Here, have some drugs

I pointed out last year something I thought was so blindingly obvious that it didn’t make any sense to keep up the charade. If anything, we should know by now that anything can be abused where it previously had some legitimate purpose.

And medical companies made good money pumping us full of this stuff.

Bayer was one of the premier providers of today's poisons.

This bottle was from 1901

Let's cure that cough with Heroin!

And CocaCola was an early supporter of cocain. In fact, the name of the company comes from this particular ingredient.

Relieves tension, by removing your inhibitions

Of course, the academic community also encouraged it. As this Scientific American article from 1906

Of course, it wouldn’t be fair if we left cigarettes out of this. After all, doctors loved Camels.

I wonder if any of these doctors are still alive... Probably not.

Even our former persident, the late Ronald Reagan enjoyed Chesterfields. Incidently, the brand got some attention again for being used in the movie True Romance in a part called the “Sicilian scene”.

Ronald Reagan loves a good smoke

And, of course, Santa loved Pall-Malls.

I imagine it gets a bit chilly up there.

Or is it Lucky Strike?

Does St. Nick get tired of being dragged in to be the posterboy for competing products?

Advertisement

Producer of Marihuana

Yes, it’s real folks… And no it isn’t me.

Courtesy of the Library of Congress

So what magically changed between 1945 and today?

Legislation of morality does nothing but take the burden away from personal responsibility. Making it illegal hasn’t stopped it at all and, in fact, has given rise to a thriving community of criminals. Apparently we’ve learned nothing from prohibition. The similarities are blindingly obvious, yet somehow the exception in this ban.

What was once a business that was taxed just as alcohol was, suddenly became the demon of society.

But the big difference between alcohol isn’t the substance itself. It’s the culture that gave rise to its widespread popularity. It’s the customers and producers and their lifestyle. And not one of these categories matched the politicians’ view of the upright citizen who would brew, licensed, alcohol.

How is the person high on alcohol any less of a danger than the one on Ambien or Johnnie Walker? Let’s re-ban alcohol and institute new bans on prescription medication then. We are all for equality under the law, aren’t we?

And the claims that “Buying marihuana will help terrorists”? And I suppose Al Capone was Gandhi back then? The “terrorists” go for whatever makes them the most money in a short period of time. For all we know they’re probably renting houses to former owners of foreclosed homes. Maybe we should ban renting as well.

The reason they’re able to channel money away is because it’s illegal to produce here. And all for a century old bias. You want to stop the money flow? Stop making it illegal and tax it instead. You will never ever prevent people from doing whatever they please so might as well solve two problems at once.

Disclaimer

I am in no way condoning the use of drugs (illegal or otherwise). I’m merely pointing out the glaring hypocrisy between the eras.

With all their flaws, the government just a half-century ago saw the wisdom of taxing a vice to bring in revenue. Not all old ideas are obsolete.