Scientific Evidence Portal
Follow The Money: Smoking Showdown - Public Health Vs. Private Rights (and profits) in a Multistate Battle in 2006 | Anne Bauer
Article Published: 2007/06/04
Type: Articles and Dissertations
Published By: National Institute on Money in State Politics
Further Information The final aim of antitobacco is, most likely, to keep tobacco legal but create a cultural and legal situation that makes it impossible to consume without violating some law. That, in the hypocritical mind of a decayed culture turned to externalities and political correctness, is not prohibition!
The hypocritical message is that the culture – not really the state – rejects smoking; however, since the state represents the culture, then the state must implement laws that represent that culture.
That is all artificial, of course, and imposed top-down. In this section, Who Pays Whom, we are concerned exactly with that: the financing of a movement that would never have become significant if it were not steadily “pumped” with millions and billions of dollars coming from institutions and, especially, from the pharmaceutical industry that has an obvious vested interest in banning public and private smoking and the smoking culture in general.
It follows, therefore, that a continuous stream of money is to be pumped into “tobacco control” to sustain the campaign of disinformation, while moulding the culture to "values" that it never spontaneously chose.
This very interesting document tracks some of the money flow from both the pharmaceutical and the tobacco industry through the years in the United States. Why is antitobacco prevailing? Is it because “the people” have come spontaneously to realize the “evils” of smoking and thus have rejected it? Ergo smokers should comply? Nothing of the sort. It is much simpler than that. As one of the graphics (reproduced here) of the document clearly demonstrates, it is a matter of straightforward investment in the colossal brainwashing enterprise: “In Washington, for every dollar raised by pro-tobacco committees, antitobacco committees raised forty-eight”.
What does that have to do with “grass roots” or “spontaneous cultural change”? Absolutely nothing, but an incredible social danger is demonstrated by this and other documents in this section: that social changes are no longer coming from the bottom up (that is, from the people to the state) as it should be in a truly free and democratic society. Now they are coming from the top down, as happens in every truly fascist society. Special interest groups with an agenda which of course is servile to those who pay them control the state and the institutions to lie to the people so that the people believe those lies and comply with legal and cultural impositions that would never be acceptable were people not lied to.
The appalling reality is that many of those who "hate" smoking gladly accept this subversion of democracy and institutional integrity merely in exchange for environments without smoking. The ease with which they redefine "freedom" to suit their wishes speaks volumes about the decay of liberty as a social value. Vision as to the consequences of policies is utterly lacking. This is pathetically childish and awfully dangerous.
This tragic process, spearheaded by antitobacco, has now expanded to almost anything under the sun: from food to alcohol, from cellular phones to global warming, from “car control” to “soft drink control.” You name it, it is there – and the only possible result in all cases is a sickly paranoia-driven society progressively accepting slavery in exchange for an illusion of "good health."