• Aniki@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    because cannabis was mostly consumed by groups that the political mainstream didn’t like. for example, it is still the case today that cannabis is mostly being consumed by people who lean left politically.

    e.g. https://news.gallup.com/poll/405086/marijuana-views-linked-ideology-religiosity-age.aspx

    • 68% of U.S. adults favor legalizing marijuana, tied for record high
    • Liberal, younger, less religious are most supportive
    • Only 32% of conservatives aged 65 and older are in favor

    also, around 1969 when a lot of people took drugs (LSD etc) on hippie festivals (woodstock), these people overwhelmingly had anti-war, anti-capitalist, hippie views etc. so there’s a clear link between drug usage and political views.

    • ranzispa@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Today cannabis is mostly consumed by people who voted left, thus 90 years ago it was made illegal to damage people who vote left; the prohibition was passed by the left.

      Sorry, I’ll try to follow you, but this makes no sense. The fact that people vote left smoke marijuana is not influential in explaining why it was banned. There may be a relationship there but just this fact proves nothing.

      I might as well say that marijuana was banned to harm the farmers population since farmers are the ones who mostly grow marijuana.

      because cannabis was mostly consumed by groups that the political mainstream didn’t like

      Could be, but I don’t think marijuana back then was so widespread as it became with the Hippie movement.

      • Aniki@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        my understanding is that cannabis is far less damaging to the health than nicotine cigarettes. yet nicotine cigarettes stayed legal while cannabis was declared illegal. the logical conclusion is that the health concerns were not the determining factor. therefore, it was obviously about other things, such as cultural perception, commercial lobbying, political ideology.

        by the way, tobacco (nicotine) was one of the first cash crops that were exported from the US to europe when america was first settled by european settlers, which gave money to america and made the migration much more attractive to many people. that’s why there is a cultural fond memory of tobacco, because it funded settling america back then (among other factors) (source: read it a while ago on wikipedia).

        then there’s the strong tobacco lobbying group. turns out that there’s a lot of money to be earned with cigarettes and the lobbying group for tobacco is strong. that’s another reason why it wasn’t banned.

        then there is this whole issue that a whole lot of drugs are primarily taken by marginalized groups. why? these groups already have a difficult life, drugs often help with pain relief -> higher drug usage in the black population. combine this with the “forced labor is illegal except as a punishment for crime” thing and suddenly you get a rural south that wants to find any pretense to criminalize black people. and guess what, drugs are a convenient way to do that.

        • ranzispa@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          I agree with what you say here, but nothing points out why marijuana was banned. I do not know why it was banned. But these are assumptions standing on thin air.