U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-07-2014, 10:28 AM
 
Location: Colorado
14,523 posts, read 8,939,385 times
Reputation: 26494

Advertisements

I don't know about all the hippiefied mumbo jumbo about consciousness and such, but I do know exactly how and why marijuana came to be illegal. It had nothing to do, really, with the drug, and everything to do with powerful financial interests threatened by new developing processes to make use of the highly renewable industrial hemp.

If you have control over a rare and hard to renew resource, and you make BANK off of that control, and someone comes up with a means to turn something common and easy to cultivate and sustain into a product that is better than yours, you will FIGHT IT however you must. And that's just what happened. William Randolph Hearst is the guy that Citizen Kane was based off of. His interests in the timber and paper industries of the Pacific Northwest were threatened when a competitor began to develop ways to make paper out of hemp. Then Dupont's revenue streams were threatened by processes to make certain plastics and chemicals out of it as well. Also opposing hemp was Andrew Mellon, who was the wealthiest man in America at the time, was heavily invested in DuPont's new nylon processes. The success of nylon required that it replace hemp in the making of many things such as rope and clothing, which is exactly what has happened. They colluded to produce a massive campaign of paranoia and fear against "marihuana" the drug, in order to get industrial hemp illegal by association.

Arguments that were used preyed upon racism and xenophobia, as Mexicans in the southwest were known to smoke, they were the target of much of the demonization, and furthermore, arguments were made before legislators in hearings that black jazz musicians were using marijuana to intoxicate and seduce white women. Reefer madness took hold and the rest is history.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-07-2014, 10:31 AM
 
1,168 posts, read 1,105,141 times
Reputation: 912
It's politics, which is the game of power through social control
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 10:37 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia
11,956 posts, read 11,101,000 times
Reputation: 8191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic_Spork View Post
I don't know about all the hippiefied mumbo jumbo about consciousness and such, but I do know exactly how and why marijuana came to be illegal. It had nothing to do, really, with the drug, and everything to do with powerful financial interests threatened by new developing processes to make use of the highly renewable industrial hemp.

If you have control over a rare and hard to renew resource, and you make BANK off of that control, and someone comes up with a means to turn something common and easy to cultivate and sustain into a product that is better than yours, you will FIGHT IT however you must. And that's just what happened. William Randolph Hearst is the guy that Citizen Kane was based off of. His interests in the timber and paper industries of the Pacific Northwest were threatened when a competitor began to develop ways to make paper out of hemp. Then Dupont's revenue streams were threatened by processes to make certain plastics and chemicals out of it as well. Also opposing hemp was Andrew Mellon, who was the wealthiest man in America at the time, was heavily invested in DuPont's new nylon processes. The success of nylon required that it replace hemp in the making of many things such as rope and clothing, which is exactly what has happened. They colluded to produce a massive campaign of paranoia and fear against "marihuana" the drug, in order to get industrial hemp illegal by association.

Arguments that were used preyed upon racism and xenophobia, as Mexicans in the southwest were known to smoke, they were the target of much of the demonization, and furthermore, arguments were made before legislators in hearings that black jazz musicians were using marijuana to intoxicate and seduce white women. Reefer madness took hold and the rest is history.
Excellent historical breakdown.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 10:41 AM
 
Location: Colorado
14,523 posts, read 8,939,385 times
Reputation: 26494
Of course once prohibition took effect, plenty of other big money/big politics interests found ways to cash in.

Private prisons, full of minor pot offenders.
Sheriffs in some states who actually get kickbacks for arrests of said offenders.
Police departments who are allowed to seize all kinds of assets from said offenders, and actually anyone who is even a "suspect" even if they are later proven innocent, can lose assets to these thugs. The cops often get the fancy cars from "drug dealers" to drive around as they please. In fact it's to the point in some jurisdictions where cops can pretty much get away with confiscating anything they want from anyone, as long as they can trump up some charges. You're only going to succeed in pushing back if you can afford the best legal help and probably some judicious bribe money along the way.
Big pharma doesn't want anything out there that any of us could grow in our homes that might compete with the dangerous and expensive drugs they're pushing.
Big alcohol doesn't want any competition in the realm of intoxicating substances.

I could go on but why bother. The bottom line is that when the same people who sit on the boards aren't also in office legislating for their own best interest, those corps and orgs are quite capable of pushing fortunes in campaign support and lobbying to essentially render our leaders puppets.

It's astonishing that even a few states have managed to lean towards legal. If big money finds a way to use it to feed their beast, we'll really see it take off. Just wait, if Monsanto gets involved, it'll be legal within 6 months, everywhere.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 10:46 AM
 
Location: A great city, by a Great Lake!
15,896 posts, read 10,666,269 times
Reputation: 7466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic_Spork View Post
I don't know about all the hippiefied mumbo jumbo about consciousness and such, but I do know exactly how and why marijuana came to be illegal. It had nothing to do, really, with the drug, and everything to do with powerful financial interests threatened by new developing processes to make use of the highly renewable industrial hemp.

If you have control over a rare and hard to renew resource, and you make BANK off of that control, and someone comes up with a means to turn something common and easy to cultivate and sustain into a product that is better than yours, you will FIGHT IT however you must. And that's just what happened. William Randolph Hearst is the guy that Citizen Kane was based off of. His interests in the timber and paper industries of the Pacific Northwest were threatened when a competitor began to develop ways to make paper out of hemp. Then Dupont's revenue streams were threatened by processes to make certain plastics and chemicals out of it as well. Also opposing hemp was Andrew Mellon, who was the wealthiest man in America at the time, was heavily invested in DuPont's new nylon processes. The success of nylon required that it replace hemp in the making of many things such as rope and clothing, which is exactly what has happened. They colluded to produce a massive campaign of paranoia and fear against "marihuana" the drug, in order to get industrial hemp illegal by association.

Arguments that were used preyed upon racism and xenophobia, as Mexicans in the southwest were known to smoke, they were the target of much of the demonization, and furthermore, arguments were made before legislators in hearings that black jazz musicians were using marijuana to intoxicate and seduce white women. Reefer madness took hold and the rest is history.

You nailed it as usual Sonic! The special interests of today and yesterday really need to get the hell out of the way! Because in a free market (as it should be) you either compete, or find a new hobby, and not whine to the government.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia
11,956 posts, read 11,101,000 times
Reputation: 8191
The War on "Drugs" was essentially launched as a means to control a certain segment of society.

The disgraced former President Richard Nixon has admitted that a major reason for launching the War on "Drugs" was to curtail and silence Vietnam War Protestors-a means to arrest and disband protests where the use of marijuana may have been prevalant but also very benevolent and peaceful.

40 Years Ago Today: Congress Was Told To Tell The Truth About Marijuana; They Didn’t | NORML Blog, Marijuana Law Reform

In 1972 a Congressionally appointed 13 member Commission on US Drug Policy-which included 9 hand picked members by Nixon-recommended that "criminal law is too harsh a tool to apply to personal possession." They also recommended that marijuana be removed from its Schedule I Drug classification.

Nixon ignored the findings and recommendations of the report (as those in Government and Corporations often do when they don't get what they want) and in his own words "launched an all out war on all fronts".

And sadly there are still people today that believe in the non-sense.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 01:27 PM
 
Location: Western Washington
8,004 posts, read 10,540,639 times
Reputation: 19482
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2e1m5a View Post
The War on "Drugs" was essentially launched as a means to control a certain segment of society.

The disgraced former President Richard Nixon has admitted that a major reason for launching the War on "Drugs" was to curtail and silence Vietnam War Protestors-a means to arrest and disband protests where the use of marijuana may have been prevalant but also very benevolent and peaceful.

40 Years Ago Today: Congress Was Told To Tell The Truth About Marijuana; They Didn’t | NORML Blog, Marijuana Law Reform

In 1972 a Congressionally appointed 13 member Commission on US Drug Policy-which included 9 hand picked members by Nixon-recommended that "criminal law is too harsh a tool to apply to personal possession." They also recommended that marijuana be removed from its Schedule I Drug classification.

Nixon ignored the findings and recommendations of the report (as those in Government and Corporations often do when they don't get what they want) and in his own words "launched an all out war on all fronts".

And sadly there are still people today that believe in the non-sense.
Yep, pretty sad, isn't it!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 01:34 PM
 
87 posts, read 103,165 times
Reputation: 56
In this country it's all about money. When the right amount of money goes to the right person, it either becomes legal or illegal.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 01:48 PM
 
Location: Western Washington
8,004 posts, read 10,540,639 times
Reputation: 19482
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2e1m5a View Post
Can anyone explain why certain mundane yet very dangerous drugs such as Alcohol, Psychoactive Pills and Tobacco are legal while drugs that alter and explore consciousness yet pose little to no health risks are outlawed, such as Marijuana, Mushrooms and DMT?

It is well known by now that health risks are not taken into consideration when picking and choosing drugs to outlaw.
Are citizens that are conscious and aware a threat to the system?

Please watch this video below:


Graham Hancock-The War on Consciousness - YouTube


"We live in a society that will send us to prison if we make use of time-honored sacred plants to explore our own consciousness. Yet surely the exploration and expansion of the miracle of our consciousness is the essence of what it is to be human?

By demonozing and persecuting whole areas of consciousness, we may be denying ourselves the next vital step in our own evolution."
Interesting video. I do appreciate the fact that he admits to probably "abusing" cannabis, yet doesn't agree to the prohibition of it. Cannabis has medicinal value. Cannabis is potentially addictive.

Many, many substances are potentially addictive. Many substances are deadly. Many prescribed medicines are potentially addictive and are potentially life threatening. The government's way of regulating the pharmaceutical companies?...of keeping them "in check"?...."Warning Labels".

If it was not about profit and the almighty $$$, the government would simply say, "You're right. We do not have the legal right to prosecute you for using this herb and to grow for your own use. Be warned..use at your own risk. If cannabis intoxication becomes the most important thing in your life, your fellow taxpayers will not be forced to support you or your family.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 02:06 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia
11,956 posts, read 11,101,000 times
Reputation: 8191
Quote:
Originally Posted by beachmel View Post
Interesting video. I do appreciate the fact that he admits to probably "abusing" cannabis, yet doesn't agree to the prohibition of it. Cannabis has medicinal value. Cannabis is potentially addictive.

Many, many substances are potentially addictive. Many substances are deadly. Many prescribed medicines are potentially addictive and are potentially life threatening. The government's way of regulating the pharmaceutical companies?...of keeping them "in check"?...."Warning Labels".

If it was not about profit and the almighty $$$, the government would simply say, "You're right. We do not have the legal right to prosecute you for using this herb and to grow for your own use. Be warned..use at your own risk. If cannabis intoxication becomes the most important thing in your life, your fellow taxpayers will not be forced to support you or your family.
Well stated . Gotta spread some reps around before I can rep you tho.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:01 PM.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top