"If you'd bother to inform yourself, you'd see that some of this conjecture is a matter of public record:"
I looked at some of this but I have a rather dismal assesment of the WWW most of the time not even the most of rudimentary library materials are found in an acceptable manner on the web and hence I think that sometimes it's almost better not to try. But hey I have been suprised.
"First of all, check out the Virginia Law Review which states, in no uncertain terms, that marijuana prohibition (and by extension, hemp prohibition) was pushed through congress on the most specious of information sources."
So I assume that they picked Virginia because it was a nice place to grow tobacco related crops?
" Analysis and transcription of interesting tidbits can be found here."
" In fact, the page cited above is one of a larger body of work studying the legality (tenuous as it is) of the US policy on drugs stretching back to the anti-narcotics legislation of 1914."
So let me get this straight are you saying that there has to be some sort of precedent to take an action?
You do realize that most of the time it's ok to say make a law that states
If you have a zebra that eats genetically modified corn it has to stay out of your living room, or something like that right?
It sounds like people are trying to find some reason why other people in the past didn't come after others faster than they did and hence give some justification for their current behaviour.
" The root page can be perused here."
"Additionally, it is a matter of public record that substantially improved techniques in the harvesting and cultivation of hemp commercially were coming on board, as described here in a transcription from Mechanical Engineering Magazine (Feb 1937) and here in a transcription from Popular Mechanics (Feb 1938)."
How is such a thing different from say harvesting any other crop. I mean the basics are all there no wonder we have an easy time with things say like banannas and mangos.
" A new billion dollar industry, in direct competition to existing textile and paper industries, would have caused a lot of consternation by people who would have liked to keep the status quo."
Yeah but it does seem quite odd. I might beleive that it could be used for a number of things but wouldn't people want to use what they want and not bother to change? I for one would rather continue to use things like cotton. It made up a great deal of the ecconomy of the south at the time and there are certain properties (feel, touch, density that people prefer). In this respect it works the same way as silk, it's been around a while and people are still using it.
" DuPont was coming on the scene with a new wonder-invention called Nylon, too, which would have had major competition in the same arena."
I don't see anyone (who isn't eccentric mind you I am sure some stoner has a hemp shirt) wearing a shirt or pants made of the stuff. Also how would anyone want to have pantyhose made of hemp?
Personally I know that ropes and the like are prone to rotting and falling apart (in the old days they had to have tar covering them), Nylon does not how is this even fair competition.
" Oil may not have been directly threatened at that point, but oil barons were also known to move quickly and decisively against anything that might threaten their monopoly power in the future, which hempseed certainly had the ability to (after all, hempseed oil was used as a fuel for a loooong time before coal became widespread in the 1800s)."
And yet for some odd reason in all the years of reading any really prominent history I see nothing mentioning any of this.
I assume you are talking about America here right? Even less of a chance of much *widespread* and *significant* use of such or many more books would have it discussed.
Steam engines in America were the first major industrial application of machinery and that machinery ran on coal. The only other sources of power I really heard of was whale oil and various fish oils in the British Isles but that was for the most part not really there.
" Search around for some information on Standard Oil if you need any expansion on that topic."
Well Rockefeller was a paranoid man but that can be explained by secureing your position.
"And now, on to the point by point..."
"Addiction to marijuana, indeed, the knowledge of the ability to smoke a cannibus leaf and cop a buzz was virtually nonexistant in the US at the time of prohibition."
Really? Then why was it supposedly sited as being 'used' by minorities. Now come it couldn't have been their use of ropes, paper, and clotheing right?
Or it this wasn't the case and it was banned then dosn't it seem interesting that people are trying to make a case to do something unprecedented. It makes that act of smokeing cannibas to be less historically supported and also less legitimate.
" See the above link from virginia law review in which they mention several times the total non-issue marijuana use was amongst constituents, even after extensive public relations efforts. "
Ok I think that we understand that maybe people as a whole (the rational ones) didn't even consider getting drugged up at that time.
"All this is completely orthogonal to the prohibition on hemp, anyways."
And I think I understand that it refers to different plants but why all the pro drug rants for hemp? If hemp has *nothing* to do with cannibas why bother with getting that particular plant allowed?
Since they appear to be visually similar I can understand but other than that I see little problem with that.
Well it's not just the capitalist interpretation of history but the Marxist one as well. Money isn't the only motivating factor. The crusades are a nice little example of such not being the only motivations, not to mention other things.
"War related oil industry?"
That was actually to illustrate that there was little chance of die off within the absolute value of the years surrounding period (say 5 years).
" There was no war on when this legislation was being drafted, unless you're talking about US oil going to help Italy invade Ethiopia in 1935 (which it did... Germany and US provided coal and oil to italy in that period when the league of nations had declared an embargo)."
And the League sucked.
Of course the US is always evil and all. I have also seen the 'wonderful' quotes of the American ambassador in Italy cheering on Mousolini. Personally I have to believe that using presentism in history is that problem I have. All sorts of revisionism is what the world is good for nowadays.
" I doubt those profits would have been extensive, although I have a difficult time finding exact export numbers at this point."
And I wasn't considering this as I really didn't read much on that.
"Keep in mind that the BIG war that would use LOTS of oil was from 1938-1945, and US involvement came late."
Hmmm actually I believe that there was a US gunboat (some sort of reconissance craft) which was sunk in the Yangtzee by the Japanese in China in 1933, but that didn't get anyone involved.
" There may have been some oil being shipped for mobilization efforts in other countries (like italy), but they would be minor in the Great Scheme of Things."
Ok I would have that wrong but there was plenty of other places that needed oil. Industry in the US and other countries not involved with killing. The New Deal and the WPA would have needed some.
"Additionally, it's only wrong if you view profit motive exclusively in the context of clear and present dangers to the oil industry."
I try not to but you did bring up the oil industry and I really doubted that the insane experiment of biodisel really went that far back so that's why I reacted the way I did.
" At the time, there was a distant danger to oil, but a clear and present danger to textiles and paper."
And I believe that people would have to have it demostrated to them that such a change would be necessary.
"Perhaps you're a little young to realize this, but there wasn't any "hippies" back in 1937, either... unless, of course, you're engaging in the tired old scheme of labelling ideas you don't like in derogatory terms so you can more conveniently dismiss them, in which case temporal continuity is a meaningless point."
No it's actually like a little but of presentism on my part (I appologize for this but sometimes it happens to the best of us but there are few political labels that effectively convey they expression of some radical person who dresses strangely, has strange exotic 'religious' beliefs and in general tries to force radical changes to people who are totally baffled and amused).
" This was a movement that would have been carried out by Maw and Paw Farmer, in the fields and valleys of tenable farmland everywhere."
Interesting I personally don't know of any massive part of anyone to farm hemp.
" It doesn't get any less 'hippie'."
Point taken on the score of producing crops.
"So it's easier to believe a conspiracy of religious and temperance extremists managed to railroad this through on zealotry alone, as opposed to a profit motive?"
Hey it worked for the 18th ammendment why not hemp/cannibas.
" I'm sure there were some 'right thinking people' of the once-mighty temperance movement who were all pissy of the failure to prohibit alcohol looking for a new patsy, but to dismiss profit motive outright is ludicrous, especially when only a decade prior Coolidge proclaimed to the world (in it's traditionally misquoted form): "The Business of America is Business"."
1. What is the right quote?
2. How does this offhand quote specifically relate to the hemp problem? Just because there is a pro-business orientation to the government dosn't mean that there is a business motive to the problem at hand. Look at the terrorist problem. I guarantee that profit is not the main motive but of world order and maybe a little revenge.
" It makes me all the more incredulous when you suggest that congress would allow a potentially enormous cash crop be blown away on the basis of that zealotry."
One again that people may not have wanted or needed. What was it going to be so good to get people out of the depression. How does a farmer get ahead with some freaking hemp and not on say corn or soy beans or even tobacco.
"Quite frankly, as alcohol is now legal, motivations of the day are largely moot aside from entertaining legal trivia."
And (not to insult your on your scholarship here) but hemp isn't? I mean there are more interesting debated I could be having but the drug one gets my dander. I read too many arguments spooled off on paper from kuroshin (the 5 is really silly) that rise my dander.
" Thus, I've never bothered to get as intimately familiar with the motivations behind them."
Well they happened to have nearly 100 or so years of social movements behind them and 2 constitutional ammendments in the US constitution but I guess that dosn't do anything for you does it?
" Marijuana isn't currently legal,"
As well as not wearing my seatbelt in my state the highway patrol (not on a highway but on a surface street) 'informed' me of this (via traffic sitations) does it have to matter.
" and the fact that it isn't generates a lot of controversy,"
namely by people who really, really, really, really, want to get high for the most part. Frankly hemp can be used for the next super fuel, or in cheapy paper (I mean really it would have to be some supper paper and get a nice look I have gone paper shopping often), or even to make garrish clothing for political and social extremists who have non-mainstream religious views (not mentioning hippies here at least in this post).
" piques my interest and urges me to get informed."
Ok if you want but how about all the other more pressing problems. Seems like there are some people who will sell their soul to get pot sold in vending machines in McDonalds or something in the future to merit all this investigating.
" You should try it."
Seems that that is the idea of the month.
Because hemp really isn't used. Seems that the only people who have a desire to deal with hemp are the people who are going to want to force people to make cannibas legal.
" Hemp remains a plant of extraordinary versatility."
So are many other things if you think about it. Tofu and swiss army knives for instince.
" Oh, here's a 411 for you, hemp is *not marijuana*."
Ok an unfortunate snafu on my part not being a pot activist I didn't really make the distinction but they *are* related.
" It never has been and never will be."
Silly me I integrated this fact into my post you are reading now. Still a bunch of shrill pot heads getting in your face about their 'right' to get stoned get's annoying.
" While there are some trace levels of THC in industrial hemp, the hassle involved in the refining and extraction of that THC would be extremely impractical compared to simply growing high-potency THC cannibus."
But not necessarily a barrier to deserpate THC addicts.
" You could, I suppose, smoke some of the castoffs of hemp plants, but you probably wouldn't get much psychoactive effects off of it aside from a headache due to carbon monoxide ingestion."
Hey people made tobacco from bark before because of the addictive nature of repetitive smokeing.
"Oh, you know it for a fact, do you?"
" Strange how so many medical practicioners "know" it to be otherwise."
Because I don't have a single reputable article in any major medical journal saying such.
There are no miracle plants. I mean how many cures for cancer make you "happy" (ie high)?
How do you know eating your own feces for a week, or say someone's elses won't give you medical benfits unless you really try?
" You may believe it to be factual, and you may take it on faith that those who tell you it's entirely devoid of medicinal benefit are speaking the truth in an unbiased fashion, but there's too much evidence to the contrary to allow myself and many, many others to accept any "fact" as to medicinal use at face value."
And prove some really necessary broad spectrum medical benefit. I heard some silly applications to anti-nausea affects of chemothearpies and something to do with glaucoma but those are pittiful levels of the population and that can be handled with restricted pharmecuticals.
As for the evil conspiracy I doubt that there is any truth to it.
Again stoners giving Baal rivers of blood to get high and they think that there is a conspiracy to prevent getting high.
"And while *you* may not get any benefit out of it in *your* life there's plenty of people who *are* getting benefit,"
from what destroying their minds pretending the world dosn't apply to them?
" if not directly medical,"
Which is my point.
" then in simply making them happier,"
Is being in la la land by tradeing your brain and body true happiness. I have a bhuddist therapist I know who would have a trade at this.
" less stressed out people."
Maybe until they get down off their high or are in jail.
" When was the last time you saw anyone look stressed out when stoned?"
Personally I don't actually get in those situations. Lack of associations with and bad types in my past and a general lack of trust in stoners, coupled with a lack of interest in illegal activity.
"BTW - "demonostrated"? Freudian slip, there?"
actually a bad application of phonics from my youth (you get it 'hooked on phonics' har har har ok I'll stop makeing jokes for now) applied to spelling
"You'll have to look pretty hard to find a resonable person that says ingesting marijuana lacks harm."
Now hey wait a minute I thought I remembered some debates that stated that it *wasn't* harmful. Wow which is it harmful or not. Seems like there is a lack of proper scientific consensus.
" You're breathing in combusted materials in a way your body wasn't originally designed to handle."
What about other ways? I can easily attack smokeing because it damages aveoli in the lungs.
" Anything of that nature will harm you, in some small fashion."
Only small if you don't mind chokeing on your own fluids.
" Sadly, almost everything in this life will harm you."
To a small degree. I however draw the line about (to take a metaphor from Pinocchio) going to 'Pleasure Island' only to become a donkey.
" The air we breathe is filled with poisons both natural and man-made."
I know that but we *have* to breathe or the game is up in 4 minutes without brain damage and 5 for absolute death. Seems steep on principle.
" Our food, our water, the UV from the sun."
Again death from lack of food (usually a month, water maybe 2-4 days), and well I guess you can hide from the sun hut that isn't always practical but then there is sunscreen for the paranoid.
"The point that many are making today is not one that weed is harmless, it's that its use is less harmful than other legalized drugs used for recreation,"
The only two I know of are Tobacco and Alchol. Tobacco will eventually dissapear with the intense medical, scientific, and media campaign (sadly the media one seems to work better saying it's 'uncool' to smoke rather than it's deadly or waiting for objectivity) arrayed against it (the companies are wiseing up check who really owns Kraft foods for example). Alchol is a toughie but that's been tried and found that some people really like getting souced but you can't get 'high' off alchol as you can from other drugs.
" and that the so-called 'war on drugs' is a far greater blight on society than this particular drug ever could be."
What about all the fools doing anything they can for a hit of some addictive drug. What of the ethics versus morality of that.
"Eat it all up, junior. There's a good lad."
I have come to realize that kuroshin is mostly like this.
"And it's vitriol."
Thanks for correcting me.
" Sarcasm loses a lot of potency when it's mangled by poor spelling and punctuation."
A silly mistake to be sure. That's why erasers are on pencils.
"You should care."
I try but issues of ecconomics are not my forte since I don't go for the obcession of money that business majors have, hence I don't really bother with most of these little problems. Usage taxes are especially of little importance when dealing with things of elastic demand (if it were a gasoline tax which is on an inelastic commodity I would came much more).
" Voter apathy is largely responsible for the continuously eroding rights of the average citizen... and don't kid yourself, most people ARE comfortably numb to the problems of the world by taking heavy doses of whatever their drug of choice is, be it weed, alcohol,
Maybe because people talk of things like every day is going to be their last one on earth. *EVERY* issue is of life and death imporatnce. Add to this pot advocates pratically *forceing* the world to get their pet guilty pleasure into the realm of acceptance and you get people getting tired of dealing with hearing it.
" or televalium."
Bastard anyone who kills pbs and The Simpsons needs to drug out into the street and shot.
Come on you know you like Frontline admit it. When do you have the time to talk to say Mullah Omar about the issues?
"By definition, any group of sufficient size conspiring to commit an illegal act is a criminal organization, ie: ORGANIZED CRIME."
Oh good lord I remember this from one of my debates with my sister and the proper definition of 'have' to. I maintained that 'have' is less rigorous and referrs to a secussful prosection of a particular task rather than life and death problem.
" Organized crime comes in many flavors, and of varying degrees of organization, but it's still organized crime.
Alright I get the point if you are pedantic but I still am using the popular idea.
" The fact that you like to think of the cosa nostra or yakuza as 'real' o.c. and the rest as 'poseur' o.c. doesn't change the fact that the law considers it so by definition."
Which law enforcement group?
" Here is the definition according to the latest legislation on the matter: "
""criminal organization" means any group, association or other body consisting of five or more persons, whether formally or informally organized, having as one of its primary activities the commission of an indictable offence under the Criminal Code or any other Act of Parliament for which the maximum punishment is imprisonment for five years or more and any or all of the members of which engage in or have, within the preceding five years, engaged in the commission of a series of such offences"
Hmmm this sounds like either the UN or the British Isles.
So You have to have a group of people with a felony conviction within 5 years to be an organized crime syndicate right?
"That about covers it."
Hmmm it sounds fishy and since we are talking about the USA here (at least I thought we were) we have to consider that street gangs are dealt with differently from mafia members. I mean I havn't seen any FBI people busting gang members.
"I think your ideas of what a government is supposed to do are skewed."
Probably an opinion. Many people fought for the welfare state and I happen to like it.
" Here's a direct quote from the Constitution of the US."
" You might have heard of it:"
Being a student of history especially American I think I have.
""Establish Justice", "Insure Domestic Tranquility", "Provide for the Common Defense", etc... you see those?"
Yes I do indeed.
" That's what a government is supposed to do."
Correction the US government it's also the preamble and I think there is some debate as to the legal applicibality.
" Help it's populace by providing common services that all people need in order to survive and function."
Maybe that falls under protecting them from debilitating addictions from dangerous substances as well right? I mean common services to survive and function, right?
" Not only is it a government's requirement to help it's populace, it should be ITS SOLE PURPOSE."
Sounds like it also applies in the help department.
" The fact that it is not, of course, is a tragedy to be examined in another set of postings."
I don't see why it isn't even in this specific circumstance.
"As for the rest of your sentence, it doesn't make much sense. I *assume* it's some additional drivvel about "hippie leftists" without point, so I'll leave it at that, except for this bit:"
Well I doubt I write drivel on purpose but there is chance for rectification.
"Ah, there is something we can agree on."
Ahh that's nice.
" So why then does society throw away people who posess vanishingly small amounts of marijuana, locking them up for decades amongst rapists and murderers?"
Maybe a slight exageration about decades, and I could think that there is a chance for a good cause for sentence reduction and such but there is a nice legal and social theory here. Some part of the supply chain has to be attacked. The distributors have to be attacked but then a great number get away, so therefore there is also an attack on the people who want and this gives the buyers a problem.
" I guess the caring society thing is really more a concept than a fact."
Not totally careing all the time I will admit but still trying to keep society nonfractured.
" I wouldn't consider what's in place now 'cruel and indifferent' though, I think of it more as unenlightened self-interest."
Well there is a tendency to have people not care about others because of an idea in which people have to expend as little as possible because they have a 'right' to make off like bandits regardless of the social contract and mutual welfare. That is what bugs me.
"Oh, little tidbit for you... In 1998, Canada finally saw the light and re-established hemp as a legal crop."
So there should be a whole lot of rich hemp planters right? Maybe some good links?
" With any luck marijuana decriminalization will soon happen, with attendant drop in prison populations and enforcement costs."
And a rapid rise of silly mass addictions and social problems.
"So far as the record goes, no lover of drinking has yet gone out into the night and shot himself as a gesture of protest" Gilbert Seldes, The Future of Drinking 1930
[ Parent ]