You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #14: You are correct. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
Le Taz Hot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. You are correct.
Here's a good link for the early 20th Century cannabis history:

The Truth About Marijuana

<snip>

The actual story behind the legislature passed against marijuana is quite surprising. According to Jack Herer, author of The Emperor Wears No Clothes and an expert on the "hemp conspiracy," the acts bringing about the demise of hemp were part of a large conspiracy involving DuPont, Harry J. Anslinger, commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, and many other influential industrial leaders such as William Randolph Hearst and Andrew Mellon. Herer notes that the Marijuana Tax Act, which passed in 1937, coincidentally occurred just as the decoricator machine was invented. With this invention, hemp would have been able to take over competing industries almost instantaneously. According to Popular Mechanics, "10,000 acres devoted to hemp will produce as much paper as 40,000 acres of average pulp land." William Hearst owned enormous timber acreage, land best suited for conventional pulp, so his interest in preventing the growth of hemp can be easily explained. Competition from hemp would have easily driven the Hearst paper-manufacturing company out of business and significantly lowered the value of his land. Herer even suggests popularizing the term "marijuana" was a strategy Hearst used in order to create fear in the American public. "The first step in creating hysteria was to introduce the element of fear of the unknown by using a word that no one had ever heard of before... 'marijuana'" (ibid).

<more>

http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_culture1...




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -Why the U.S. Outlawed Pot Le Taz Hot  Jun-23-11 07:31 AM   #0 
  - It's a convenient excuse to criminalize minorities and underclass elements and impose discipline on  leveymg   Jun-23-11 07:42 AM   #1 
  - Winner-winner, chicken dinner! n/t  theaocp   Jun-23-11 09:12 AM   #9 
  - Also a cover story  eomer   Jun-23-11 04:28 PM   #19 
  - Anti science, anti-fact, faith based crapola.  Bluenorthwest   Jun-23-11 07:43 AM   #2 
  - The term "marijuana" itself is propaganda  IndyPragmatist   Jun-23-11 07:45 AM   #3 
  - Interesting thought.  Gregorian   Jun-23-11 12:21 PM   #15 
  - I agree with this, but the name is now ingrained in the culture.  Romulox   Jun-23-11 12:44 PM   #17 
  - Even from the grave... Nixon still screws the country! n/t  nebenaube   Jun-23-11 07:53 AM   #4 
  - Don't Change Dicks In The Middle Of A Screw. Vote For Nixon In '72.  sharesunited   Jun-23-11 08:30 AM   #5 
  - I had that sticker on my bass case in 1972  hifiguy   Jun-23-11 05:19 PM   #24 
  - How smart you were for your age!  sharesunited   Jun-23-11 11:56 PM   #43 
  - Dick Nixon before he Dicks you! nt  sasquuatch55   Jun-24-11 06:49 AM   #46 
  - Along with Reagan! They never really died. n/t  RKP5637   Jun-23-11 08:32 AM   #6 
  - It was Nixon's great "fuck you" to college students  Zorro   Jun-23-11 08:40 AM   #7 
  - k&r n/t  RainDog   Jun-23-11 09:00 AM   #8 
  - I thought it was DuPont vs the Hemp industry  yodermon   Jun-23-11 09:14 AM   #10 
  - this article doesn't explain why weed was criminalized in the 30s  ladywnch   Jun-23-11 09:39 AM   #11 
  - The 30's was pressure from the cotton industry - they were behind "Reefer Madness".  HopeHoops   Jun-23-11 10:06 AM   #12 
  - Both of these two post immediately above  socialist_n_TN   Jun-23-11 05:02 PM   #20 
  - Thats what I had always thought too.  OwnedByFerrets   Jun-23-11 05:32 PM   #26 
  - If you haven't seen "Reefer Madness", find it and watch it - funny as hell.  HopeHoops   Jun-23-11 05:42 PM   #27 
  - I actually saw it a LONG time ago  socialist_n_TN   Jun-23-11 05:49 PM   #30 
  - Watch it online here:  cui bono   Jun-24-11 04:16 PM   #50 
  - I saw it in a small theatre in a conservative Southern town in the early 70s  struggle4progress   Jun-23-11 06:35 PM   #34 
     - Damn. I never got to do that.  HopeHoops   Jun-23-11 07:10 PM   #35 
  - Here's the story behind the prohibition of marijuana in the 1930s. I  Mimosa   Jun-23-11 05:49 PM   #29 
  - Hemp and Marijuana are two seperate things. This never made sense to me. I know they're almost the  KittyWampus   Jun-23-11 05:52 PM   #32 
     - Here Ya Go:  WillyT   Jun-23-11 10:19 PM   #42 
  - Was there some compelling reason to not switch to hemp?  Beartracks   Jun-23-11 09:07 PM   #39 
     - Actually farmers did grow hemp in WW2  zeemike   Jun-23-11 09:49 PM   #41 
     - Hemp isn't a drop-in replacement for cotton, but it is a good product  jmowreader   Jun-24-11 02:49 AM   #44 
  - Now that makes sense.  RC   Jun-23-11 01:53 PM   #18 
  - You are correct.  Le Taz Hot   Jun-23-11 12:05 PM   #14 
  - And Randolph Hearst would have lost money if hemp became the paper of choice for his newspapers  judesedit   Jun-24-11 06:56 AM   #47 
  - Project Buzzkill  Blue Owl   Jun-23-11 11:40 AM   #13 
  - It sounds to me like Nixon bought in to the Goebbels style Reefer Madness movies of the 30s.  Uncle Joe   Jun-23-11 12:43 PM   #16 
  - Such an odd man this Nixon. He actually supported Methadone clinics strongly.  RagAss   Jun-23-11 05:13 PM   #21 
  - didn't  amborin   Jun-23-11 05:16 PM   #22 
  - I have no idea.  RagAss   Jun-23-11 05:17 PM   #23 
     - maybe not  amborin   Jun-23-11 05:29 PM   #25 
  - No disrespect intended  Speed8098   Jun-24-11 05:45 AM   #45 
  - Early on it was regulated (i.e., outlawed) regionally to go after Mexicans and blacks  MrScorpio   Jun-23-11 05:47 PM   #28 
  - Not the primary reason at first  Mimosa   Jun-23-11 05:51 PM   #31 
     - I changed "first" to Early on"  MrScorpio   Jun-23-11 05:52 PM   #33 
     - amen, I was going to point that out. Corporations screwing  demigoddess   Jun-23-11 09:05 PM   #38 
  - I have always referred to the'war on drugs' as "Nixon's Revenge"  rurallib   Jun-23-11 08:27 PM   #36 
  - The sad fact is that our current Democratic party  dotymed   Jun-23-11 08:31 PM   #37 
  - K&R n/t  DeSwiss   Jun-23-11 09:38 PM   #40 
  - Too bad Grace Slick didn't get to get in.  Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel   Jun-24-11 08:51 AM   #48 
     - I'm so glad that never happened  RainDog   Jun-24-11 09:21 AM   #49 
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC