There is some Talmudic justification for this kind of behaviour, which contributes to the relatively high exhibition of these traits among those who practice Judaism or whose environment is heavily influenced by that culture (the Sacklers are indeed Jewish)[see below].
The Talmud teaches us quite explicitly that non-Jews may be treated as we may treat cattle - they are ours to exploit in pursuit of our own security and prosperity. There is little that is not justifiable so long as it serves that goal. In fact, more concern is afforded in the Talmud to the interests of other Jews who may be harmed by conflicting exploitation of goyim, than to the subjects themselves.
Of course this is taboo in the extreme by the standards of modern Western society, and of course I have no idea of the Sacklers' private convictions, but just as some may use their Bible as justification for their homophobia or the Koran for justification of their misogyny, some may well use the Talmud as justification for xenophobic sadism and exploitation - which includes the deceptive popularisation of opioids for extraordinary profits in spite of (or because of) the physical, spiritual and financial suffering of others.
[Some quotes for the uninitiated]
"An orthodox Jew is not bound to observe principles of morality towards people of other tribes. He may act contrary to morality, if profitable to himself or to Jews in general." Zohar, Vayshlah 177b
"On the house of the Goy one looks as on the fold of cattle." Mas. Shabbath 31b
"The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night." Zohar, Shemoth, Toldoth Noah, Lekh-Lekha
Sanhedrin 58b provides that Jews may not be held responsible for the deaths of non-Jews.
I'm sure you're not being disingenuous so I'll politely remind you of the part in each of those events where the deceased attempted to wrestle control of a firearm.
That's part of the problem. Everyone understands their career, family, home, etc may be destroyed if they don't go along with the narrative to get along, even long after that narrative has abandoned it's relationship with reality.
Why they commit crime at such higher rates than the White population would be an interesting conversation to have. Unfortunately, it seems as if you're implying that we shouldn't police them equally because of their race. I cannot endorse that, and I would urge you to consider their victims (most of whom are also Aboriginals, if they are your concern).
>I have privilege as a White person because I can do all of these things without thinking twice about it … I can go jogging (#AmaudArbery). I can relax in the comfort of my own home (#BothemSean and #AtatianaJefferson). I can ask for help after being in a car crash (#Jonathan Ferrell and #RenishaMcBride). I can have a cellphone (#StephonClark). I can leave a party to get to safety (#JordanEdwards). I can play loud music (#JordanDavis). I can sell CDs (#AltonSterling). I can sleep (#AiyanaJones). I can walk from the corner store (#MikeBrown).
Who really says this?
Michael Brown could've had a regular visit to the store too. Instead, he chose to brazenly steal whatever he wanted and waltzed out despite the owner's protestations, strutted down the middle of the street with his stolen goods, wrestled a pistol from the attending police officer and discharged a shot in the struggle, and then - having made a little distance in his getaway - chose to turn around and charge at the officer even as he demanded cooperation.
Arbery could've had a pleasant jog too. Instead he chose to enter a stranger's house, flee when confronted by concerned neighbours, and very nearly wrestle away his firearm - and we all know how that would've ended - creating a life or death situation for the good Samaritan.
Why, if this is such a terrible phenomenon, must we lie to create martyrs? I don't even disagree with the scourge of brutality, especially having seen a 17 year old White boy shot and killed by police today in a welfare check. But why is it so common in the BLM movement to rally behind violent criminals on the receiving end of justifiable responses? I understand the black incentives for doing so, but why are Whites perpetuating these myths so enthusiastically? Why aren't they rioting for the White victims instead of (or at the very least, as well as) these black thugs?
The Talmud teaches us quite explicitly that non-Jews may be treated as we may treat cattle - they are ours to exploit in pursuit of our own security and prosperity. There is little that is not justifiable so long as it serves that goal. In fact, more concern is afforded in the Talmud to the interests of other Jews who may be harmed by conflicting exploitation of goyim, than to the subjects themselves.
Of course this is taboo in the extreme by the standards of modern Western society, and of course I have no idea of the Sacklers' private convictions, but just as some may use their Bible as justification for their homophobia or the Koran for justification of their misogyny, some may well use the Talmud as justification for xenophobic sadism and exploitation - which includes the deceptive popularisation of opioids for extraordinary profits in spite of (or because of) the physical, spiritual and financial suffering of others.
[Some quotes for the uninitiated] "An orthodox Jew is not bound to observe principles of morality towards people of other tribes. He may act contrary to morality, if profitable to himself or to Jews in general." Zohar, Vayshlah 177b
"On the house of the Goy one looks as on the fold of cattle." Mas. Shabbath 31b
"The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night." Zohar, Shemoth, Toldoth Noah, Lekh-Lekha
Sanhedrin 58b provides that Jews may not be held responsible for the deaths of non-Jews.