- Joined
- Jan 23, 2013
- Messages
- 30,630
The US used to tax and regulate drugs — not ban them
Updated by German Lopez on September 22, 2014
The most important period for the war on drugs may not have been the 1970s, when President Richard Nixon declared the war and Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act, or even the early 20th century, when lawmakers approved new taxes and regulations that effectively prohibited the distribution of certain drugs (dubbed narcotics) for recreational use.
Instead, historian Kathleen Frydl argues the most important moments may have occurred from the 1940s to the 1970s — as lawmakers began transitioning the war on drugs from a tax-and-regulate model to a criminalization approach.
In The Drug Wars in America, 1940-1973, Frydl argues policymakers of the period ramped up their anti-drug efforts as a means of building the government's power — both to legitimize increased police authority at home and justify new international incursions abroad. I sat down with Frydl on Friday to discuss her book, the war on drugs, and what we can expect in future drug policy.
German Lopez: What do you think is often missed in discussions of the war on drugs?
Kathleen Frydl: Most of the drug war literature discusses the war on drugs as either a racial and class agenda, or it discusses the war on drugs as a response to modernity and the disorder that modernity produces. I don't disagree with either line of argument, but I think both of them miss the actual "how." How did the state move from regulating drugs via a tax regime — taxes and tariffs — to a criminal punishment and prohibitive regime?
The "how" part of the story actually supplements both arguments: the race and class argument, and the struggles to deal with modernity. That new layer and frame of reference is that of the state, and how the state made choices to manage its power at the dawn of America's global ascendance. How the state made choices to manage its power proved just as consequential to the formulation of the modern drug war as race, class, and modernity.
This fine article is continued here http://www.vox.com/2014/9/22/6559791/war-on-drugs-history-1950s-1960s-kathleen-fryd
............................................................................................................................................................
Kathleen J Frydl
B.A. (1994) University of California, Davis; M.A. (1996) University of Chicago; Ph.D. (2000) University of Chicago
Assistant Professor, University of California, Berkeley, 2003-present; Program Officer, National Academies, 2000-2003
Updated by German Lopez on September 22, 2014
The most important period for the war on drugs may not have been the 1970s, when President Richard Nixon declared the war and Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act, or even the early 20th century, when lawmakers approved new taxes and regulations that effectively prohibited the distribution of certain drugs (dubbed narcotics) for recreational use.
Instead, historian Kathleen Frydl argues the most important moments may have occurred from the 1940s to the 1970s — as lawmakers began transitioning the war on drugs from a tax-and-regulate model to a criminalization approach.
In The Drug Wars in America, 1940-1973, Frydl argues policymakers of the period ramped up their anti-drug efforts as a means of building the government's power — both to legitimize increased police authority at home and justify new international incursions abroad. I sat down with Frydl on Friday to discuss her book, the war on drugs, and what we can expect in future drug policy.
German Lopez: What do you think is often missed in discussions of the war on drugs?
Kathleen Frydl: Most of the drug war literature discusses the war on drugs as either a racial and class agenda, or it discusses the war on drugs as a response to modernity and the disorder that modernity produces. I don't disagree with either line of argument, but I think both of them miss the actual "how." How did the state move from regulating drugs via a tax regime — taxes and tariffs — to a criminal punishment and prohibitive regime?
The "how" part of the story actually supplements both arguments: the race and class argument, and the struggles to deal with modernity. That new layer and frame of reference is that of the state, and how the state made choices to manage its power at the dawn of America's global ascendance. How the state made choices to manage its power proved just as consequential to the formulation of the modern drug war as race, class, and modernity.
This fine article is continued here http://www.vox.com/2014/9/22/6559791/war-on-drugs-history-1950s-1960s-kathleen-fryd
............................................................................................................................................................
Kathleen J Frydl
B.A. (1994) University of California, Davis; M.A. (1996) University of Chicago; Ph.D. (2000) University of Chicago
Assistant Professor, University of California, Berkeley, 2003-present; Program Officer, National Academies, 2000-2003
