3 ms·

Seems like the true story is beyond Wikipedia. There was definitely a reason why it was banned in so many countries, when alcohol/tobacco weren't. Perhaps it re

Seems like the true story is beyond Wikipedia. There was definitely a reason why it was banned in so many countries, when alcohol/tobacco weren't. Perhaps it reduces productivity?

COGlory 6y ago
It's disappointing to see a comment like this get downvoted, especially on HN. The comment appears to find a pretty obvious inconsistency: "why is weed not treated like booze?" and then proposes an obviously off-the-cuff explanation that should stimulate discussion "Perhaps it reduces productivity". I can only assume that is the reason it's being downvoted, because the former statement is extremely obvious - weed is treated dramatically differently than alcohol in many countries. OK, if it's not "it reduces productivity", or even "it reduces productvity more than alcohol" then throw in your two cents about why, don't down vote someone looking for an answer and just spitballing possibilities.
taurath 6y ago
US foreign policy, and a precursor for things like trade, arms and military assistance, was banning of substances in those countries. 1971 was when the world changed its policy through the UN, with a lot of pushing from the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_Psychotropic_Substances https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_Psychotropic_Sub... The wikipedia article does not cover the world context at the time of the convention, who was pushing for it. I would love to be able to read further on that, as I know the Nixon administration in the US very plainly used the scheduling system as a way to demonize minorities in the US, but I really don't understand much more about the context of the time, and whether it was legitimately a global concern or whether the US rammed it through the UN for social control.
- abandonliberty 6y ago
  That's what I thought, but the wikipedia page seems to tell a bit of a different story: >The colonial government of Mauritius banned cannabis in 1840 over concerns on its effect on Indian indentured workers;[202] the same occurred in Singapore in 1870.[203] In the United States, the first restrictions on sale of cannabis came in 1906 (in the District of Columbia).[204] Canada criminalized cannabis in The Opium and Narcotic Drug Act, 1923,[205] before any reports of the use of the drug in Canada The legal history is fairly light - the full story must be elsewhere.
  - taurath 6y ago
    Cannabis has its own weird history for sure, but has a ton of racial undertones throughout the history of its restriction
    - abandonliberty 6y ago
      Minority oppression happens everywhere; perhaps more as a consequence of racism than an act of it. Cigars keep getting caught up in actions against e-cigarettes and tobacco, with the US moving the age from 18-21, and Australia and Canada applying plain packaging laws. Surprisingly, the public health risk caused by tobacco doesn't extend to cigars at the same magnitude. Plain packaging increases consumption by shifting spend to greater quantities of discount brands from expensive premium brands. This negatively impacts economies with segments of premium cigar production. https://ipa.org.au/ipa-review-articles/cigars-and-the-plain-packaging-effect https://ipa.org.au/ipa-review-articles/cigars-and-the-plain-... Tyranny of the majority. In the US, it seems like anti-marijuana legislation was part of the new Jim Crow. Criminalize a common behavior, but only enforce it against a small segment of the population, leading to people trapped in low wage labor due to their criminal record.

Seems like the true story is beyond Wikipedia. There was definitely a reason why it was banned in so many countries, when alcohol/tobacco weren't. Perhaps it reduces productivity?

COGlory 6y ago

It's disappointing to see a comment like this get downvoted, especially on HN. The comment appears to find a pretty obvious inconsistency: "why is weed not treated like booze?" and then proposes an obviously off-the-cuff explanation that should stimulate discussion "Perhaps it reduces productivity". I can only assume that is the reason it's being downvoted, because the former statement is extremely obvious - weed is treated dramatically differently than alcohol in many countries. OK, if it's not "it reduces productivity", or even "it reduces productvity more than alcohol" then throw in your two cents about why, don't down vote someone looking for an answer and just spitballing possibilities.

taurath 6y ago

US foreign policy, and a precursor for things like trade, arms and military assistance, was banning of substances in those countries. 1971 was when the world changed its policy through the UN, with a lot of pushing from the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_Psychotropic_Substances https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_Psychotropic_Sub... The wikipedia article does not cover the world context at the time of the convention, who was pushing for it. I would love to be able to read further on that, as I know the Nixon administration in the US very plainly used the scheduling system as a way to demonize minorities in the US, but I really don't understand much more about the context of the time, and whether it was legitimately a global concern or whether the US rammed it through the UN for social control.

abandonliberty 6y ago
That's what I thought, but the wikipedia page seems to tell a bit of a different story: >The colonial government of Mauritius banned cannabis in 1840 over concerns on its effect on Indian indentured workers;[202] the same occurred in Singapore in 1870.[203] In the United States, the first restrictions on sale of cannabis came in 1906 (in the District of Columbia).[204] Canada criminalized cannabis in The Opium and Narcotic Drug Act, 1923,[205] before any reports of the use of the drug in Canada The legal history is fairly light - the full story must be elsewhere.
- taurath 6y ago
  Cannabis has its own weird history for sure, but has a ton of racial undertones throughout the history of its restriction
  - abandonliberty 6y ago
    Minority oppression happens everywhere; perhaps more as a consequence of racism than an act of it. Cigars keep getting caught up in actions against e-cigarettes and tobacco, with the US moving the age from 18-21, and Australia and Canada applying plain packaging laws. Surprisingly, the public health risk caused by tobacco doesn't extend to cigars at the same magnitude. Plain packaging increases consumption by shifting spend to greater quantities of discount brands from expensive premium brands. This negatively impacts economies with segments of premium cigar production. https://ipa.org.au/ipa-review-articles/cigars-and-the-plain-packaging-effect https://ipa.org.au/ipa-review-articles/cigars-and-the-plain-... Tyranny of the majority. In the US, it seems like anti-marijuana legislation was part of the new Jim Crow. Criminalize a common behavior, but only enforce it against a small segment of the population, leading to people trapped in low wage labor due to their criminal record.