First, in your strange occupations you sacrificed to the god of
deafening noise, you were so busy with your activity that you had no
time to suffer, to hear, to breathe, to drink the milk of life and the
light of heaven. No, you had to be active, perpetually active,
perpetually doing. And when the fuss and bustle proved futile, when the
destiny within you, instead of ripening into sweetness, decayed and
turned into poison, you multiplied your activity, you created enemies
for yourselves, first in your imagination, then in reality; you went to
war, you became soldiers and heroes. You have made conquests, you have
borne insane hardships and done gigantic deeds. And now? Are you
content? Are your hearts happy and serene? Is destiny sweet to your
taste? No, it is bitterer than ever, and that is why you are clamouring
for more action, rushing into the streets, storming and shouting.
electing councils, and loading your guns again. All because you are
forever in flight from suffering! In flight from yourselves, from your
souls!
- If The War Goes On, Herman Hesse
Cannabis prohibition groups are a bunch of losers who will spout just about anything that is asked of them, and probably even sell their mothers for a couple of bucks. They have no integrity or scruples. In this sense, they are similar to many of our politicians and celebrities. All cannabis prohibition groups are funded and employed by industries opposed to cannabis - the synthetic pharmaceutical industry, fossil fuel industry, medical industry, alcohol, tobacco and opium industries - or funded and employed by the tools these industries use to control the power structures of the world today - politicians, media, religious orthodoxy, law enforcement and judiciary, drug enforcement, the armed forces, the black market, etc.
The job of cannabis prohibition groups is to continuously spew out unscientific nonsense and lies regarding cannabis to keep society afraid of the herb. They prey upon the common fears of society and create myths that amplify these fears, connecting cannabis to the fears and ensuring that the propaganda is loud, widespread and relentless. With the funding that they receive they organize campaigns to spread misinformation among the public.
The myths that cannabis prohibition groups typically propagate against cannabis are: cannabis is harmful and addictive; cannabis causes insanity; cannabis fuels crime; only the dregs of society use cannabis; cannabis is the devil's weed; cannabis destroys youth; cannabis causes traffic-related road fatalities; cannabis affects tourism; THC is a most harmful cannabinoid and must be permanently banned or kept under tight regulation; women who use cannabis are immoral; etc.
Cannabis prohibition groups go by such grand names like Smart Approaches to Marijuana, Healthy and Productive Michigan, Band of Hope, Total Abstinence Association, etc. They organize campaigns such as 'Just Say No to Drugs', working along with law enforcement and the medical industry, generally targeting schools, and fueling the fear of parents and society at large.
Let us look at one of these modern prohibitionist groups - Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) - that operates nationally in the United States. Cannabis Wire reports that 'The man behind SAM is Kevin Sabet, a former advisor for the federal Office of National Drug Control Policy during the Bill Clinton, George Bush, and Barack Obama administrations. Sabet started SAM in 2013 with Patrick Kennedy, the son of the late Ted Kennedy and a former Rhode Island congressman. SAM “envisions a society where marijuana policies are aligned with the scientific understanding of marijuana’s harms, and the commercialization and normalization of marijuana are no more,” according the group’s website.' The inconsistency in SAM's supposed concern about protecting public health is evident in this report by Marijuana Moment which says 'Former Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI), co-founder of the anti-marijuana group Smart Approaches to Marijuana, spoke out against the legalization bill and sparred with lawmakers. At one point, he was asked whether he believes alcohol should be prohibited — and after hesitating to respond, he said he did not but that alcohol advertisements should be more tightly regulated.' The lack of understanding of the issues at hand, and the shallowness of these prohibitionist groups is evident from the policies that they frame. Crains New York reports that 'Sabet's idea of replacing arrests with warnings, citations and small fines is a far cry, however, from what most drug reformers have in mind. Although he says SAM is still formulating its approach and aims for flexibility, the recommendations in the "model legislation" on the group's website read almost like a parody of bureaucratic overreach. Low-level offenders—which SAM typically defines as someone caught smoking weed in public or carrying more than 10 grams of cannabis for personal use—could face a "mandatory assessment of problem drug use after the first citation." Those found to have a drug problem would be sent for treatment; those who do not could be sent to social services to address "other life factors" that might be contributing to drug use.' SAM funds anti-cannabis campaigns the the state level across various US states. SAM funded the failed anti-cannabis legalization campaign in Michigan by Healthy and Productive Michigan. Reports show that another primary sponsor for the campaign by Healthy and Productive Michigan was Dow Chemical Corporation. As Marijuana Moment reports 'Meanwhile, the largest committee working against the initiative, Healthy and Productive Michigan, is reporting a sizable new contribution of $75,000 from national prohibition organization Smart Approaches to Marijuana, which has already provided over $1 million in cash and in-kind services to the effort. The prohibitionist committee also reported $100,000 from Dow Chemical Corporation.' The organization SAM was highly active in the media until recently, but appears to have faded a bit in the face of the pro-cannabis tsunami sweeping across the US.
The people who fall for the propaganda created by cannabis prohibition groups are typical members of the herd who fall for anything that a priest, politician or celebrity says, because they believe that these persons in authority, or with high social standing, or with piles of money, can never say or do anything wrong. The inability of these members of the herd to use their brains is clearly evident in the fact that they are unable to differentiate between a harmful, addictive, drug created in the laboratories of pharmacists and a natural medicinal herb that has been used across the world for thousands of years by hundreds of millions of people. So, while the propagandists and the members of the herd who fall for the propaganda consume cocktails of synthetic pharmaceutical medicines every day that they are highly addicted to - and cannot function without - along with alcohol and tobacco, they castigate and ostracize cannabis and its users who use a safe natural medicinal herb for their health and intoxication. These propagandists and the members of the herd can be found everywhere, unfortunately. They are mostly from the ruling upper classes and castes, or aspire to be among these sections of society through any means possible. You will find them waving flags and lining up the streets when a crooked politician goes by in his motorcade. You will see them pushing their children to become soldiers to go and kill the enemy wherever he may be found while they regularly attend church on Sundays. You will find them at movie theaters standing up when the national anthem is played before their favorite Marvel superhero movie. You will find them trying to leave the country and go to where they think that the grass is greener at the first chance they get, rather than do anything to make life better in their own homelands. They will take RT-PCR tests, wear masks, sanitize themselves, repeatedly vaccinate themselves with anything that the government asks them to, and post pictures of all this on social media. They will exhort their employees to do the same, or sack them if they fail to comply. For the industries opposed to cannabis - the ones who today lead the herd and everybody else over the brink of human-made climate catastrophe - these prohibitionists and herd members are the perfect cannon fodder to achieve their goals of amassing huge wealth at any cost, and maintaining their hold over the world's power structures.
Cannabis prohibitionists are not a new phenomenon. They existed even in 19th century India, sucking up to the British colonists and supporting them in their efforts to eventually prohibit cannabis in India, a land where it had been used for thousands of years across the length and breadth of the country - especially by the poorest classes who formed the majority - for medicine, intoxication, spirituality and livelihood. The prohibitionists spread the propaganda that cannabis use was evil, and the modern way of life espoused by the enlightened British meant shunning such evil practices. They said that cannabis use was based on ignorance and that an educated person would not indulge in such evils. Prohibition groups in 19th century India also had grandiose names that appealed to the herd, especially those from the upper classes and castes. Let us examine some of these 19th century cannabis prohibitionist groups from India, and how they influenced the eventual prohibition of cannabis in India by the British.
One dubious prohibition group from the 19th century that gave evidence to the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission was the Indian Relief Society. It states in its evidence against ganja that 'The evil effects of this intoxicant have been testified to not only by medical authorities, but also by high Government officials. Dr. Chevers, in his standard work on Medical Jurisprudence in India (p. 504), writes as follows:— "Late in their miserable career the ganjasmoker and the opium-eater become utterly shattered, alike in mind and body The ganjasmoker and bhang-drinker often remain chronically inebriated and are sometimes excited to acts of frantic violence. A madman, who had used ganja, would probably continue insane for months, if merely confined without medical treatment." Again (p. 541)— "It is a matter of popular notoriety both in Bengal and the North-West Provinces that persons intoxicated with ganja are liable to commit acts of homicidal violence; hence we find several cases in the Law Reports in which the accused urged the plea of intoxication by ganja in mitigation of their crimes." Dr. Chevers also mentions several cases of "running amuck," as it it called, where a man madly attacks and stabs every person whom he meets whilst he is in this state of frenzy. Dr. A. Hilson, late Inspector-General of Civil Hospitals, thus wrote in his Annual Reports of the Lunatic Asylums in Bengal (1890, p. 5), Statement VII, para. 14:—"Causes of Insanity.— one of the chief features in this return is the evidence it affords of the potency of ganjasmoking in the production of mental disease " Again (1891, p. 4) Statement VII, para. 15:— "As usual, this return shows that ganja smoking is the most potent cause of lunacy. The general opinion confirms this, and I am inclined to believe it." It has been ascertained that nearly 26 per cent. of the inmates of lunatic asylums are recruited from ganja-smokers.' The Indian Hemp Drugs Commission itself proved conclusively that the cannabis causes insanity myth was false. The Indian Relief Society then goes on to recommend how farmers cultivating ganja can be rescued from this "immoral trade". It says 'It is the duty of the Government to come to the rescue of the cultivators. Tobacco, chillies, potatoes and several other crops can be grown on the rich highlands which are now devoted to ganja. The venture would prove very remunerative, especially as a railway now runs through the heart of the ganja-growing country, which would open up the market for any kind of valuable produce. There can be little doubt that the cultivation of ganja could be easily suppressed by the authority of Government. Mr. Buckland writes as follows: "The same power which enacted the law now in force prohibiting the cultivation of ganja without the license of a Government official, could easily prohibit it altogether, either directly or indirectly. If the licenses were withdrawn, the cultivation would cease, or if the conditions on which the licenses were granted were made more difficult, the cultivators would no longer care to apply for them." Vide National Review, January 1884.' The Society even goes on to suggest to the Bengal Government how it can recoup the losses to revenue incurred from ganja prohibition. It states that 'The last point for consideration is how to recoup the loss of revenue to the Government resulting from the suppression of ganja and its subordinate varieties. It has been pointed out that the total revenue derived from the hemp drugs is nearly 24 lacs a year. An enlightened Government such as ours, it is to be hoped, is quite competent to devise means for the recoupment of a petty loss like this for such a cause as the emancipation of 80,000 people from the use of these degrading and demoralising drugs and for the welfare of the cultivators thereof who are being ruined by its cultivation. Suggestions. — A few suggestions may however be respectfully made:— I. Economy — A wise parsimony is one of India's greatest needs. Civil salaries of European officers in Egypt and Ceylon are much lower than those of European officers in India. With the increased facilities for communications with Europe and furlough, privileges, etc., the condition of service in India for Europeans has considerably changed. And surely the scale of pay and pensions of the said officers need revision. If, however, it is considered that Europeans cannot serve with a lower scale of pay, native agency in the Government might be more largely used and thereby an important economy might be effected, as they would not only serve with a lower scale of pay and pensions but also the large amount of payments for non-effectives will there by be greatly reduced. Retrenchment may also be effected in the cost of the annual migration to the hills and the subject of compensation allowances may be carefully considered. II. Duties on cotton goods might be reimposed. The price of the goods thereby raised would not bear hard upon the people. By this process the country products will also be protected. III. Income-tax might be increased raising the taxable minimum to Rs. 1,000. The rich are principally affected by it, the mass of the people are not. IV. Savings — By the suppression of the ganja trade, retrenchment in the excise establishment may also be effected. Not only reduction might be made on account of a good portion of the excise work having been taken away, but also certain number of Excise Officers might be profitably employed partly on excise and partly, say, on income-tax. The item of expenditure for rewards out of State funds for detection of offences against the Excise Law, would be diminished and at the same time an addition to the revenue by way of fines be made. Lastly — There is another aspect of the question. The suppression of the use of the hemp drugs would diminish, by about 30 per cent., the inmates of the State Lunatic Asylums, who are maintained at the cost of the Government. It may be reasonably inferred that the reduction of expenditure on this head on the State Lunatic Asylums would go some way to balance the loss of this item of excise revenue.'
Another dubious cannabis prohibition group that gave evidence against cannabis before the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission was the Total Abstinence Association. Babu Girish Chandar De, Delegate of the Total Abstinence Association, Bhawanipur, says in his evidence to the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission of 1894-95 that 'Kalighat is a great seat of ganja smoking, and I have seen many smokers. I have treated nearly a dozen of them for pneumonia, dysentery, and insanity. I have treated nearly half a dozen pneumonia cases, four or five of dysentery, and two of insanity, one of a violent and one of a mild type in ganja-smokers. One of the latter was debilitated and afflicted with boils. I have treated not less than 25 or 30 cases of pneumonia altogether. I have treated 100 or more cases of dysentery, and five cases of insanity, including the two ganja smokers mentioned above. This practice has been during the last three years. I should like to see ganja consumption restricted more than at present. That is my chief view in coming before the Commission. I do not wish for total prohibition. I do not know to what point restriction has gone at present. What I mean is that I want to see the drug less used by the people than I have seen it used in the places I know—Bhawanipur and Kalighat. Of other localities I could only speak from hearsay. Apart from Bhawanipur and Kalighat, all that I know about the consumption of the drug is what I have heard from the Secretary about the Chowbes of Muttra and the sanyasis of Budh Gaya. My personal experience leads me to favour restriction short of prohibition...I have seen so much of the evils caused by the drugs that restriction appears to me necessary. I have found people become pale and emaciated on beginning to smoke ganja, and after three or four months to become thoroughly changed for the worse, mentally and physically. I judge that these are the effects of the drug, because people, before using the drugs, were healthy and bright and intelligent. I have seen these effects in members of families I have visited in the course of my practice. I can remember at least a dozen cases which showed the above changes in three months. All these were sons of families I visited, and, except in one case, the other members of the families did not smoke. The young men were scapegraces who had taken to evil courses against the will of their families. Kalighat is probably worse than any other part of Calcutta in the matter of ganja smoking, and it is the evil effects I have seen there which make my heart bleed and make me wish to lay my views regarding restriction before Government. Ganja is worse than alcohol. Alcohol does not make people so utterly useless and worthless as ganja does, at least among respectable families. Among the lower classes also, I think ganja is the more harmful. This is my experience in Kalighat.' As to his own credentials, and qualifications for making the medical assessments that he claims to have made above, Babu Girish Chander De says 'My age is 30. I am L M.S. of the Calcutta University of the year 1889. I have been in private practice in Bhawanipur and Kalighat since that year. I am not M.B., as stated in the letter of the Secretary of the Society.'
A third prohibitionist group that gave evidence in favour of ganja prohibition to the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission of 1894-95 was a group called the Band of Hope from Faridpur. Babu Purna Chunder Maitra, Secretary, Band of Hope, Faridpur, states in his written evidence before the Commission that 'In consideration of the fact that it has been unreservedly condemned by eminent doctors as one of the most dangerous poisons known, as the most potent cause of lunacy, and as the most pernicious and deleterious of all excitants ever in use in any country, this Society is humbly of opinion that an entire prohibition of the preparation and sale under Government patronage, and total prohibition of ganja cultivation except for medicinal purposes will prove beneficial to the country, of course, under strict vigilance on the part of the local authorities as a safeguard against private cultivation. The principal arguments advanced against abolition of Government monopoly by the supporters of the ganja traffic are: (1) it will affect revenue which will have to be met by a fresh taxation; (2) it may create a spirit of disaffection among the jogis, sanyasis, fakirs, and mendicants whose number is not small; (3) ganja has the property of destroying malarial poisons and of neutralizing the effects of impure water; (4) it is a question whether the use of ganja is really doing more harm compared to other intoxicants; (5) abolition of Government monopoly will increase ganja consumption. The total abolition of the monopoly of the ganja traffic will indeed entail a loss of revenue, an amount compared to the total revenue "is not," as Sir Charles Elliott said in his recent speech at Naogaon, "so great that its loss would plunge the country into financial difficulties." So there need not be any apprehension of a fresh taxation to recoup the loss. There are in truth a number of jogis, sanyasis, fakirs, and mendicants addicted to ganja smoking, but ganja smoking forms no part of their religion, and there is not a single Hindu or Muhammadan religious book which sanctions the use of ganja. On the contrary, the Hindu Shastras and the Muhammadan Koran, like the Christian Bible, emphatically enjoin "touch not, smell not, taste not that which intoxicates and stupefies the brain." No real disaffection can, under the benign rule of the British Government, be seriously apprehended; and even in the event of there being any such apprehension, the fact should not be lost sight of that the Government in this case will have the support of the bulk of the population, against which the clamours of a discontented few will prove to be utterly unavailing. Ganja may or may not be a preventive for malarial fever. It will be for the medical authorities to pronounce whether it is; the Sanitary Commissioner in his annual report does not suggest. But it seems somewhat strange that the habitual use of the pernicious drug that stupefies and often deranges the brain and to an appreciable extent brutalizes the soul can be justified by its advocates as a preventive for malarial fever and a purifier of impure water. The question whether the use of ganja is really doing more harm compared to other intoxicants seems to be simply ridiculous in view of the opinions of medical experts, of the amount of crimes committed under its influence, and in view of the fact which experience tells us that ganja has a "special effect on some of the various animal passions, such as courage, anger, revenge and lust, and in renewing those lost or exciting those exhausted or depressed." Statement VII, of the reports of the lunatic asylums in Bengal for the years 1889, 1890, 1891, and 1892, shew that of the total admissions, 26.72 per cent. in 1889, 25.38 per cent. in 1890, 24.88 per cent. in 1891, and 23.49 per cent. in 1892, are attributed to Indian hemp. So in the opinion of Surgeon-Colonel J. G. Pilcher, F.R.C.S., Officiating Inspector-General of Civil Hospitals in Bengal "the use of ganja or other preparation of Indian hemp is by far the most fruitful cause of admissions throughout India. The next potent cause is spirit drinking, .... while the use of opium seems to give rise to comparatively little insanity in the community . . . ." (paragraph 19, Lunatic Asylums' Report, 1889),—vide also paragraph 14, paragraph 15, paragraph 12 of the Lunatic Asylums' Report for 1890, 1891, 1892, respectively. Mr. C. J. O'Donnell, Superintendent of Census Operations in Bengal, 1891, thus observes in respect of the use of ganja in his census report, Volume III, page 240: "Although it is possible that there may be a racial strain towards insanity in Northern and Eastern Bengal, it is very probable that the greater preference evinced by the people for toxic drugs, such as ganja or Indian hemp, must be taken into account. The intoxicants in use in Behar and Chota Nagpore, a dilute form of spirit obtained from the flower of the mohua tree, the fermented juice of the Palmyra palm and rice beer are all comparatively weak liquors and never known to induce mental disorder. Ganja, on the other hand, is unquestionably very deleterious, being recognized throughout Bengal as a brain excitant of a very dangerous kind." Benjamin Ward Richardson, M.A., F.R.S., thus observes: "We have, however, sufficient evidence of bad effect to be certain that the peculiar intoxication induced by the narcotic (hemp drug) is certainly destructive to sound mental life " (Abkari, January 1892, page 10). Brigade-Surgeon R. Pringle, M.D., in his note on ganja says: "the action of ganja on the system, when taken alone and without any controlling power, is very remarkable, and but little known on account of its rare occurrence, and appears to resemble that of no other drug in the absence of all narcotism, but yet combined with strange temporary loss of will power and that of memory, with inability to concentrate thought." Statement VII of the Lunatic Asylums' Report shows also the amount of crimes committed under ganja influence. A full and complete return on that head is not available. In Rajshahi (specially in Puthia and Nator) and Hughli districts most of the pilferings are imputed to the ganja and opium smokers. At the Faridpur Sessions during the current year two cases* of brutal murder (one of murdering a wife and child and the other of murdering a lame boy) have been tried, and the criminals declared to be insane, the cause of. insanity being attributed to ganja smoking. All these and the criminal propensities of the ganja. smokers lead to the irresistible conclusion that ganja is a real evil, not to speak of an annual drain of about 22 lakhs of rupees on the povertystricken and half-famished people of Bengal.. Then it is said that the abolition of Government monopoly will increase ganja consumption. If free cultivation is allowed, it will no doubt have that effect, but that is not what is wanted. The thing that is wanted is a prohibition of ganja cultivation altogether, except on a small scale for medical purposes, if necessary, and even that under the direct control and supervision of Government. The abolition of out-stills has caused a decrease in the consumption of country liquors; so entire prohibition of ganja cultivation will put a stop to ganja smoking. The greater the difficulty of attainment, the lesser the consumption. Ganja is not a food, much less a food of a "highly concentrated nature." So, if it is not available in the market, very few will care to cultivate it, specially when there would be apprehension of a criminal prosecution in case of detection, which, under the cautious vigilance of district authorities, will never be a difficult task. That habitual and hard ganja smokers can do without it admits of no doubt, but they will not give up the habit except under compulsion or sanction of the law. Ganja-smoking prisoners are forced to give it up as soon as they are incarcerated, and instances are not rare that inveterate ganja smokers come out corrected from jail, never indulging thereafter in the pernicious habit. It is very difficult to suggest a probable substitute for ganja. Liquor may be one, and a peculiar preparation of strong tobacco may also serve the purpose. But in all cases it will depend on a man's individual evil propensities and craving for intoxicants to take or not to take a substitute. In conclusion, this Society begs leave to urge upon the Commission to consider the justice and propriety of a just, benign and Christian Government to allow cultivation and sale of a drug which has been excluded from some countries, and in England doubly protected in the poison list.' In his oral evidence on being summoned before the Hemp Commission, Babu Purna Chunder Maitra states that 'The Band of Hope, Faridpur, is a Temperance Society. It numbers 474 members, the majority of whom belong to Faridpur. Quarterly and special meetings are held at Faridpur. A meeting was held in connection with the present subject, at which my letter, which had been previously drafted, was approved. I had been appointed to draw up the letter by the Executive Committee. The letter was approved by a general meeting. The Faridpur Band of Hope is affiliated with the Anglo-Indian Temperance Association of London. The authorities upon which the Association relies in framing the opinion stated in my letter are almost all quoted in the letter itself. After the Association approved my letter, there was no further consultation on the subject. I am not aware therefore of any other grounds, beyond those stated in the letter, for the opinion held by the Association. As regards the two cases quoted in paragraph 7, in which brutal murder is alleged to have been attributed to ganja-smoking, which brought on insanity in the criminals, there was evidence in the records of the cases that ganja had caused the insanity. In saying this I act upon information. I have no personal knowledge. I told the Association about these cases. When I submitted my draft I explained these cases. So far as I recollect, the Sessions clerk, who is a member of the Band of Hope, was my informant. I had heard rumours of these cases, and that led me to enquire about them. I do not know whether the Sessions clerk was aware, at the time I made enquiries of him, that his information was to be used in the Association's letter. I could not have taken any further steps to ascertain the facts of the cases. I did not attempt to see the records, because I believed it would be useless for an outsider to apply. I wanted simply to give the Commission a clue that they might find out the truth. I did not, however, recommend that the Commission should send for the records. I simply stated the cases as facts. When I found that the Commission was going to hear evidence, and not merely act upon the written statements, I attached less weight to written statements. I have, however, no accurate information now to give about these two cases.' The Note by the Hemp Commission appended to the evidence of Babu Purna Chandra Maitra read as follows - '(1) Madhab Nagarchi. Madhab Nagarchi was tried by the Sessions Judge, Faridpur, for murdering his wife and child and was acquitted on the ground of insanity on 10th July 1893. The only mention of ganja in the record is in the evidence of Mohan Nagarchi, uncle of the accused, who stated that " Madhab smokes ganja." This was before the Committing Magistrate. It was not repeated in his evidence before the Sessions Judge. This Mohan Nagarchi was alleged by the accused to have had an intrigue with the murdered woman, on account of which the accused took her life. Mohan Nagarchi and two other witnesses stated that the accused had been mad several years before and had then injured his mother; and six witnesses (including the above) stated that he had been mad for a day or two before the murder. He had also had a quarrel with his wife the day before. The Committing Magistrate attributed the crime to jealousy; but the Judge, to insanity. Neither mentions ganja. The Asylum papers show that "the lunatic's father had tendency to insanity; and that the probable cause of Madhab's own insanity was "natural tendency possibly made worse by smoking ganja." (2) Dhopai Khan. Dhopai Khan, apparently without motive, murdered a cripple boy on 20th October 1889. He was insane and not fit to be tried until 1893. The Sessions Judge acquitted him on the ground of insanity on 9th May 1893. There is no mention of ganja in the record, but the Judge states a letter from the Jail Superintendent in 1889 had given the "probable cause of insanity as ganja smoking:" the grounds for this statement which appears to have been made by an Assistant Surgeon are not apparent. The papers received at the Asylum from the Magistrate of Faridpur in 1890 show that the lunatic was not addicted to ganja or other intoxicants and that no cause could be assigned for his insanity. The Asylum Superintendent stated that the cause of insanity was unknown, and that the man was subject to relapses.' Here again we find extensive reference to lunatic asylum statistics linking cannabis to insanity, statistics that were found to be hugely erroneous by the Hemp Commission which ruled out any link between insanity and cannabis usage.
More than 80% of witnesses appearing before the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission were against prohibition of cannabis. This included medical experts, senior officials in administration and judiciary, and members of high standing in civil society. The persons in favor of prohibition were less than 15%. In summarizing the evidence of those in favor of cannabis prohibition in 19th century India, the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission had this to say 'The Bengal witnesses in favour of prohibition of ganja consist of a Sub Deputy Collector, an Assistant Surgeon, two Medical Practitioners, an Honorary Magistrate, two zamindars, two pleaders, a delegate from the Indian Relief Society, Calcutta, the Secretary to the Band of Hope, Faridpur, the Secretary to the Bogra Medical Society, and two Missionaries. The Commission cannot find much to quote from these opinions, but the following are the most forcible:— (238) Delegate, Indian Relief Society, Calcutta, Babu Amrita Krishna Mullick, B.A., B.L.: After quoting official and medical opinions relating to the injuriousness of ganja, the Society endeavours to show that the cultivators of the hemp plant lose largely by their occupation, and maintains that it is the duty of the Government to come to their rescue by abolishing it. The Society maintains that the privation to the consumers would not be serious, and that it is difficult to suggest any drug more deleterious than ganja to which they could take. The Society contends that the alleged religious sanction to the use of the drugs is a fallacy, and refers to the opinions of several pandits in support of this view. The Society argues that to meet the deficit in the revenue, which would be about 24 lakhs per annum, the salaries of European officers should be cut down, the duties on cotton goods re-imposed, and the income-tax increased with an enhanced taxable minimum. Savings would be effected by reduction of establishment and by decreased cost of lunatic asylums. (236) Secretary, Band of Hope Temperance Society, Faridpur, Babu Purna Chandra Maitra: "This Society begs to urge upon the Commission to consider the justice and propriety of a just, benign, and Christian Government to allow cultivation and sale of a drug which has been excluded from some countries, and in England doubly protected in the poison list." The witness argues that the drug "has been unreservedly condemned by eminent doctors as one of the most dangerous poisons known, as the most potent cause of lunacy, and as the most pernicious and deleterious of all excitants ever in use in any country." He admits that there are a number of jogis, sanyasis, fakirs, and mendicants addicted to ganja smoking, but states that ganja smoking forms no part of their religion, and there is not a single Hindu or Muhammadan religious book which sanctions the use of ganja. "No real disaffection can under the benign rule of the British Government be seriously apprehended, and, even in the event of there being such apprehension, the fact should not be lost sight of that the Government in this case will have the support of the bulk of the population." He alleges that ganja produces crime, and that the taxation, amounting to 22 lakhs, is a drain on the poverty-stricken and half-famished people of Bengal. He finds it difficult to suggest a substitute for ganja, but liquor may be one, and a peculiar preparation of strong tobacco may also serve the purpose. (134) Secretary to Bogra Medical Society (10 members), Pyari Sanker Dass Gupta, L. M. S.: "The prohibition will give rise to no political danger. For the ganja smokers have very little influence over society. The Government has faced questions of a greater religious character, as the Suttee or the Age of Consent Act, with boldness. This is comparatively a minor question affecting only depraved men." (203) Rev. W. B. Phillips, Missionary.: "What with liquor and opium and hemp drugs of various kinds, all licensed by Government, it does seem as if the population were terribly exposed to degrading influences. It is not my province to face the difficult task of dealing with these evils; and I sincerely sympathize with the Government in the heavy duty of solving the grave problems involved. But I do feel it my duty to set forth as strongly as possible the assurance that very much mischief is being worked in the country by the various intoxicants so freely and largely sold. I hardly care to distinguish between opium, alcohol, and ganja. I regard them all as bad. My mind is so impressed with the evil effects of excessive use that I do not care to consider the moderate use. I would wish Government to begin with ganja, to proceed with little delay against opium, and then tackle alcohol. I prefer this as a matter of policy, as ganja is easiest dealt with. I am prepared to prohibit all three intoxicants on account of the evil which I see done by them." (81) Kali Das Mukerji, Sub-Deputy Collector: After advocating prohibition of ganja on the grounds of the evil effects, and stating that there would be no danger from the discontent caused owing to the small number of the consumers, the witness proceeds: "The reasons usually put forward in favour of ganja consumption are as follows: (1) that Hindu friars and jogis cannot do without it, for it helps them in their religious contemplation, and sustains them under severe exertion and exposure; (2) that it is a safeguard against disease in malarious tracts; and (3) that it serves the labouring classes as a refreshing stimulant, alleviating fatigue. I do not think that any of these reasons is conclusive, though plausible. In fact, none of them stands the test of close examination. If any intoxicating drug is at all necessary for friars and jogis, alcohol, opium, or siddhi may serve the purpose. Eight kinds of intoxicating drugs are prescribed in the Tantras for Hindu devotees, and it is optional with them to take any if they care to do so at all.............................. That ganja is a safeguard against disease in malarious tracts is not necessarily true.............................. Even as a stimulant and remover of fatigue, ganja has very little to recommend it to the labouring classes............................... A careful observation is sure to establish the fact that any ordinary labourer whose only stimulant is tobacco is on the whole a better workman than his ganja consuming brother." '
In summarizing the evidence across India regarding cannabis prohibition, the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission of 1894-95 arrived at this conclusion - 'A general review of the evidence relating to the question of prohibition of ganja and charas brings the Commission to the same conclusion as that which they have framed upon a consideration of the evidence on the ascertained effects alone. The weight of the evidence above abstracted is almost entirely against prohibition. Not only is such a measure unnecessary with reference to the effects, but it is abundantly proved that it is considered unnecessary or impossible by those most competent to form an opinion on general grounds of experience; that it would be strongly resented by religious mendicants, or would be regarded as an interference with religion, or would be likely to become a political danger; and that it might lead to the use of dhatura or other intoxicants worse than ganja. Apart from all this, there is another consideration which has been urged in some quarters with a manifestation of strong feeling, and to which the Commission are disposed to attach some importance, viz., that to repress the hemp drugs in India and to leave alcohol alone would be misunderstood by a large number of persons who believe, and apparently not without reason, that more harm is done in this country by the latter than by the former. The conclusion of the Commission regarding bhang has been given in paragraph 564; under all the circumstances they now unhesitatingly give their verdict against such a violent measure as total prohibition in respect of any of the hemp drugs.'
Despite the overwhelming opposition to cannabis prohibition in India and the conclusions of the Commission, the British colonists went ahead and suppressed ganja and charas completely so that they could peddle their alcohol, tobacco and opium, in addition to the western pharmaceutical drugs that they brought in. The pattern of prohibition that we saw in India was replicated world wide by all governments that worked with these industries - aided ably by cannabis prohibitionist groups who provided the propaganda that mesmerized the herd. And, that is where we stand today with ganja and charas banned world wide, barring one or two exceptions.
NORML reports that '“In the lead up to legalization, professional associations … suggested that legalization posed a threat to public health, advocated for the legal age for cannabis use to be set at a minimum age of 21 or 25, or that Canada should not legalize at all because it would place youth at greater risk of harm. With such categorical fears now shown to be largely unfounded, this should provide the basis to move forward on more nuanced grounds. … [O]n the balance, cannabis legalization – especially when considering the severe adverse social impacts of criminalization, and especially for youth – continues to offer the potential to better protect and achieve consequential net benefits to public health and welfare of cannabis users and society at large.”' The prohibitionists, when confronted with scientific evidence that disproves the lies that they promote, will stick to their guns as long as their funding from the cannabis opposing industries continues. As soon as funding stops, the prohibitionist organization will fold up shop, rename themselves and start spreading the propaganda of the next funder, even if that is a cannabis advocacy group that asks them to say the exact opposite of what they were saying earlier. Leafly reports that 'Four years ago, prohibition groups fighting cannabis legalization were swimming in money. In 2016, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson spent millions in a failed effort to derail legalization. The Virginia-based philanthropist Julie Schauer donated tens of thousands of dollars to legalization opponents. Pharmaceutical giant Insys, maker of the opioid fentanyl, spent boatloads of cash to kill Arizona’s adult-use legalization initiative. In 2020, it’s a different story. Sheldon Adelson has given nothing to the fight against legalization. Julie Schauer hasn’t been heard from except in New Jersey, where she’s donated $500 to an opposition group known as Don’t Let New Jersey Go To Pot. Insys’ high-flying political days ended when founder John Kapoor was sentenced to five years in prison for bribery and fraud. Several other Insys executives were also charged and convicted.' As I said, in this sense, the cannabis prohibitionist advocate is no different than the politician or the celebrity who will endorse anything for a few bucks. Regarding the way that a prohibitionist is just as likely to support legalization, when the situation demands it, Leafly reports that 'Price’s license is a reminder that the fight for equity in the cannabis industry must continue with redoubled vigor. We fight for perfect justice and fairness in opportunity, even while knowing we will fall short. We welcome new allies even as our eyes are open to their past sins and failures—because those new allies can help us correct those failures and remedy those harms. But there is, in that mix of queasy feelings about Tom Price, an urgent demand for something from Price himself. That something is atonement. When a former prohibitionist—especially one who actively propped up prohibition, the War on Drugs, and mass incarceration—embraces legalization, that embrace should include a public acknowledgement that the harms of the past were exactly that. Harms. This is a bipartisan ask. Whether it’s Tom Price or Joe Biden, there’s a need to say “I was wrong. I am sorry. And I will work to heal the harm I caused.”'
Cannabis prohibition advocacy groups actively meddle with the democratic process in many US states. Regarding their role in Ohio, where the people voted for cannabis legalization, NORML reports that 'Prohibitionist groups, along with some of the state’s top lawmakers,
have publicly called for legislative changes to the state’s
voter-approved marijuana legalization law. Fifty-seven percent of
voters approved Issue 2 on Election Day, which legalizes the
possession, home cultivation, and retail sale of cannabis. In the days
prior, Republican Gov. Mike DeWine urged voters to decide against the
initiative. Members of the GOP-led Senate also passed a resolution
condemning the measure – claiming that it would bring “unacceptable
threats and risks to the health of all Ohioans, especially children.” In
the days following the vote, Senate President Matt Huffman stated, “The
General Assembly may consider amending the statute.” The governor has
also called for legislative changes to the law before its enactment
date, December 7, 2023. Because the proposed measure was put
before voters as a statutory question rather than a constitutional
amendment, state lawmakers can amend or repeal its provisions.'
The infamous 'Just Say No' anti-drug campaign by Nancy Reagan is a classic example of the cannabis prohibitionist. This was happening even as her husband facilitated the strengthening of the foundations of the opioid, cocaine and methamphetamine crisis in the US today; even as he and subsequent presidents worked to reinforce what people like Nixon had begun; even as the US readied itself to give the petrochemical and arms industry a boost through global wars that are now burning wilder than even before. Hunter Thompson had this to say about the Reagans in his book Fear and Loathing at the Rolling Stone - 'If politics is the art of controlling your environment, Nancy is a master politician and probably a lot more fun to live with and work and travel with than ever suspected. She has been the Best That She Can Be, and she has come a Very Long Way for a Size 2 Anorexic Dwarf. Jesus! What is she'd looked like Marilyn Monroe? She (allegedly) had the morals of a slut on acid and behaved like a beast while the president was stoned day and night, and all that time she was talking about remodelling the White House in the style of Dolley Madison or Grandma Moses, she was acting like Linda Lovelace and Christine Keeler and Madame Defarge all at once. They turned the whole East Wing of the White House into a Cave of Orgies and a dope den worse than anything in Singapore...It was horrible...and the press never noticed. They called him John Wayne, but he was weirder than Caligula, and the weirder he got, the more the voters loved him and the more respect he got from Ted Koppel.' Today's US President, Joe Biden, won the presidential elections partly for his supposedly pro-cannabis stance. Most people had forgotten that he was the one who set up the Office of the Drug Czar which spent significant effort to suppress cannabis and keep it prohibited. Biden continues to do just that while making just enough noises to appear to be on the side of cannabis legalization - even as the majority of Americans demand federal legalization, and even as 24 US states have legalized adult recreational use. Modern medical evidence has confirmed that there is no link between
cannabis and insanity, with the UN re-scheduling cannabis from its most
restrictive category to its least restrictive category of controlled
substances in December 2020. Countries like Canada, Uruguay, Germany, Malta and Luxembourg have legalized recreational cannabis for adult use, as have 24 US states at the time of writing. The Supreme Court of Mexico and the Constitutional Court of South Africa have ruled that the prohibition of cannabis violates the fundamental rights of the individual.
Related articles
Prohibitionist groups, along with some of the state’s top lawmakers, have publicly called for legislative changes to the state’s voter-approved marijuana legalization law.
Fifty-seven percent of voters approved Issue 2 on Election Day, which legalizes the possession, home cultivation, and retail sale of cannabis. In the days prior, Republican Gov. Mike DeWine urged voters to decide against the initiative. Members of the GOP-led Senate also passed a resolution condemning the measure – claiming that it would bring “unacceptable threats and risks to the health of all Ohioans, especially children.”
In the days following the vote, Senate President Matt Huffman stated, “The General Assembly may consider amending the statute.” The governor has also called for legislative changes to the law before its enactment date, December 7, 2023.
Because the proposed measure was put before voters as a statutory question rather than a constitutional amendment, state lawmakers can amend or repeal its provisions.
https://norml.org/news/2023/11/16/ohio-lawmakers-prohibitionist-groups-call-for-legislative-reforms-to-voter-approved-marijuana-legalization-law/
'Meanwhile, the largest committee working against the initiative, Healthy and Productive Michigan, is reporting a sizable new contribution of $75,000 from national prohibition organization Smart Approaches to Marijuana, which has already provided over $1 million in cash and in-kind services to the effort. The prohibitionist committee also reported $100,000 from Dow Chemical Corporation.'
https://www.marijuanamoment.net/more-money-flows-to-michigan-and-missouri-marijuana-ballot-initiative-campaigns/
'Sabet's idea of replacing arrests with warnings, citations and small fines is a far cry, however, from what most drug reformers have in mind. Although he says SAM is still formulating its approach and aims for flexibility, the recommendations in the "model legislation" on the group's website read almost like a parody of bureaucratic overreach.
Low-level offenders—which SAM typically defines as someone caught smoking weed in public or carrying more than 10 grams of cannabis for personal use—could face a "mandatory assessment of problem drug use after the first citation." Those found to have a drug problem would be sent for treatment; those who do not could be sent to social services to address "other life factors" that might be contributing to drug use.'
https://www.crainsnewyork.com/features/slowing-legal-weed-freight-train
'Former Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI), co-founder of the anti-marijuana group Smart Approaches to Marijuana, spoke out against the legalization bill and sparred with lawmakers. At one point, he was asked whether he believes alcohol should be prohibited—and after hesitating to respond, he said he did not but that alcohol advertisements should be more tightly regulated.'
https://www.marijuanamoment.net/watch-new-jersey-lawmakers-debate-marijuana-legalization-ahead-of-critical-vote/
'The man behind SAM is Kevin Sabet, a former advisor for the federal Office of National Drug Control Policy during the Bill Clinton, George Bush, and Barack Obama administrations. Sabet started SAM in 2013 with Patrick Kennedy, the son of the late Ted Kennedy and a former Rhode Island congressman. SAM “envisions a society where marijuana policies are aligned with the scientific understanding of marijuana’s harms, and the commercialization and normalization of marijuana are no more,” according the group’s website.'
https://cannabiswire.com/2018/10/03/an-anti-cannabis-crusader-ramps-up-for-the-midterms-and-beyond/
'Let's give Nancy all the credit she deserves. The Democrats have lost five out of the last six presidential elections, so maybe they can learn something from this book instead of just giggling about it. Kitty Dukakis, among others, might have put this evil handbook to good use if it had been available back in 1988. But, alas...
If politics is the art of controlling your environment, Nancy is a master politician and probably a lot more fun to live with and work and travel with than ever suspected. She has been the Best That She Can Be, and she has come a Very Long Way for a Size 2 Anorexic Dwarf. Jesus! What is she'd looked like Marilyn Monroe?
She (allegedly) had the morals of a slut on acid and behaved like a beast while the president was stoned day and night, and all that time she was talking about remodelling the White House in the style of Dolley Madison or Grandma Moses, she was acting like Linda Lovelace and Christine Keeler and Madame Defarge all at once.
They turned the whole East Wing of the White House into a Cave of Orgies and a dope den worse than anything in Singapore...It was horrible...and the press never noticed. They called him John Wayne, but he was weirder than Caligula, and the weirder he got, the more the voters loved him and the more respect he got from Ted Koppel.'
- The Taming of the Shrew, May 30, 1991, Fear and Loathing at the Rolling Stone, The Essential Writing of Hunter S. Thompson
What you call action is a running-away from pain, a not-wanting-to-be-born, a flight from suffering! You, or your fathers, called it 'action' when you bustled about night and day in shops and factories, when you heard many many hammers hammering, when you blew quantities of soot into the air. Don't misunderstand me, I have nothing against your hammers, your soot, or your fathers. But I cannot help smiling when you speak of your bustling as 'action'. It was not action, it was merely a flight from suffering. It was painful to be alone - and so men established societies. It was painful to hear all manner of voices within you, demanding that you live your own lives, seek your own destiny, die your own death - it was painful, and so you ran away, and made noise with hammers and machines, until the voices receded and fell silent. That is what your fathers did, that is what your teachers did, and that is what you yourselves did. Suffering was demanded of you - and you were indignant you didn't want to suffer, you wanted only to act! And what did you do? First, in your strange occupations you sacrificed to the god of deafening noise, you were so busy with your activity that you had no time to suffer, to hear, to breathe, to drink the milk of life and the light of heaven. No, you had to be active, perpetually active, perpetually doing. And when the fuss and bustle proved futile, when the destiny within you, instead of ripening into sweetness, decayed and turned into poison, you multiplied your activity, you created enemies for yourselves, first in your imagination, then in reality; you went to war, you became soldiers and heroes. You have made conquests, you have borne insane hardships and done gigantic deeds. And now? Are you content? Are your hearts happy and serene? Is destiny sweet to your taste? No, it is bitterer than ever, and that is why you are clamouring for more action, rushing into the streets, storming and shouting. electing councils, and loading your guns again. All because you are forever in flight from suffering! In flight from yourselves, from your souls!
- Zarathustra's Return, A Word to German Youth, 1919, If The War Goes On, Herman Hesse
'They conclude: “In the lead up to legalization, professional associations … suggested that legalization posed a threat to public health, advocated for the legal age for cannabis use to be set at a minimum age of 21 or 25, or that Canada should not legalize at all because it would place youth at greater risk of harm. With such categorical fears now shown to be largely unfounded, this should provide the basis to move forward on more nuanced grounds. … [O]n the balance, cannabis legalization – especially when considering the severe adverse social impacts of criminalization, and especially for youth – continues to offer the potential to better protect and achieve consequential net benefits to public health and welfare of cannabis users and society at large.”'
https://norml.org/blog/2021/08/17/analysis-marijuana-legalization-opponents-fears-have-not-come-to-fruition-in-canada/
'Four years ago, prohibition groups fighting cannabis legalization were swimming in money.
In 2016, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson spent millions in a failed effort to derail legalization. The Virginia-based philanthropist Julie Schauer donated tens of thousands of dollars to legalization opponents. Pharmaceutical giant Insys, maker of the opioid fentanyl, spent boatloads of cash to kill Arizona’s adult-use legalization initiative.
In 2020, it’s a different story. Sheldon Adelson has given nothing to the fight against legalization. Julie Schauer hasn’t been heard from except in New Jersey, where she’s donated $500 to an opposition group known as Don’t Let New Jersey Go To Pot. Insys’ high-flying political days ended when founder John Kapoor was sentenced to five years in prison for bribery and fraud. Several other Insys executives were also charged and convicted.'
https://www.leafly.com/news/politics/who-are-2020s-top-marijuana-legalization-campaign-donors-weve-got-all-the-data
'While the expanding cannabis legalization movement shows that most of the world believes cannabis to be a relatively safe substance, the stigma around cannabis use, particularly the intoxicating high caused by THC, persists. But Ben Pollara, among others, argues that THC is one of the most beneficial aspects of the plant.
“THC is one of many chemicals in marijuana but is by far and away the most active one,” Pollara writes. “It is also the one which produces the most and strongest medicinal effects for patients.”'
https://www.leafly.com/news/politics/prohibitionists-want-thc-limit-laws-heres-why-patients-and-consumers-are-fighting-back
'She claimed she’s only smoked pot one time her entire life, but “didn’t like the way it made me feel.” It’s a little ambiguous when and where it happened, but she said she “really did it” onstage as “part of my schtick” at the Los Angeles Forum in the 1970s. This is likely a reference to the shows in 1972 that were fundraisers for Senator George McGovern’s presidential campaign, later released as an album. For other substances, Streisand said she does enjoy beer now and then, as complement to Chinese or Italian food. (She also enjoys non-alcoholic beer.)'
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/08/barbra-streisand-on-marijuana-her-and-cd-players-in-the-car
'Price’s license is a reminder that the fight for equity in the cannabis industry must continue with redoubled vigor. We fight for perfect justice and fairness in opportunity, even while knowing we will fall short. We welcome new allies even as our eyes are open to their past sins and failures—because those new allies can help us correct those failures and remedy those harms.
But there is, in that mix of queasy feelings about Tom Price, an urgent demand for something from Price himself. That something is atonement.
When a former prohibitionist—especially one who actively propped up prohibition, the War on Drugs, and mass incarceration—embraces legalization, that embrace should include a public acknowledgement that the harms of the past were exactly that. Harms. This is a bipartisan ask. Whether it’s Tom Price or Joe Biden, there’s a need to say “I was wrong. I am sorry. And I will work to heal the harm I caused.”'
https://www.leafly.com/news/politics/how-should-we-react-when-a-prohibitionist-wins-a-marijuana-license
'There are some things, Jann, that we know in our hearts, are Ugly, and this book is one of them. It is old swill in a new bottle, a squalid take from a squalid time that unfortunately seems to be ours. There is something weird about any calendar that has the Year of the Weasel happening thirteen times in a row.
Anyway, thanx for the review copy of Kelly's book on Nancy. It was good for a few laughs, but not many. And there is meaning in it, for sure, but not much. It is an ugly, mean little package that made me feel cheap for just reading it or even holding the thing in my hands.
This book is a monument to everything low and mean in the human spirit. It is a marketing triumph for that dingbat from Simon and Schuster, but it is far too wrong and repugnant to keep around the house, and last night I had to get rid of it. My friend Simon Luckett took it away and jammed it into a garbage compactor, along with a case of old beer bottles. He was shocked and deeply embarrassed when he opened the book to page 14 and saw the Nancy Davis Reagan family tree, which shows that both he and Nancy are descended from the same family of Lucketts that left Maryland and fled westward around the turn of the century, when the family name came under a cloud of scandal. "My mama never talked about it," he said, "but she always left the room whenever that woman appeared on the TV set...Good Lord, I hope she never sees this book." He seized it off the table and stood up to leave. "Don't worry," he muttered. "I'll put it where it belongs."
- The Taming of the Shrew, May 30, 1991, Fear and Loathing at the Rolling Stone, The Essential Writing of Hunter S. Thompson
