Systemic racism exists throughout our entire culture. Even our language is inherently racist. The cultural norm for academic language is based upon white grammar and pronunciations. This leads to forms of expression by minorities that conform to their own cultural language standards to be celebrated as artistic (slam poetry for example) but not academic. But I’m not going into the racism pervasive throughout our entire culture, or even language. Instead, today’s “essay” is on how our drug laws are racist. They were designed and implemented with the intent of criminalizing black and brown communities.
I’m going to dig into marijuna specifically and show how the laws that led up to it becoming in effect illegal in 1937 were not based on scientific research or medical facts. Instead, fear-mongering propaganda was used to attack and demonize minorities, spreading panic among the white population so that wealthy white elites might profit.
Much of where we are today in the United States can be laid upon the feet of the efforts of the so-called War on Drugs, from the over-policing of minority communities to military-grade gear law enforcement offices can access. And all this has built across 100 years due to plants we could probably describe as Mostly Harmless.
To the WayBack Machine: A “Brief” Look at Marijuana’s History
Humans have been using cannabis for thousands of years. It could very well be the first crop plant we ever cultivated. Even the medical potential of marijuana was touted as far back as 1830. Dr. O’Shaughnessy noted that even if cannabis might not be a cure for an ailment, it is a better and safer remedy than other narcotics available at the time.
Cannabis had been grown in the U.S. since the founding of the country. One third of George Washington’s farm crops was hemp. Not because he was toking—hemp is classified as a cannabis strain with less that .03% THC, which makes it non-intoxicating—but rather because hemp has been a useful and valuable fiber, hence our primitive ancestors cultivating it.
Stick with me. This information about hemp does come into play later.
Although various states in the U.S. were taking action against marijuana starting as early as 1913, it wasn’t until the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 (yes, originally spelled with an h) made it effectively illegal by placing a huge tax ($100 at the time, which amounts to about $2,200 in now money) on sales or transactions of cannabis and required proper authorization from a government agency to sell.
The American Medical Association (AMA) objected to this tax, I would like to note, because doctors were prescribing cannabis medically and had been for years. This tax ended that.
So how does a drug lauded in the medical community become taxed into illegality? Propaganda and subterfuge.
Cannabis and Prohibition
Events throughout history don’t happen in a bubble. Context of the time period matters. For example, it would be difficult and disingenuous to talk about the counterculture hippie movement without giving consideration to psychedelics. The two are linked.
So too is the case with cannabis and alcohol. Or more specifically, cannabis and U.S. Prohibition, which occurred between 1920 and 1933. Look at the timing of the rise of cannabis use and the dissemination of anti-cannabis propaganda. Much of it occurred during the Prohibition period. These connections are difficult to prove because we don’t have a lot of data about cannabis use from this time. I’ll lay out my logic and point out I’m not the only one making these connections.
Before 1910, the rich, white elite had access to cannabis products, including hashish dens and “narcotic” tonics. But between 1910 and 1920, hundreds of thousands of Mexicans immigrated into the U.S. With them they brought their culture of smoking cannabis leaf, a form of consumption not previously wide-spread amongst the U.S. population.
Prohibition started in 1920. Alcohol became illegal, but cannabis was still legal and started growing in popularity as an intoxicant, especially amongst poorer populations. After all, when alcohol became illegal, it also became the intoxicant of the rich, elite socialites at fancy, hidden speak-easies. The wealthy white people always get to party with illegal substances.
The same religious movements that deemed alcohol a dangerous vice started moving on cannabis with their campaign of education-exploitation misinformation. But they didn’t get a hold until after Prohibition ended.
General Opinions Around Cannabis Prior to 1937
Cannabis wasn’t regulated because there were legitimate medical concerns about the dangers of cannabis. There were concerns, yes, I won’t deny that. But legitimate is a stretch. Perhaps additional background might be useful.
The Pure Food and Drug was enacted in 1906. That required manufacturers to list if any of 10 “addictive” or “dangerous” substances were ingredients in foods or medicines. Opium, alcohol, cannabis, and morphine were on the list. This is roughly the birth of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
And I’m all for the government forcing companies to list the ingredients added to food and medicines. If you want a wild ride through the sordid history of crank medicine, read Charlatan by Pope Brock. It will make you glad for the FDA and other regulatory bodies!
The Harrison Narcotics Tax Act went into effect in 1915, which started taxing and limiting the availability of narcotics—although this included non-narcotic drugs like cocaine; the word narcotic has a history of being a catch-all term. Opium, cocaine, and other substances were limited under several narcotics laws but not outlawed outright. Doctors could still prescribe these as medicines.
Several international import laws were already lumping cannabis in with other “narcotics,” but cannabis was not covered in the Harrison Narcotics Act. It remained free and clear until the original Marihuana Tax Act of 1937.
The Racist Marihuana Tax Act of 1937
This tax was not applied because of scientific evidence or medical studies but rather on unsubstantiated and later disproven racist claims. This was not a new tactic for getting laws passed, of course. Arguments for the Harrison act were fraught with racist commentary such as drugs making black men murderous and causing them to rebel against white authority and that “Chinamen” were using narcotics to seduce white women.
Not only was racist propaganda used to sell the tax, it’s application affected minority populations far more than white communities. After all, even though the tax effectively removed access to cannabis from white people, it was only just beginning to gain in popularity through the 1930s. Cannabis had little social relevance to white folks, and they had just gotten alcohol back anyway in 1933. The tax was a much larger blow to black and brown communities for whom cannabis use was a part of their culture.
If you follow the money, there were several other people/families/businesses in positions of authority who benefited from this tax, but it’s hard to prove that any of them were actually involved. But I think it’s worth giving them a mention to give some historic context as to why the myth of marijuna being evil likely spread.
How to Sway Public Opinion: Rich People
The United States is supposed to be a democratic republic in which we democratically elect representatives to govern. However, the U.S. doesn’t function as a democratic republic and hasn’t for decades. It’s a plutocracy: The rich elites and wealthy businesses control our laws and policies.
Why is this important?
The Marihuana (you have no idea how hard it is to type that with an h! I’m constantly fighting against muscle memory!) Tax Act of 1937 effectively shut down all cannabis production because it did not distinguish between hemp and the intoxicating form of the plant.
There were theories at the time (which science later disproved) that hemp might be a cheap alternative to wood pulp for making paper—and therefore a threat to wealthy timber owners. Also around this time, DuPont invented nylon as synthetic fiber, which had some serious backing by rich and influential people.
During prohibition, poor white communities turned to cannabis, but black and brown populations were already cannabis users. Prohibition didn’t affect these communities as much, nor did the ending of Prohibition cause a huge uptick in alcohol consumption; they just continued to use cannabis.
Enter the rich, white alcohol producers who had their friends in the U.S. government make cannabis unavailable to these communities. With their cheap intoxicant of choice removed, the black and brown population had to join their white compatriots in using the more expensive, more damaging, more addictive alcohol.
Hemp for Victory
Here’s a funny side note. Due to the value of hemp fiber to the war effort, the U.S. government decided to ignore the illegality of hemp production during World War II. When the war was over, we just went back to a policy of it all being illegal.
How to Sway Public Opinion: A Person of Authority
Harry J. Anslinger, the first Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, is the villain of this story. Anslinger was appointed to this position in 1930 by then United States Secretary of the Treasury Andrew W. Mellon (who was not only Anslinger’s wife’s uncle but also a big investor in DuPont….).
Prior to the end of Prohibition, Anslinger apparently had no qualms with cannabis and didn’t think its use was problematic. When Prohibition ended in 1933—when his department would no longer be needed and he would lose power and authority—Anslinger changed his tune and began collecting and disseminating dubious claims about the level of abuse, the addictive nature, and the danger of cannabis intoxication:
“Marihuana is a short cut to the insane asylum. Smoke marihuana cigarettes for a month and what was once your brain will be nothing but a storehouse of horrid specters. Hasheesh makes a murderer who kills for the love of killing out of the mildest mannered man who ever laughed at the idea that any habit could ever get him.” —H.J. Anslinger, Villain
Anslinger also made wildly racist claims to drum up anti-cannabis support, stating that marijuana made Mexicans kill white people and that black men would party with white women, get them high, woo them with tales of racial persecution, and get them pregnant. And more directly, he said “Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”
Sounds not unlike the rhetoric used to sell the Harrison Narcotics Tax 20 years earlier.
Putting the Fox in Charge of the Hen House
I want to take a moment to note the issue with letting authority figures decide the thing they are policing. Anslinger was going to be defunded after Prohibition until he created a new evil to replace alcohol: cannabis.
That would be like having an older sibling babysitting the younger siblings and parents saying, “We’re paying you for doing this, but we’ll pay you more the worse they behave. Let us know afterward everything they did wrong.”
That kid is going to walk away with a pocket full of cash having convinced his parents that his siblings are absolute monsters.
Why no, my parents never employed incentive-based babysitting tactics on my brother and I. Why would you even ask that?
This is still how our system works. The DEA sets substance policies with little oversight, thus reaffirming its own value and importance. In 2016, there was a sharp rise in the import of the herbal supplement kratom, which was touted as a nootropic and possible replacement for opioids. Several people swore it helped them wean themselves off their heroin and painkiller addiction. However, with no testing, no medical evidence, no public debate, the DEA tried to pull an emergency scheduling and make it a Schedule I substance. Which would then make it impossible for the medical community to study it (“That’s some catch, that Catch 22!”) to see if it could alleviate the opioid crisis.
Fortunately there was enough public outcry that the DEA had to back off. But nothing good comes from a government agency that has the power to decide how powerful it is by picking what they regulate.
And now back to marijuana.
How to Sway Public Opinion: Lie
I’ve addressed the lies of anti-drug propaganda of the 80s and 90s, the bullshit Erin and I remember as kids. That was nothing new, of course; propaganda about the negative effects of drug use goes back over a century. If you want public support for banning something, you need to make people think that thing is dangerous and unnecessary. You need to sow fear.
Enter education-exploitation media like Reefer Madness. Released in 1936, this was part of the propaganda machine that led up to the Marihuana Tax Act. It’s meant to be a cautionary tale of cannabis use. Rather it is a campy and ridiculous bag of lies.
And people believed it!
Which makes sense. Think about all the disinformation out there now on the Internet. We’re constantly inundated with lies and propaganda. And that’s not even considering marketing campaigns. People fall victim to sensationalized misinformation all the time. Fake news is not a new problem. It just has a different platform these days.
One of the objections the AMA raised about the tax was the use of the word marihuana. At this point, the word had little meaning at that point. The AMA noted that by using marihuana and not the scientific name cannabis, the government was purposefully obfuscating the intent of the law and avoiding reasonable public debate. Doctors didn’t realize that a tax on this unknown “marihuana” substance would lead to their patients being unable to get prescribed cannabis products.
To Sum Up
Anslinger was able to stay in power by demonizing marijuana. He spread false evidence about its addictive and deadly nature. He played off white people’s fears of Mexicans and black people, reinforcing terrible stereotypes of dangerous and lawless minorities. Several rich, white elites were in a position to make money off restricting the availability of cannabis. And the medical and scientific communities were side-stepped to obfuscate educated debate.
Given the law’s dubious history, it’s hard to understand why the United States still has this prohibition against marijuana. Even the original Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 was struck down as unconstitutional in 1969. The law was repealed by the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970. This gave us our current system of scheduling drugs.
For some reason marijuana was made a Schedule I substance. “Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.”
And again that Catch-22 of Schedule I substances. They have no known medical value…. So they cannot be used in research studies to test if they might have medical value. Though, for marijuana, there’s research dating back to 1830 showing its medical value….
The Current Racism in Drug Laws
As a white, middle class cis individual, I have very little fear of having drugs in my house. The police have little reason to knock on my door. And if they did, I would have little reason not to answer. They probably aren’t at my house to arrest me.
Similarly I have little fear in carrying weed in my pocket or in my car. I might get pulled over if I’m speeding, but that won’t lead to me having my car searched. Unless I seem especially shady or nervous. Or if my vehicle’s interior holds any of the tell-tale signs of a drug-mule car (like an overabundance of air fresheners or scuffs on my paneling suggesting a “secret compartment” for smuggling contraband. I do my research.).
I’m not a dealer, and if I was caught with cannabis, it would be a small amount for personal consumption. In my home state, that could result in confiscation and a small fine if the cop wanted. Which means I’m very likely to be sent on my way, possibly with my stash still in my possession.
Black people are nearly four times as likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than a white person.
They are more likely to be stopped without cause. More likely to be searched without provocation. And more likely to be prosecuted for possession.
And yet a white person is more likely to be carrying contraband. Probably because we know we aren’t likely to be stopped and searched. I rarely carry illegal substances with me, but like I said, I’m not afraid to.
Marijuana: The Gateway Drug
I’ve joked before that marjiuana is a gateway drug but not for the reason propaganda states. It was a gateway for Erin and me; after we tried it, we realized how much we’d been lied to during our life. It made us question which other substances we’d been lied to about (hint: all of them).
When Erin and I discussed this post, she noted another way that marijuana is a gateway drug. It’s the gate that lets law enforcement into your house.
We’re both related to cops and have friends in law enforcement. We’ve discussed marijuana decriminalization with them. The most cited objection for doing so? Current marijuana laws make it easy to get to criminals.
The police know the worst criminals in a community. They use evidence (or just solid suspicions) of marijuana possession to get a warrant to search the house. Low-and-behold, crack, meth, guns; everything they need to put someone away for life. All the cops needed was that gateway drug to get the warrant.
It shouldn’t be easy to legally invade a home. And marijuana shouldn’t be illegal to justify searches and seizures so that the police can make quick arrests.
Decriminalizing Marijuana
There are many reasons why decriminalizing the use of all substances would be a benefit. In the 60s, LSD got a similar treatment of propaganda and fear-mongering that positioned it as a Schedule I drug.
But that would be a false equivalent. Racial stereotypes weren’t weaponized to push that scheduling the way they were during the early drug laws.
Our marijuana laws were racist from inception to execution. They were created to specifically target minority groups, and that bias continues and has grown across decades. The continued criminalization of weed disproportionately affects black and brown communities and continues to perpetuate racial stereotypes.
Decriminalizing marijuana won’t fix a broken system because the system isn’t actually broken. It’s working exactly as intended…as a way of criminalizing and degrading minority populations. And for the last century, it’s done a damn good job.
And it needs to stop.