• supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    In a U.S. context, it is actually really simple. Racism and the age old practice of othering types of people by associating them with a drug (cocaine = rich and white, crack = poor, black and dangerous). That’s it, the full answer is of course a lot more complicated but in the end it is exactly still this dumb and cruel.

    politicians across the political divide spent much of the 20th century using marijuana as a means of dividing America. By painting the drug as a scourge from south of the border to a “jazz drug” to the corruptive intoxicant of choice for beatniks and hippies, marijuana as a drug and the laws that sought to control it played on some of America’s worst tendencies around race, ethnicity, civil disobedience, and otherness.

    https://www.brookings.edu/articles/marijuanas-racist-history-shows-the-need-for-comprehensive-drug-reform/

    I actually think examining the rise of crack in the US and how it was used as a political wedge and xenophobic tool of fear mongering helps explain why marijuana is illegal in the US the easiest, because the forces and structures are the same for crack being highly illegal as they are for marijuana, just much less thinly veiled and dialed up to 11.

    • bartolomeo@suppo.fi
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Right, because alcohol is the white man’s drug. Plain and simple.

      They made alcohol illegal for a while but it turned out to be too onerous for the white people so it was legalized again. Marijuana laws have caused massive damage to minority communities, so they remain in place.

      • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        3 months ago

        True after all alcohol is white enough of a drug that you can come from a run smuggling family and still become President and nobody bats an eye.

      • Zitronensaft@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Marijuana was banned to target minorities, but alcohol prohibition mostly was repealed not because white people like alcohol (white people instituted prohibition in the first place, after all), but because alcohol is stupidly easy to make from a wide variety of substances so most cultures around the world produce some kind of alcohol with their local crops. You can use pretty much anything sugary: fruit (wine), honey (mead), and grains like rice and wheat (sake & beer). It is really hard to ban a substance when half the foods in our diet can be turned into that substance if you let it sit in a jar or bucket in your closet for a few weeks.

        Prohibition was repealed primarily because it was a futile effort and with alcohol being banned, very strong distilled spirits were the economical way to discreetly transport and serve alcohol since it is easier to hide a few bottles of liquor from authorities searching your truck or business than to hide large barrels of low ABV drinks like humans had been brewing and drinking for millennia. It is also a lot easier for people to drink themselves sick with distilled drinks, so ultimately it was decided that it was safer to make alcohol legal and regulated instead of having it still plentiful, but getting people sicker and funding criminal empires. It’s a lot easier to ban one plant than to ban every food source with sugar in it, but the marijuana prohibition has clearly led to many of the same problems as alcohol prohibition did.

        There are still people who would love to ban alcohol if they feasibly could. Many places in the US still have local alcohol bans, I currently have to travel two counties away to legally purchase liquor and one county away from home to purchase beer or wine. Prohibition only ended on a federal level.

    • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      People from Nixon’s cabinet have straight up said that they made both illegal and started the “War on Drugs” as justification so that they could lock up opposition leaders in both the black and hippie communities.

  • _haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    They tried to make it illegal and the results were disastrous, one could argue the same for marijuana but the campaign to keep it illegal was much more successful.

    • Maeve@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Bootleggers and alcohol could deposit their money in bank accounts. Legal grow-ops* can not.

      *I fail to see how autocorrect can “correct” to completely different words in no way similar.

  • Scrof@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    3 months ago

    Tradition, mainly. It’s so ingrained in the majority of cultures that you can’t simply uproot it with a law. Although it should be a more controlled substance, no doubt about that. It’s addictive, debilitating, incredibly harmful and it simply destroys more lives than literally any drug known to man.

    • medgremlin@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s also one of the most dangerous drugs to try to quit. Going cold turkey on alcohol can very well be lethal.

    • orphiebaby@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I came here to say this. This is really the real response. “Prohibition didn’t work” isn’t the reason, it’s the results of a response.

      • set_secret@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        lol at the 5 misogynists downvotes.

        Using gendered language, such as “known to man,” is outdated and overlooks the contributions of individuals who don’t identify as men. It’s not just about being politically correct; it’s about being accurate and inclusive. Language shapes our perception of reality, and by using more inclusive language, we acknowledge and respect the diversity of contributions across all genders. Calling this out isn’t about policing language for the sake of it; it’s about moving towards a society that values everyone’s contributions equally. Let’s push for language that includes everyone, reflecting the true diversity of human achievement.

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s also easier to make than cannabis. Alcohol will ferment in nature, you literally don’t have to do anything to make (crappy) alcohol. Good luck banning that, we tried once, went even worse than the war on drugs.

      • Vent@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Marijuana grows in nature and you just need to dry it out and light it on fire.

        • Ziggurat@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          3 months ago

          But you need a very specific plant, dry-it, and burn-it. Just let some fruit ripe and you’ll get alcohol. The ability to digest alcohol (rather than being poisoned) is one of the evolutionary advantage of some “great apes” including humans. It’s pretty great because it give us access to more food. Look how fruits into alcohol (wine, cider and more) is a great way to preserve them for the winter

          • zout@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            Don’t bother answering here, the THC crowd is downvoting everyone who says alcohol is easier to make. It feels like reddit to be honest.

            • whoreticulture@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              You can literally just grow a cannabis plant in your house right now. Buy a seed and let it grow. If you wanted to make alcohol it would be much more involved.

              • berkeleyblue@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                You buy some fruits (or grow them in the garden) and ferment them… how is that more involved than growing a canabis plant and dry it?

        • zout@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          And hope there’s enough THC in there, because pollination basically ruins the THC content.

          • CuttingBoard@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            3 months ago

            Fertilization does not kill THC. Nobody wants to buy weed full of seeds. Seeds have weight. It’s similar to BBQ rubs. Take out the salt and see what they weigh. Salt is heavy and cheap.

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            3 months ago

            Works fine as a drug if fertilized…

            To quote afroman:

            So roll, roll, roll my joint, pick out the seeds and stems

            Feelin’ high as hell, flyin’ through Palmdale, skatin’ on Dayton rims

            Back in the day most weed came with seeds. Doesn’t really change the THC content, just means you gotta pick them out before hand, hence sinsemilla, which is preferable, because it has denser buds, and no seeds.

      • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s also easier to make than cannabis.

        You are aware that Cannabis is a plant, and therefore naturally occurring, yes? It was literally on the planet for hundreds of millions of years before modern homosapiens.

        • zout@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          3 months ago

          To make marijuana, you need to dry the flowers of unpollinated female cannabis plants. It takes some effort and time to grow them like this. To make alcohol, you squash a bunch of overripe fruit, put it in a semi closed container and forget about it for a week or two. There are even video’s of animals in the wild eating overripe fruit and getting wasted from it. So yeah, it is easier to make.

          • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            3 months ago

            I have personally grown, sold, and been around commercial Cannabis cultivation my entire adult life. We are gonna have to agree to disagree on this one.

              • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Not all animals have the same type of endocannabinoid receptors as homosapiens. However, plenty of animals choose to consume Cannabis plants in nature where they are available, and have not been eradicated. I fail to see what any of this has to do with your initial point though. The process of drying Cannabis is not what “activates” THC. That process is called decarboxylation. I’m not aware of any animals that can get stoned simply by eating Cannabis before it has gone through the process of decarboxylation through heating. However, your initial statement was that Cannabis needed to go through some kind of specific process for it to produce THC in the same way that fruit must go through fermentation to produce alcohol. This is simply not the case. The process of selective breeding is what has increased the THC content of Cannabis, but even wild Cannabis plants contain a myriad of different cannabinoid compounds.

                • zout@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  That was not the initial statement. The initial statement is that alcohol is easier to make than marijuana.

      • Melkath@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Ya. That. And not prohibition. Aka money people trying to outlaw it and the people saying “you can’t control me”.

  • someguy3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    They tried prohibition, didn’t work.

    The way I see it. Alcohol is an older drug, so it was engrained in society. But the new drug marijuana could be cracked down on. Also because it was hippies that smoked marijuana, but everyone drank alcohol.

    *Lock Stock had a scene. “Want a tug on that? [joint]”. Reply: “No I don’t want any of that horrible shit. Can we go get drunk now?”

  • hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Unlike marijuana, alcohol has been an important part of (the western) society for thousands of years. And the last time we tried banning it, it didn’t go too well.

    • zik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      And politicians drink alcohol so they’re not exactly lining up to ban it.

  • stoly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    They wanted an excuse to lock up people of color and disrupt communities. With the civil rights act, they couldn’t go old school. So they invented the “war” on drugs specifically because blacks and Latinos were stereotyped as being cannabis smokers. This is all about racism.

        • viking@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          How do you know where the OP is located? Alcohol is legal in most countries, and cannabis is illegal in most. This question applies almost anywhere in the world.

            • Hedgehawk@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              3 months ago

              The US wasn’t even the first to ban it. In 1937 Marijuana Tax act was passed that effectively prohobited it, but a full ban came in 1970. Countries that banned it before 1937 include, but are not limited to: Thailand, Irish free state, Romania, UK, Indonesia, Australia, Lebanon, Sudan, Italy, Panama, Canada, South Africa, Mexico, Jamaica, Greece, Singapore…

      • stoly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        However when the context is the US, you can keep your edginess to yourself.

        • Obi@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          How is the context here the US exactly?

          Edit: sure, I guess just downvote me for asking an innocent question, not sure what’s going on here.

  • magic_lobster_party@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is a non-US perspective, but my take is this:

    Alcohol production has a long and rich history. Many cultures, in particular western, have their own relationships to alcohol. The development of different alcohol production processes tells a lot about the history of a culture.

    Belgian monks with their beer brewing styles. Scotch whiskey. French wine yards. Even Japanese with their sake.

    Remove wine from France, and we will have another French Revolution with guillotines again. It’s difficult to remove something that’s so heavily ingrained in the culture without public outrage. Alcohol is part of the identity.

    Few cultures have marijuana as part of their identity, hence it’s easier to ban.

  • gencha@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    A bit of perspective: During the prohibition in the USA, both cocaine and heroin were sold legally over the counter.

    Most illegal drugs today are perfectly legal when a pharmaceutical company produces it and you are purchasing it through channels where the elite gets paid.

  • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 months ago

    The US tried to ban it and it just led to gangs becoming super powerful because they sold people illegal alcohol.

    So it’s not really a policy choice like “this is safe enough, this is not safe enough” it’s legal because making it illegal doesn’t work.

  • Sludgehammer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Two things really.

    1. Tradition. Alcohol has a long history in European culture and by immigration the United States. It’s common to have a glass of wine or a beer with dinner, the rich will impress their friends with the extravagant alcohol they drink serve, you take a glass of wine at communion… heck at one point weak beers were drunk more than water, because at the time nobody knew what made water safe to drink but everyone could tell if beer smelled rotten.

    2. Production. Marijuana is easy to grow, but it takes a lot of time and space to produce. Alcohol on the other hand you need something with sugar and some yeast or starter. It can be fermented in some corner of the basement or even a cupboard. It’s so hard to control the production of alcohol even in prisons there’s usually somebody fermenting pruno somewhere and that’s one of the most controlled and monitored environments. It’s really hard to prevent people from brewing some form of alcohol because it’s about as easy as making bread.

    When you combine these two you end up with the disaster that occurred when the United States tried to ban alcohol during prohibition. An easy to produce intoxicant with a large market was suddenly banned, when people started looking for more organized crime stepped in to fill the void.

    • Numhold@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      It‘s a shame I had to scroll down so far to see the second half of your explanation. The point about production is why trying to outlaw alcohol is so much more insane than trying to outlaw any other drug. The moment an apple leaves its tree, it starts producing alcohol. There‘s a reason alcohol is ingrained in so many cultures: It gets created basically everywhere, with and without human interaction.

    • whoreticulture@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      But people also grew marijuana during prohibition? Lots of illegal grows in the forests in Northern California. There was never a time where cannabis was unavailable in the United States.

  • Rottcodd@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    The other answers mostly sum it up - it was initially made illegal primarily as a way to establish an “other” with which to frighten conservatives.

    There’s another thing that hasn’t been mentioned yet though that I’ve long thought is relevant - is part of the reason that marijuana specifically was for so long (and still is in some quarters) so condemned.

    Imagine you’re a corrupt politician, and you want to sell your constituents on the idea of going to war in the Middle East (so you can collect some bribes from defense contractors and oil companies) or instituting mandatory sentencing (so you can collect some bribes from prison contractors) or cutting taxes on the wealthy (so you can collect bribes from rich people and corporations) or any of the other, similar things that corrupt politicians want to do

    Who would you rather try selling that idea to? A bunch of pot smokers or a bunch of drinkers?

    I think part of the issue is that marijuana appeals to a part of the population that really is, to corrupt politicians and their cronies and patrons, “undesirable.” When they want to get the people all fired up in support of their latest bullshit, they want somebody with a beer in their hand, drunkenly shouting, “Yeah! Kick their asses!” Not somebody with a joint in their hand, muzzily saying, “Hold on a minute - you want to do what?”