14 ms·

Amsterdam’s coffeeshops are closing

159 points by kristofferR 10y ago

rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
This is what happens when you take two bad ideas - illegalization of victimless vice and overregulation of industry - and make them sleep in the same bed. The coffeeshop model was a cute Dutch experiment in the beginning but it is groaning with scale. The model has to be scrapped and re-thought, or it will continue to be manipulated by "well-meaning" laws that shutter coffeeshops becaue they just happen to be located within the prohibited radius of schools, even if such schools only teach hairdressing to adults. Petty-internet-argument-deflection-shield: soft vices like marijuana are victimless when safe and legal. Criminalization puts it in the hands of criminals.
Kaotique 10y ago
Our Dutch softdrug policy was extraordinary 30 years ago but since then has become completely gridlocked in politics. Producing is illegal. Selling and using sort of legal. This crazy policy has our police force waste all their time chasing a never ending line of illegal production facilities and kept the production in the hands of criminals. We need a completely legalised product chain for softdrugs so it can be safely produced and legally traded, bought and used.
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  I often complain that the US has a mindset of "We're different, so what works in other countries couldn't possibly work for us!". In this case, I'm finally proud to say the opposite: It does work for us, so why couldn't it work for them? I've only been to Amsterdam once, and I don't pretend to even begin to understand their culture or politics, but legalization here in the US has been great. We've got a lot of people looking for reasons legalization has destroyed our society, and they are coming up empty handed. Meanwhile, we're making a ton of money on taxes. Is there anyone who knows why they couldn't/shouldn't follow our example?
  - beat 10y ago
    The US is also interesting in that we have a very Frankish-state model with powerful state governments that can set their own policies. So early movers like Washington and Colorado can try various things, and other states can learn from them (while also being at odds with antiquated, rigid federal policy). Success in the early-mover states will inform change in other states.
    - bsimpson 10y ago
      Idealistically, that's how the US is structured. Practically, the federal government has been centralizing control since the New Deal. Since the article is about marijuana, let's use that as an example. If you believe the US is a federal republic, then you ought to be able to grow whatever plants you want in the comfort of your own home - the federal government has no business regulating that. That precise case was brought before the Supreme Court during the Bush administration, and even Scalia (who famously championed states' rights in many other decisions) consented that the federal government could regulate the private, intrastate growth of marijuana: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich The states that legalized marijuana could only do so because Obama is personally tolerant of it. Had he not been, he could have directed federal authorities to enforce the federal ban on marijuana - federal laws trump local ones.
      - drvdevd 10y ago
        This is true, except the battle hasn't heated up enough yet to see whether this is actually true, with respect to Marijuana specifically, and then perhaps states' rights generally. The state of California might just, by itself, choose to challenge the feds on this for example, and that would be quite interesting.
        civilian 10y ago
        I really really hope that California does something like this. Unfortunately, California Police don't have a history of supporting state law. When the feds were busting medical marijuana shops in California, they would routinely get help from local police, and the local police would act like their lapdogs.
- aerique 10y ago
  I want to add that, in the past, we (The Netherlands) could not legalize the whole chain because of pressure from the USA and France.
  - cr1895 10y ago
    And currently the stubborn opposition to change from the national government is largely due to international treaties.
  - drvdevd 10y ago
    I find this so incredibly ironic: - The Netherlands chooses to (kinda) allow softdrug use and thus gains tourist income throughout the 90s and 00s (and maybe earlier?) - The US pressures them to avoid full legalization and supply chain development - US states then partly legalize two decades later, and quickly surpass the Dutch system in size, scope, and income What should the Dutch learn from this?
    - funnyfacts365 10y ago
      Dutch should learn their adoration for the US is misguided and hurts more than helps.
      - pmoriarty 10y ago
        Why does this adoration exist, do you think?
- drvdevd 10y ago
  I predict that this will be a major issue in the US, very soon. We too, have a quasi-legal system, if very different from the Dutch policies. Our incoming administration will have to contend with an industry that has grown large reasonably quickly, and with a conflicting Federal policy. States that have chosen legalization want this money now. Many citizens from across the social spectrum have staked their livelihoods on it. If this becomes a states rights issue, and the Feds choose to switch policy and start raiding, things could go downhill quickly for the administration. Of course none of this has anything to do with softdrugs or cannabis. It's all about control and money. I suspect the Dutch policy shift has similar economic motives somewhere below the surface.
- AndyMcConachie 10y ago
  American-Dutch person here. This article misses a few key points. 1) Dutch softdrug laws are heavily influenced by other/bigger EU countries like France and Italy that don't like their citizens visiting NL and using, or bringing back drugs. Hence the closings of coffee shops in border areas. 2) Closing of window prostitution in Amsterdam is a completely different issue than closing of coffeeshops. There might be a moral argument for both, but in my cynical mind most of the windows being shutdown have more to do with snapping up key real estate in the middle of the city than anything else. Some people claim it is about cleaning up the criminality, but I think it's just connected people getting better access to good real estate. 3) There might be a real estate angle to the closing of coffeeshops as well, but I'm not as familiar with it to really say. Amsterdam, like other major cities, has started to see an influx in foreign capital buying up homes for investment purposes. It's rather disgusting and has lead to rises in home prices in the city.
  - Freestyler_3 10y ago
    on 2. the official statements have always been that it is to stop human trafficking (indeed cleaning up criminals). If there is a conspiracy behind it, I don't know. on 3. I know that in my city the coffeeshop rents the building, rent protection law does not allow the owner to kick a renter out without very good reason (not going to get specific here). The owner (renting company) wants the coffeeshop out, it has tried more than once. They want to re-purpose the building and make more money of the big building in the centre of the city.
    - mercer 10y ago
      My guess would be that is that it's not an outright conspiracy, but opportunism by individual actors (circumvrenting rent protection for example, or populism) combined with a general push toward making the city center more proper for all sorts of reasons that affect a lot of popular cities (rising value, 'fancy' tourists, etc.). I think it's a sign of a bigger societal/urban change, and that the bigger, underlying problem is rapidly increasing segregation. My experience with any coffeeshop is that the vast majority of its clientele is, off the top of my head: 1) left-wingish 'hippie' type, 2) muslims/'ethnic' groups, 3) working-class individuals or 4) a certain subset of tourists. Most coffeeshops have at least a whiff of seediness. anyways, what all these groups have in common is that they're not particularly liked by those who have a stake in the future of urban centers. These places should be clean, expensive, commercial, and acceptable to as many people as possible.
- pmyjavec 10y ago
  I agree, after living there for a while I couldn't really see the sense in allowing people to consume or sell something that was produced illegally. Anyway, it's as shame to see things going backwards in Netherlands ;(
- bgentry 10y ago
  The Vice show Weediquette had a good episode [1] where they looked at these aspects of the cannabis industry in The Netherlands. It's bizarre that the coffee shops are fully allowed to sell something that there is no legal way to produce or acquire in the country. The government even prosecutes many distributors and growers. And they wonder why organized crime is having such an impact on that industry? [1]: https://www.viceland.com/en_us/video/half-baked/56fae505be4ad699153772c4 https://www.viceland.com/en_us/video/half-baked/56fae505be4a...
- kelseydh 10y ago
  It's funny, I was in Amsterdam this year and different from the experience of most of my international visitors, the whole place felt restrictive in terms of marijuana, not liberated. Denver, Portland, Seattle, Vancouver / Victoria (Canada) and parts of California now have what I believe to be much more liberal "marijuana cultures" than Amsterdam now. Vancouver literally has hundreds of marijuana dispensaries in its downtown even though pot is still technically illegal in Canada (for now.) The Dutch coffeeshop model was cutting edge back in the 90's when no one else was doing it, but as you said it's incredibly outdated compared to the explosion of high quality dispensaries we are seeing across the Pacific coastal areas of Canada and the U.S.
  - pmoriarty 10y ago
    I don't know about that. The dispensaries in California only allow sale to people for medicinal purposes, and only with permission from a doctor. California has recently legalized marijuana possession for non-medical (recreational) use, but there's still no legal way today to sell marijuana in California for non-medical purposes (though that should be coming in a couple of years). Meanwhile, in the Netherlands you didn't need permission from a doctor or anyone else to buy marijuana from a coffeshop. Recreational marijuana use was implicitly sanctioned -- something that most of the United States still has a problem with (though a handful of states are changing their mind). Then there's the Federal laws against any kind of marijuana use, a very hard-headed, close-minded policy that forbids even the use of purely medicinal marijuana derivatives without psychoactive effects, much less recreational use. Finally, there's the issue of drug testing, which no states (to my knowledge) have opposed. So you could still be effectively be prevented from using marijuana if you have to submit to drug tests or anti drug policies at your place of work.
    - kelseydh 10y ago
      I will clarify that most of my experience is with the Pacific Northwest of U.S. and Canada, most of which now enjoys defacto legalization driven in part by the medical loophole.
- rmason 10y ago
  The article sounds like they're not selling drugs on the street. That wasn't my experience when I visited Amsterdam. On certain streets every couple of hundred feet there was some pusher asking if I wanted drugs. By the third day or so I was getting really annoyed with them. I was also offered drugs in a couple of nightclubs that I visited. I don't ever remember visiting a place where the drug sellers were so aggressive. It's a very beautiful city and I recommended visiting. The people were friendly, the food fabulous and I would like to get back there some day.
  - cr1895 10y ago
    >On certain streets every couple of hundred feet there was some pusher asking if I wanted drugs. By the third day or so I was getting really annoyed with them. Get out of the RLD! The street dealers are a truly obnoxious blight on the city, but they are really only concentrated in certain areas. They prey on the gullible, party-driven young tourists on stag-dos and the like. Most often what they sell is fake, and infamously some years ago one fool was selling white heroin as cocaine, leading to several deaths and a city-wide campaign to encourage people to ignore street dealers and not to fear punishment for seeking medical help.
    - mercer 10y ago
      Maybe things changed in the past year, but my experience is exactly as you describe. In my entire time in Amsterdam I was never approached by dealers, except when I was in the Red Light District. Even after almost a decade, entering the RLD is still a bit of a 'culture shock'. (and even much of the RLD is dealer-free; it's specific streets)
      - NamTaf 10y ago
        This was also my experience when I visited a few months ago. I didn't once get approached on the streets, but I certainly noticed that the RLD was a different culture (including one guy approaching someone else as a 'friend' then trying to start a fight with him in order to probably mug him). I can imagine that pushers are through that area but I guess I look big and ugly enough that they didn't bother approaching me. Certainly outside the RLD throughout greater Nieuwmarkt was more hustle-bustle than the rest of the areas of Amsterdam that I saw, but I never felt like I was in a place I shouldn't be.
- mcv 10y ago
  Dutch policy has become regressive, and has been overtaken by other countries. The semi-criminality of soft drugs in Netherlands still keeps the trade partially illegal and therefore of interest to organized crime. Complete legalization with healthy regulation would be a much better idea.
ideonexus 10y ago
Fascinating from the perspective of someone who lives just outside of Washington DC, where marijuana has essentially been legalized. My friends who smoke tell me that, while it's illegal to sell weed, it's not illegal to give it away. So there are now shops that sell old newspapers for $50 each, but you get a free bag of high-grade weed along with it. It will be interesting to see the effects this has on other crimes and illegal drug use in a few years of study. Having toured Amsterdam on a business trip, I was surprised that, even with the easy access to weed and prostitution, taxi drivers would not take me to certain historical sites in the city because they were too dangerous. The "safe" section of the city was fairly small, with the rest of it overrun with harder drugs and crime. With more American states legalizing and decriminalizing, we'll soon get to compare with the Dutch experiment.
- mvdwoord 10y ago
  Small side note, Amsterdam has it's issues here and there with crime, for sure, but saying there is only a small "Safe" section is complete nonsense. Most historical sites are completely safe, except maybe for pickpockets, like any major tourist congregation. The major problem in Amsterdam is the taxi drivers. They refuse to take you somewhere because the distance is not enough for them to make some money on (even though this practice is illegal). They are aggressive, do not know their way around town and are general assholes. The market was deregulated, i.e. everybody with a roof light is now a taxi, they even have fake signs from "reputable" taxi companies. TL;DR Amsterdam is safe Amsterdam Taxis are crazy bad.
  - enra 10y ago
    I was surprised by the parent comment as well. I visited Amsterdam last summer and walked to pretty much every part of the city, also took a train to other towns and didn't see hard drugs & anything even moderately unsafe. I find that US average cities are order of magnitude more "run by hard drugs and unsafe". In SF I walk by sketchy areas and piles of needles everyday, you can't really avoid it.
  - alex_hitchins 10y ago
    I have found this out also. Amsterdam is a fantastic place I encourage all to go and visit.
yellow_viper 10y ago
I've been to Amsterdam 6 times over the past 10 years and every time it gets harder to find a coffee shop. Pubs galore, obviously.
- bogomipz 10y ago
  I was there recently. In the Canal District they looked very abundant still.
  - kristofferR 10y ago
    I was there a few days ago and it wasn't hard to find the coffeshops, but it's was often really hard to find available seating. Thankfully quite a lot of pubs that sell alcohol (but not weed) allow/encourage people to bring and smoke their own joints (as long as they don't contain tobacco, which is banned).
    - yellow_viper 10y ago
      The tobacco thing is only really enforced if you ask them if it's allowed. We roll with tobacco and at the most they'll come ask you to hide your fag packet/filters in case the police come in.
      - cr1895 10y ago
        And the weirdest thing is that the prerolled joints are 95% of the time rolled with (a lot of) tobacco. And those are perfectly fine to sell and smoke in the coffeeshop!
        yellow_viper 10y ago
        Are they? I've only ever seen them mixed with that incense stuff.
        cr1895 10y ago
mathattack 10y ago
I visited Amsterdam almost 20 years ago. I'm very square. I struggled to find a place to just buy a coffee! Re: Comments about crime, things may have changed but I found it to be very safe. Perhaps not as safe as Tokyo, but better than the South side of Chicago or the tenderloin in SF.
- edblarney 10y ago
  It's safe. There's no question about that. I don't think this is the issue. One thing is that the laws have never really been clear. In 2016, it's hard to have 'local flex' on many things. Everything is observed. This is one of the big drawbacks of globalization: every little bit of odd-behaviour is scrutinized from a global and legal perspective. 'Local cultural context' is not possible, and basically ignored. With a microphone a camera and a twitter feed on every corner, everything must be 'sanitized'. I'm willing to accept a few greasy wheels, a bit of foul language so long as I know that the locals can handle/deal with it.
  - kelseydh 10y ago
    This is a very true point and sad consequence of both globalization and technological interconnectedness. In New Zealand I have heard stories about how a few decades ago in rural parts of the country, pubs used to stay open well past national closing hour limits, due to a general nonchalance and attitude among the locals that we "we-just-do-things-differently-here." Local police just looked the other way. That kind of flagrant disregard for laws where they don't fit the desire of local populations is starting to die out, as globalization combined with technology is sterilizing the power of local cultures to develop their own quirks, customs and ways of doing things without accountability. Where local discretion used to reign, rigid codified standards have taken over.
- jdmichal 10y ago
  I think Amsterdam is safe, in the sense that I don't feel there's much reason to fear for your physical well-being. However, when I visited (mid 2000's), the main train station's PA message loop included warnings about pickpockets.
falsedan 10y ago
This article has… too many puns. > A report by the Bonger Instituut, a criminology think-tank named after a professor at the University of Amsterdam, is blunt > But as fewer coffeeshops are expected to cater to ever larger groups of stoners, that approach could leave them out of joint.
- fapjacks 10y ago
  I hate this sort of ubiquitous, juvenile attitude about cannabis. It is completely annoying.
  - forinti 10y ago
    Articles in The Economist are always full of puns.
- qz_ 10y ago
  I love it. > The Economist explains, man
- cushychicken 10y ago
  I had to google "Bonger Instituut" to convince myself it wasn't a joke.
ommunist 10y ago
The Economist is up to turning Dutch economy hotter. Nice PR piece.
peterwwillis 10y ago
Mostly-non-toxic and non-habit-forming drugs that have the potential to change your values are dangerous to the status quo, and therefore morally reprehensible. Alcohol and cigarettes, toxic and dangerous to users and bystanders, don't change your values, and enable control of a population. The only reason this continues its farcical conflict in modern societies is the moral majority shout louder (and have more money) than potheads do.
- bogomipz 10y ago
  Marijuana while generally not physically addictive can be habit-forming though. How else do you explain stoners? I'm not bashing pot but I know people who were different people before adopting "pot as a lifestyle." I'm drawing the distinction here between recreational user and non-medicinal multiple times a day daily user, with "stoner" being the latter.
  - peterwwillis 10y ago
    You're right, I misspoke, it is habit forming and non-addictive.
- pbhjpbhj 10y ago
  >the moral majority shout louder (and have more money) // Yet, the very rich seem to be doing drugs like nobody's business. Half of the stories you hear on TV couch shows seem to be "well all us celebrities were high on cocaine, again, and blah, blah, blah". If you wanted to round up drug users you could probably just do a pat-down at the BBC and supplement that with a dawn-raid on the top 20 media personalities of the moment. I think there is a genuine risk that widescale and easy access to certain drugs can damage a country's productivity, which in turn damages the elites' profits; personally that seems the most likely reason for most drug laws, mixed in with a not-insignificant amount of protecting people from themselves, for sure.
- kelseydh 10y ago
  Our drug laws should approach psychedelic drugs differently from the rest. I strongly believe this.
the_mitsuhiko 10y ago
Honestly Amsterdam has in many ways become a place for British tourists being super annoying. If closing coffeeshops is what it takes for the place to become more enjoyable for the rest of us I'm not mad.
timwaagh 10y ago
last time i checked there was still a street next to the Dam with ten or so of these operations. They're not going away anytime soon. But you have to realise pot stinks immensely. it is no fun to have a street smell of weed. So some restrictions in the center of Amsterdam are in order, else the inner city will be clouded in pot-smog.
- kristofferR 10y ago
  Weird, I've never heard anyone describe the smell of weed as stinky. It's strong and distinct, sure, but not bad smelling. Anyway, you have it backwards. Because the coffeeshops are getting overcrowded people are basically forced to smoke outside instead, which is obviously way more smelly than people smoking inside coffeeshops (which can be odorless outside if done properly).
  - SolaceQuantum 10y ago
    Weed has always smelled to me of skunk spray. By potheads it's been described to me as "gods vagina" smell, which doesn't seem much better. If one had sensitivity to scent, a cityscape reeking of weed would be fairly unpleasant.
    - dkersten 10y ago
      I think it's an "acquired taste" kind of thing: it doesn't smell nice... until it does.
    - mercer 10y ago
      God's vagina is actually a really clever way to describe it. Pungent, and to a large degree unpleasant to many people, but irresistible if you're into that sort of thing.
  - kasey_junk 10y ago
    Pot smoke is routinely described as stinky. Lots & lots of people, including me do not like the smell. That said I'm not sure the smell would be a reason to criminalize it.
DoodleBuggy 10y ago
People go to Colorado now instead?
bkbridge 10y ago
And that is why San Francisco and LA are going to EXPLODE with tourist. Snapchat central, here we come. The Kids are running the show now. Amsterdam was cool, but that's kind of last year. LA is rocking! :-)
- NamTaf 10y ago
  Question from someone who hasn't been to the US in 2 decades: Is the MJ culture of the US where it's legalised (Colorado, LA, etc.) such that you get coffeeshops like the Netherlands, or is it more a dispensery style arrangement where you buy it for consumption in a private premises such as your home, or both?
  - passivepinetree 10y ago
    Dispensary style. Public consumption is almost universally outlawed AFAIK.
tdburn 10y ago
Do they serve coffee at these shops?
- NamTaf 10y ago
  Yes. They cannot serve alcohol but otherwise they can serve snacks and other non-alcoholic drinks. I enjoyed a decent espresso coffee and some juice. Culturally, it's a place where people come to e.g.: play a game or three of chess with some mates and just chill and socialise. Barring alcohol, the rest of what you can purchase more or less aligns with what you'd expect people would want in that sort of situation.

159 points by kristofferR 10y ago

This is what happens when you take two bad ideas - illegalization of victimless vice and overregulation of industry - and make them sleep in the same bed. The coffeeshop model was a cute Dutch experiment in the beginning but it is groaning with scale. The model has to be scrapped and re-thought, or it will continue to be manipulated by "well-meaning" laws that shutter coffeeshops becaue they just happen to be located within the prohibited radius of schools, even if such schools only teach hairdressing to adults. Petty-internet-argument-deflection-shield: soft vices like marijuana are victimless when safe and legal. Criminalization puts it in the hands of criminals.

Kaotique 10y ago

Our Dutch softdrug policy was extraordinary 30 years ago but since then has become completely gridlocked in politics. Producing is illegal. Selling and using sort of legal. This crazy policy has our police force waste all their time chasing a never ending line of illegal production facilities and kept the production in the hands of criminals. We need a completely legalised product chain for softdrugs so it can be safely produced and legally traded, bought and used.

CaptSpify 10y ago
I often complain that the US has a mindset of "We're different, so what works in other countries couldn't possibly work for us!". In this case, I'm finally proud to say the opposite: It does work for us, so why couldn't it work for them? I've only been to Amsterdam once, and I don't pretend to even begin to understand their culture or politics, but legalization here in the US has been great. We've got a lot of people looking for reasons legalization has destroyed our society, and they are coming up empty handed. Meanwhile, we're making a ton of money on taxes. Is there anyone who knows why they couldn't/shouldn't follow our example?
- beat 10y ago
  The US is also interesting in that we have a very Frankish-state model with powerful state governments that can set their own policies. So early movers like Washington and Colorado can try various things, and other states can learn from them (while also being at odds with antiquated, rigid federal policy). Success in the early-mover states will inform change in other states.
  - bsimpson 10y ago
    Idealistically, that's how the US is structured. Practically, the federal government has been centralizing control since the New Deal. Since the article is about marijuana, let's use that as an example. If you believe the US is a federal republic, then you ought to be able to grow whatever plants you want in the comfort of your own home - the federal government has no business regulating that. That precise case was brought before the Supreme Court during the Bush administration, and even Scalia (who famously championed states' rights in many other decisions) consented that the federal government could regulate the private, intrastate growth of marijuana: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich The states that legalized marijuana could only do so because Obama is personally tolerant of it. Had he not been, he could have directed federal authorities to enforce the federal ban on marijuana - federal laws trump local ones.
    - drvdevd 10y ago
      This is true, except the battle hasn't heated up enough yet to see whether this is actually true, with respect to Marijuana specifically, and then perhaps states' rights generally. The state of California might just, by itself, choose to challenge the feds on this for example, and that would be quite interesting.
      - civilian 10y ago
        I really really hope that California does something like this. Unfortunately, California Police don't have a history of supporting state law. When the feds were busting medical marijuana shops in California, they would routinely get help from local police, and the local police would act like their lapdogs.
aerique 10y ago
I want to add that, in the past, we (The Netherlands) could not legalize the whole chain because of pressure from the USA and France.
- cr1895 10y ago
  And currently the stubborn opposition to change from the national government is largely due to international treaties.
- drvdevd 10y ago
  I find this so incredibly ironic: - The Netherlands chooses to (kinda) allow softdrug use and thus gains tourist income throughout the 90s and 00s (and maybe earlier?) - The US pressures them to avoid full legalization and supply chain development - US states then partly legalize two decades later, and quickly surpass the Dutch system in size, scope, and income What should the Dutch learn from this?
  - funnyfacts365 10y ago
    Dutch should learn their adoration for the US is misguided and hurts more than helps.
    - pmoriarty 10y ago
      Why does this adoration exist, do you think?
drvdevd 10y ago
I predict that this will be a major issue in the US, very soon. We too, have a quasi-legal system, if very different from the Dutch policies. Our incoming administration will have to contend with an industry that has grown large reasonably quickly, and with a conflicting Federal policy. States that have chosen legalization want this money now. Many citizens from across the social spectrum have staked their livelihoods on it. If this becomes a states rights issue, and the Feds choose to switch policy and start raiding, things could go downhill quickly for the administration. Of course none of this has anything to do with softdrugs or cannabis. It's all about control and money. I suspect the Dutch policy shift has similar economic motives somewhere below the surface.
AndyMcConachie 10y ago
American-Dutch person here. This article misses a few key points. 1) Dutch softdrug laws are heavily influenced by other/bigger EU countries like France and Italy that don't like their citizens visiting NL and using, or bringing back drugs. Hence the closings of coffee shops in border areas. 2) Closing of window prostitution in Amsterdam is a completely different issue than closing of coffeeshops. There might be a moral argument for both, but in my cynical mind most of the windows being shutdown have more to do with snapping up key real estate in the middle of the city than anything else. Some people claim it is about cleaning up the criminality, but I think it's just connected people getting better access to good real estate. 3) There might be a real estate angle to the closing of coffeeshops as well, but I'm not as familiar with it to really say. Amsterdam, like other major cities, has started to see an influx in foreign capital buying up homes for investment purposes. It's rather disgusting and has lead to rises in home prices in the city.
- Freestyler_3 10y ago
  on 2. the official statements have always been that it is to stop human trafficking (indeed cleaning up criminals). If there is a conspiracy behind it, I don't know. on 3. I know that in my city the coffeeshop rents the building, rent protection law does not allow the owner to kick a renter out without very good reason (not going to get specific here). The owner (renting company) wants the coffeeshop out, it has tried more than once. They want to re-purpose the building and make more money of the big building in the centre of the city.
  - mercer 10y ago
    My guess would be that is that it's not an outright conspiracy, but opportunism by individual actors (circumvrenting rent protection for example, or populism) combined with a general push toward making the city center more proper for all sorts of reasons that affect a lot of popular cities (rising value, 'fancy' tourists, etc.). I think it's a sign of a bigger societal/urban change, and that the bigger, underlying problem is rapidly increasing segregation. My experience with any coffeeshop is that the vast majority of its clientele is, off the top of my head: 1) left-wingish 'hippie' type, 2) muslims/'ethnic' groups, 3) working-class individuals or 4) a certain subset of tourists. Most coffeeshops have at least a whiff of seediness. anyways, what all these groups have in common is that they're not particularly liked by those who have a stake in the future of urban centers. These places should be clean, expensive, commercial, and acceptable to as many people as possible.
pmyjavec 10y ago
I agree, after living there for a while I couldn't really see the sense in allowing people to consume or sell something that was produced illegally. Anyway, it's as shame to see things going backwards in Netherlands ;(
bgentry 10y ago
The Vice show Weediquette had a good episode [1] where they looked at these aspects of the cannabis industry in The Netherlands. It's bizarre that the coffee shops are fully allowed to sell something that there is no legal way to produce or acquire in the country. The government even prosecutes many distributors and growers. And they wonder why organized crime is having such an impact on that industry? [1]: https://www.viceland.com/en_us/video/half-baked/56fae505be4ad699153772c4 https://www.viceland.com/en_us/video/half-baked/56fae505be4a...
kelseydh 10y ago
It's funny, I was in Amsterdam this year and different from the experience of most of my international visitors, the whole place felt restrictive in terms of marijuana, not liberated. Denver, Portland, Seattle, Vancouver / Victoria (Canada) and parts of California now have what I believe to be much more liberal "marijuana cultures" than Amsterdam now. Vancouver literally has hundreds of marijuana dispensaries in its downtown even though pot is still technically illegal in Canada (for now.) The Dutch coffeeshop model was cutting edge back in the 90's when no one else was doing it, but as you said it's incredibly outdated compared to the explosion of high quality dispensaries we are seeing across the Pacific coastal areas of Canada and the U.S.
- pmoriarty 10y ago
  I don't know about that. The dispensaries in California only allow sale to people for medicinal purposes, and only with permission from a doctor. California has recently legalized marijuana possession for non-medical (recreational) use, but there's still no legal way today to sell marijuana in California for non-medical purposes (though that should be coming in a couple of years). Meanwhile, in the Netherlands you didn't need permission from a doctor or anyone else to buy marijuana from a coffeshop. Recreational marijuana use was implicitly sanctioned -- something that most of the United States still has a problem with (though a handful of states are changing their mind). Then there's the Federal laws against any kind of marijuana use, a very hard-headed, close-minded policy that forbids even the use of purely medicinal marijuana derivatives without psychoactive effects, much less recreational use. Finally, there's the issue of drug testing, which no states (to my knowledge) have opposed. So you could still be effectively be prevented from using marijuana if you have to submit to drug tests or anti drug policies at your place of work.
  - kelseydh 10y ago
    I will clarify that most of my experience is with the Pacific Northwest of U.S. and Canada, most of which now enjoys defacto legalization driven in part by the medical loophole.
rmason 10y ago
The article sounds like they're not selling drugs on the street. That wasn't my experience when I visited Amsterdam. On certain streets every couple of hundred feet there was some pusher asking if I wanted drugs. By the third day or so I was getting really annoyed with them. I was also offered drugs in a couple of nightclubs that I visited. I don't ever remember visiting a place where the drug sellers were so aggressive. It's a very beautiful city and I recommended visiting. The people were friendly, the food fabulous and I would like to get back there some day.
- cr1895 10y ago
  >On certain streets every couple of hundred feet there was some pusher asking if I wanted drugs. By the third day or so I was getting really annoyed with them. Get out of the RLD! The street dealers are a truly obnoxious blight on the city, but they are really only concentrated in certain areas. They prey on the gullible, party-driven young tourists on stag-dos and the like. Most often what they sell is fake, and infamously some years ago one fool was selling white heroin as cocaine, leading to several deaths and a city-wide campaign to encourage people to ignore street dealers and not to fear punishment for seeking medical help.
  - mercer 10y ago
    Maybe things changed in the past year, but my experience is exactly as you describe. In my entire time in Amsterdam I was never approached by dealers, except when I was in the Red Light District. Even after almost a decade, entering the RLD is still a bit of a 'culture shock'. (and even much of the RLD is dealer-free; it's specific streets)
    - NamTaf 10y ago
      This was also my experience when I visited a few months ago. I didn't once get approached on the streets, but I certainly noticed that the RLD was a different culture (including one guy approaching someone else as a 'friend' then trying to start a fight with him in order to probably mug him). I can imagine that pushers are through that area but I guess I look big and ugly enough that they didn't bother approaching me. Certainly outside the RLD throughout greater Nieuwmarkt was more hustle-bustle than the rest of the areas of Amsterdam that I saw, but I never felt like I was in a place I shouldn't be.
mcv 10y ago
Dutch policy has become regressive, and has been overtaken by other countries. The semi-criminality of soft drugs in Netherlands still keeps the trade partially illegal and therefore of interest to organized crime. Complete legalization with healthy regulation would be a much better idea.

ideonexus 10y ago

Fascinating from the perspective of someone who lives just outside of Washington DC, where marijuana has essentially been legalized. My friends who smoke tell me that, while it's illegal to sell weed, it's not illegal to give it away. So there are now shops that sell old newspapers for $50 each, but you get a free bag of high-grade weed along with it. It will be interesting to see the effects this has on other crimes and illegal drug use in a few years of study. Having toured Amsterdam on a business trip, I was surprised that, even with the easy access to weed and prostitution, taxi drivers would not take me to certain historical sites in the city because they were too dangerous. The "safe" section of the city was fairly small, with the rest of it overrun with harder drugs and crime. With more American states legalizing and decriminalizing, we'll soon get to compare with the Dutch experiment.

mvdwoord 10y ago
Small side note, Amsterdam has it's issues here and there with crime, for sure, but saying there is only a small "Safe" section is complete nonsense. Most historical sites are completely safe, except maybe for pickpockets, like any major tourist congregation. The major problem in Amsterdam is the taxi drivers. They refuse to take you somewhere because the distance is not enough for them to make some money on (even though this practice is illegal). They are aggressive, do not know their way around town and are general assholes. The market was deregulated, i.e. everybody with a roof light is now a taxi, they even have fake signs from "reputable" taxi companies. TL;DR Amsterdam is safe Amsterdam Taxis are crazy bad.
- enra 10y ago
  I was surprised by the parent comment as well. I visited Amsterdam last summer and walked to pretty much every part of the city, also took a train to other towns and didn't see hard drugs & anything even moderately unsafe. I find that US average cities are order of magnitude more "run by hard drugs and unsafe". In SF I walk by sketchy areas and piles of needles everyday, you can't really avoid it.
- alex_hitchins 10y ago
  I have found this out also. Amsterdam is a fantastic place I encourage all to go and visit.

yellow_viper 10y ago

I've been to Amsterdam 6 times over the past 10 years and every time it gets harder to find a coffee shop. Pubs galore, obviously.

bogomipz 10y ago
I was there recently. In the Canal District they looked very abundant still.
- kristofferR 10y ago
  I was there a few days ago and it wasn't hard to find the coffeshops, but it's was often really hard to find available seating. Thankfully quite a lot of pubs that sell alcohol (but not weed) allow/encourage people to bring and smoke their own joints (as long as they don't contain tobacco, which is banned).
  - yellow_viper 10y ago
    The tobacco thing is only really enforced if you ask them if it's allowed. We roll with tobacco and at the most they'll come ask you to hide your fag packet/filters in case the police come in.
    - cr1895 10y ago
      And the weirdest thing is that the prerolled joints are 95% of the time rolled with (a lot of) tobacco. And those are perfectly fine to sell and smoke in the coffeeshop!
      - yellow_viper 10y ago
        Are they? I've only ever seen them mixed with that incense stuff.
        cr1895 10y ago

mathattack 10y ago

I visited Amsterdam almost 20 years ago. I'm very square. I struggled to find a place to just buy a coffee! Re: Comments about crime, things may have changed but I found it to be very safe. Perhaps not as safe as Tokyo, but better than the South side of Chicago or the tenderloin in SF.

edblarney 10y ago
It's safe. There's no question about that. I don't think this is the issue. One thing is that the laws have never really been clear. In 2016, it's hard to have 'local flex' on many things. Everything is observed. This is one of the big drawbacks of globalization: every little bit of odd-behaviour is scrutinized from a global and legal perspective. 'Local cultural context' is not possible, and basically ignored. With a microphone a camera and a twitter feed on every corner, everything must be 'sanitized'. I'm willing to accept a few greasy wheels, a bit of foul language so long as I know that the locals can handle/deal with it.
- kelseydh 10y ago
  This is a very true point and sad consequence of both globalization and technological interconnectedness. In New Zealand I have heard stories about how a few decades ago in rural parts of the country, pubs used to stay open well past national closing hour limits, due to a general nonchalance and attitude among the locals that we "we-just-do-things-differently-here." Local police just looked the other way. That kind of flagrant disregard for laws where they don't fit the desire of local populations is starting to die out, as globalization combined with technology is sterilizing the power of local cultures to develop their own quirks, customs and ways of doing things without accountability. Where local discretion used to reign, rigid codified standards have taken over.
jdmichal 10y ago
I think Amsterdam is safe, in the sense that I don't feel there's much reason to fear for your physical well-being. However, when I visited (mid 2000's), the main train station's PA message loop included warnings about pickpockets.

falsedan 10y ago

This article has… too many puns. > A report by the Bonger Instituut, a criminology think-tank named after a professor at the University of Amsterdam, is blunt > But as fewer coffeeshops are expected to cater to ever larger groups of stoners, that approach could leave them out of joint.

fapjacks 10y ago
I hate this sort of ubiquitous, juvenile attitude about cannabis. It is completely annoying.
- forinti 10y ago
  Articles in The Economist are always full of puns.
qz_ 10y ago
I love it. > The Economist explains, man
cushychicken 10y ago
I had to google "Bonger Instituut" to convince myself it wasn't a joke.

ommunist 10y ago

The Economist is up to turning Dutch economy hotter. Nice PR piece.

peterwwillis 10y ago

Mostly-non-toxic and non-habit-forming drugs that have the potential to change your values are dangerous to the status quo, and therefore morally reprehensible. Alcohol and cigarettes, toxic and dangerous to users and bystanders, don't change your values, and enable control of a population. The only reason this continues its farcical conflict in modern societies is the moral majority shout louder (and have more money) than potheads do.

bogomipz 10y ago
Marijuana while generally not physically addictive can be habit-forming though. How else do you explain stoners? I'm not bashing pot but I know people who were different people before adopting "pot as a lifestyle." I'm drawing the distinction here between recreational user and non-medicinal multiple times a day daily user, with "stoner" being the latter.
- peterwwillis 10y ago
  You're right, I misspoke, it is habit forming and non-addictive.
pbhjpbhj 10y ago
>the moral majority shout louder (and have more money) // Yet, the very rich seem to be doing drugs like nobody's business. Half of the stories you hear on TV couch shows seem to be "well all us celebrities were high on cocaine, again, and blah, blah, blah". If you wanted to round up drug users you could probably just do a pat-down at the BBC and supplement that with a dawn-raid on the top 20 media personalities of the moment. I think there is a genuine risk that widescale and easy access to certain drugs can damage a country's productivity, which in turn damages the elites' profits; personally that seems the most likely reason for most drug laws, mixed in with a not-insignificant amount of protecting people from themselves, for sure.
kelseydh 10y ago
Our drug laws should approach psychedelic drugs differently from the rest. I strongly believe this.

the_mitsuhiko 10y ago

Honestly Amsterdam has in many ways become a place for British tourists being super annoying. If closing coffeeshops is what it takes for the place to become more enjoyable for the rest of us I'm not mad.

timwaagh 10y ago

last time i checked there was still a street next to the Dam with ten or so of these operations. They're not going away anytime soon. But you have to realise pot stinks immensely. it is no fun to have a street smell of weed. So some restrictions in the center of Amsterdam are in order, else the inner city will be clouded in pot-smog.

kristofferR 10y ago
Weird, I've never heard anyone describe the smell of weed as stinky. It's strong and distinct, sure, but not bad smelling. Anyway, you have it backwards. Because the coffeeshops are getting overcrowded people are basically forced to smoke outside instead, which is obviously way more smelly than people smoking inside coffeeshops (which can be odorless outside if done properly).
- SolaceQuantum 10y ago
  Weed has always smelled to me of skunk spray. By potheads it's been described to me as "gods vagina" smell, which doesn't seem much better. If one had sensitivity to scent, a cityscape reeking of weed would be fairly unpleasant.
  - dkersten 10y ago
    I think it's an "acquired taste" kind of thing: it doesn't smell nice... until it does.
  - mercer 10y ago
    God's vagina is actually a really clever way to describe it. Pungent, and to a large degree unpleasant to many people, but irresistible if you're into that sort of thing.
- kasey_junk 10y ago
  Pot smoke is routinely described as stinky. Lots & lots of people, including me do not like the smell. That said I'm not sure the smell would be a reason to criminalize it.

DoodleBuggy 10y ago

People go to Colorado now instead?

bkbridge 10y ago

And that is why San Francisco and LA are going to EXPLODE with tourist. Snapchat central, here we come. The Kids are running the show now. Amsterdam was cool, but that's kind of last year. LA is rocking! :-)

NamTaf 10y ago
Question from someone who hasn't been to the US in 2 decades: Is the MJ culture of the US where it's legalised (Colorado, LA, etc.) such that you get coffeeshops like the Netherlands, or is it more a dispensery style arrangement where you buy it for consumption in a private premises such as your home, or both?
- passivepinetree 10y ago
  Dispensary style. Public consumption is almost universally outlawed AFAIK.

tdburn 10y ago

Do they serve coffee at these shops?

NamTaf 10y ago
Yes. They cannot serve alcohol but otherwise they can serve snacks and other non-alcoholic drinks. I enjoyed a decent espresso coffee and some juice. Culturally, it's a place where people come to e.g.: play a game or three of chess with some mates and just chill and socialise. Barring alcohol, the rest of what you can purchase more or less aligns with what you'd expect people would want in that sort of situation.