our side, though. A lot of people are upset with the government currently, and they're not turning to our side for answers.

[ellipsis]

The book was called weavers of the revolution, authors name to be
added. You don't have to prove anything you are right. What I am asking for is general discussion, at a semi intelligent level. Perhaps the topic doesn't warrant it but I think it does.

Another example is that I have seen revleft members state that they didn't join the rcp-USA because they don't allow smoking, drinking and drugs. Che thought tabacco so important he included a section on it in guerrilla warfare.

[anticap]

But that's my gotdamned descision. that completely goes against everything that is left...i want to smoke. i should be able to smoke. they raise taxes on cigarettes and that opresses me. it's not their fuckin' business if it's bad for me, coca-cola is bad for me, but there's no higher tax on that.

I share your libertarian streak, but remember that health care in a communist society will be a collective concern, not an individual one as it is under capitalism. If you exercise your liberty to burn plastic and inhale the vapors, or to inject yourself with raw sewage, etc., there will come a point when the community will have to issue you an ultimatum: stop intentionally poisoning yourself, or forfeit your access to the communal health care system. Dr. Rosenpenis summed it up earlier in the thread.

If you choose the latter, then you'll have to join your fellow stubbornly pro-cancer freedom-lovers and arrange your own health-care system. And when you disagree with them in some regard and they scratch your name from their rolls, you're on your own. Better to think rationally and concede that sometimes it really is in your own self-interest to follow the herd. You can stomp and pout and make a fuss about it if that makes you feel better. Communism isn't anti-tantrum AFAIK.

[Luisrah]

I share your libertarian streak, but remember that health care in a communist society will be a collective concern, not an individual one as it is under capitalism. If you exercise your liberty to burn plastic and inhale the vapors, or to inject yourself with raw sewage, etc., there will come a point when the community will have to issue you an ultimatum: stop intentionally poisoning yourself, or forfeit your access to the communal health care system. Dr. Rosenpenis summed it up earlier in the thread.

If you choose the latter, then you'll have to join your fellow stubbornly pro-cancer freedom-lovers and arrange your own health-care system. And when you disagree with them in some regard and they scratch your name from their rolls, you're on your own. Better to think rationally and concede that sometimes it really is in your own self-interest to follow the herd. You can stomp and pout and make a fuss about it if that makes you feel better. Communism isn't anti-tantrum AFAIK.

Exactly.
Freedom to do whatever you want is pretty cool, but we can put a liberal principle here, that your freedom ends when someone else's starts.

In a communist society you are free, and you don't have to give your contribution to society if you don't want to, but don't expect her to help you if you don't help her.
In the same way, society won't give you health if you are purposedly making yourself unhealthy.

Heck, so now I feel like always having sex without a condom, because it's my decision, and the public healthcare has to make an abortion every month because I am free to generate unnecessary work to someone else.

So much for your libertarian streak

[ellipsis]

I am happy to pay more for something which I will receive in return, i.e. pay for the impact on the health care system if I were to then receive healthcare when I needed it. I have no insurance and am leaving vermont where there is pretty much universal care, so I receive nothing in return. In a communist society, I would pay/work extra so as not to be a leech. I mean ideally I should quit and want to but I am beginning to think that they are habit forming.

[REVLEFT'S BIEGGST MATSER TROL]

Starving can take a while. I am not trying to downplay the impact of starvation, merely stating that the brain chemistry of addiction and starvation are very different. Additionally, the impact of hunger on social order(food riots, etc.) is well documented and well known. But the effect of cigarettes on social order is as far as I have seen completely absent in any analysis, academic or otherwise.

Case in point, how many people do you think are mad at Obama for raising cigarette taxes dramatically. I know I am.

Dude, shit starts sucking for me without food for about 6 hours. I went 3 days without food once, and that was awful. I felt so deflated. Point is, food "withdrawals" kick in a lot harder than nicotine ones, ( I would imagine, I've never smoked.) But being irritable and annoyed is surely better than being like, zombiefied?

Mabye you are right about that cigarettes being overlooked though? We always focus on the other drugs really.

[btpound]

I think that cigarette smoking is as common in the working class as alcoholism, or pot smoking or any other drug usage. We work all day, we get stressed, we can do nothing to change our condition immediately, so we light up a cigarette, have a drink, smoke a bowl. As far as famine vs. nic-fit, they can both have revolutionary implications. As Malcolm X said, "when a person is sad, he does nothing to change his miserable condition. It's only when he gets mad that he is willing to change it."

[black magick hustla]

i smoke cigs and its a miserable habit

[bcbm]

i smoke cigs and its a miserable habit

only in winter

[black magick hustla]

onkly when you dont have money and thus cant buy it and you get massive withrdawals (like now)

[ellipsis]

onkly when you dont have money and thus cant buy it and you get massive withrdawals (like now)

First do those massive withdrawals make you want to over throw the government more or less?

Second, don't you go to school in Mexico? Forgive me if I am wrong. If so cigarettes is pretty cheap there, but I have been to broke to afford them too. Boots Exactos are my brand.

[ComradeRed22'91]

So you're against the legalization of marijuana? Because that's inhaling smoke, which is just as bad for you as tobacco smoke. Furthermore, working as a lumberjack can bring about some horrendous injuries, or just about any job, are you saying these people shouldn't get their free healthcare? What about drinking coke? Or fast food?

[ComradeRed22'91]

So apparently people can no longer enjoy the wonders of fried food in a communist society.

[Buffalo Souljah]

Didn't your mom ever tell you that Camels don't smoke cigarettes ?

:rolleyes:

[eyedrop]

I share your libertarian streak, but remember that health care in a communist society will be a collective concern, not an individual one as it is under capitalism. If you exercise your liberty to burn plastic and inhale the vapors, or to inject yourself with raw sewage, etc., there will come a point when the community will have to issue you an ultimatum: stop intentionally poisoning yourself, or forfeit your access to the communal health care system. Dr. Rosenpenis summed it up earlier in the thread.


I love how people envision a postrevolutionary society that is worse than todays. Have you guys been listening to too much libertarian propaganda about how free healthcare is utopian.

If social democratic countries can have free healthcare (even if it has some major flaws) for people with stupid habits (incidentally I'm writing this while I'm drinking a beer and enjoying some snus), a postrevolutionary society surely can. I'm not really joining any revolution if what we end up with is worse than social democracy, which I find hard to believe is even possible considering the collosal waste incorporated in a social democracy.

[punisa]

Cigarettes are bad for you, but there are at least 50 equally dangerous products that you consume/use on a regular basis and probably don't even think about it.
Problem I have with cigarettes:
1) too much toxic and chemicals go in there, besides tobacco
2) they are overpriced

But back to topic. I must back up TheRedSon, his claims are corrects.
Let me give you a real life example...
During the war in Yugoslavia, Croatia 1991-1995 we have spent some of the worst years of our lives.
Conditions were unbearable, not enough food, no electricity. Bombs are falling like 10 per minute. People dead. Your odds of making through another day were sometimes rather slim.
People were scared, depressed and worried.
But I remember this one night in the bomb shelter when cigarettes ran out - oh man, you should've seen the transition there :laugh:
People were so pissed and so angry they were ready to walk out and go "Rambo" on the enemy.

So yeah, you can really spark a flame if you take away tobacco from the people.
Today it is "trendy" to be healthy, but people who live in miserable situations, like in extreme condition such as the war zone, or a little less extreme like our everyday exploitation - majority don't give a fuck about cancer or the alleged number of minutes you loose with every cigarette.

I still consider myself that banning smoking in ALL bars (they should have segregated ones) is a fascist action.
They might ban tobacco altogether one day, but it will occur gradually..
raise prices - raise awareness - prohibit from bars - prohibit from streets etc.
Eventually you'll have just a tiny minority of smokers, so they'll introduce a total ban.

If you would (totally) ban cigarettes today, you would see a full blown revolution tomorrow.

[ellipsis]

Kinda off topic, but in Cuba people don't have matches or lighters, so people approach other people smoking on the street and light their cigarette from the other person's. Even if you offer a lighter, they refuse.

[Sleeper]

I wish to counter a point made very early on in the thread about people getting into more of an upheaval over a lack of food as compared to cigarettes.

The difference between food and cigarettes as mentioned previously is that a person will die without food despite the fact that food is not (generally) an addiction, and that people will not die without cigarettes. That, of course, is entirely true, but the reason that a lack of cigarettes will drive someone to revolt is because a cigarette satisfies a more immediate need.

As a smoker, I can say that when I get a feeling that I want a cigarette I become very irritable if that craving is not satisfied in under a half hour. That's coming from someone that only smokes 4-5 cigarettes per day! On the other hand, I don't think that most people (including myself) very regularly get the feeling that they are hungry, per se. I think that the majority of people get the feeling that their body/brain is now ready to eat, which is to say that you could eat now with minimal risk of upsetting your stomach.

When it comes to actual physical discomfort over not having eaten, I would venture to say that it generally takes at least 24 hours without eating. For actual mental discomfort to arise as a result of not having eaten probably takes a few days, again, the want for a cigarette that you do not have and cannot obtain results in immediate mental discomfort.

Besides, there is still hope for someone who is mildly hungry that they will find food before they become very hungry, but when you're out of cigarettes, you're out of cigarettes. So, even though cigarettes are not technically a need, they certainly manifest themselves as a want more immediately than food manifests itself as a need.

[anticap]

I love how people envision a postrevolutionary society that is worse than todays. Have you guys been listening to too much libertarian propaganda about how free healthcare is utopian.

If social democratic countries can have free healthcare (even if it has some major flaws) for people with stupid habits (incidentally I'm writing this while I'm drinking a beer and enjoying some snus), a postrevolutionary society surely can. I'm not really joining any revolution if what we end up with is worse than social democracy, which I find hard to believe is even possible considering the collosal waste incorporated in a social democracy.

Seems you've misread me; and instead of addressing where my point about the collective nature of healthcare is wrong, have instead opted to launch into a diatribe against my alleged libertarian utopianism (there's the misreading), which you've ironically based on your own individualistic interpretation of healthcare.

[8bit]

Just like how the bourgeois drives the cost of living higher as a means to encourage people to give up living.

Not so much. Giving up living is detrimental to one's health. Giving up smoking is beneficial.

Rasing tobacco taxes may be detrimental to some in the short run, but it ultimately helps suffocate the tobacco industry.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

Not so much. Giving up living is detrimental to one's health. Giving up smoking is beneficial.

Rasing tobacco taxes may be detrimental to some in the short run, but it ultimately helps suffocate the tobacco industry.

I fully accept the bad health affects of smoking, I just want to, who are you to say I can't smoke?

As some roman once said, every civilization is only three meals away from a revolution. Not three fag breaks.

[ReggaeCat]

come on ...its not like the government cares about smokers...about healthcare systec cares wich goes to the top by the smokers....(when you have free healthcare its pretty fun taking you money back xD)aaaaand....im planing on making an communist tobbaco company where no worker is getting paid but they work so they can get free sigaretes...any1 in???:laugh:

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

Obama has raised cigarette taxes to encourage people to give up smoking.

Is the exponential increase in government revenue just an unrelated byproduct of Obama's initiaitve? If you think that's the reason behind raised cigarette taxes you're deluded.

[Reuben]

The other thing that might be said is that the smoking tax is incredibly regressive, falling primarily upon those on lower incomes.

Meanwhile since demand for cigarettes is very price inelastic it has little effect in deterring smoking. Not that this is the governments business anyway.

[anticap]

The other thing that might be said is that the smoking tax is incredibly regressive, falling primarily upon those on lower incomes.

Meanwhile since demand for cigarettes is very price inelastic it has little effect in deterring smoking. Not that this is the governments business anyway.

Using the same illogic, Russia has just doubled the minimum price of vodka to combat alcoholism. Of course, it won't affect the robber-baron class.