Letters

Letters

Cannabis: Hemper Fidelis…

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

Cannabis: Hemper Fidelis

Our special issue on pot, “Dope and Change” [Nov. 18], despite occasioning some canceled subscriptions, epithets (“childish,” “deplorable,” “dishonest,” “irresponsible”) and a cry of outrage (“a whole issue on marijuana? This is not news”), was highly popular: “makes good sense,” “long overdue,” “appreciated,” “thank you for your excellent issue on the marijuana law insanity.” Said “Don Quixokie” of Tulsa, “I am pleased with the way society is moving on the marijuana issue, but I fear the government won’t be joining us for another generation. Don’t hold your breath—unless you’ve taken a big drag.” Your letters and comments follow. —The editors


What were your editorial writers smoking when they wrote that pot-smoker George W. Bush was “elected” president?  

Rick Baum
oakland, calif.


Thank you for finally printing the words “endocannabinoid system” (ECS). This remarkable medical discovery has been ignored for twenty years by journalists and the medical establishment to their discredit. All the medicinal cannabis laws and regulations have been designed by folks with no medical education. Absurd. See medicalcannabis.com for an ECS briefing.

Al Byrne, USN, ret. Founder and director, Veterans for Medical Cannabis Access
howardsville, va.


I am amused that taxation and control are considered the answer to the marijuana legalization conundrum. What pleasure will we tax next? Spinning with our arms out until we fall over from dizziness—one of our earliest experiments as children in altered consciousness?

clathey


I’m disappointed by Carl L. Hart’s assertion that organizations like the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) and NORML are dismissive of the racial injustice inherent in marijuana prohibition. Just because an advocacy group does not discuss only a single aspect of an issue does not mean it is dismissive of that issue. There are many reasons to repeal prohibition. MPP has long made the case about racial injustice stemming from prohibition. Here are just a couple examples:

When the ACLU released its report earlier this year on marijuana arrests and the stark racial disparities in each state, MPP coordinated with it to ensure the report received news coverage nationwide. For example, U.S. News & World Report quoted me: “Marijuana prohibition laws are not only irrational, but also unfair. Discrimination against communities of color played a role in their creation and it continues to play a role in their enforcement.”

The campaign in support of Amendment 64 in Colorado—largely coordinated and funded by MPP—sought to highlight racial injustice. It secured endorsements from the NAACP, the Colorado Latino Forum, the ACLU and the Colorado Progressive Coalition.

We also coordinated with the Drug Policy Alliance, which commissioned a major study on racial disparities in Colorado, to generate a major media hit around it, then publicized the information throughout the campaign. In fact, it was the first report ever to document arrests among Latinos, as all other studies had only specified the differences between blacks and whites. 

So, will MPP drop everything to focus 100 percent of its efforts on highlighting the racial injustice of marijuana prohibition? No, we will not. Will we incorporate that into the broader discussion about the need to end marijuana prohibition? Yes, we will.

Mason Tvert
Director of communications, MPP
denver


You asked, “Why is pot still classified as a dangerous drug?” The answer is that Harry Anslinger committed racist perjury on May 11, 1937, when he told the House Ways and Means Committee during hearings on the Marijuana Tax Act (over the opposition of the AMA’s lobbyist, Dr. William Woodward) that “marijuana…is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind,” and was “smoked by Hispanics, Filipinos, Negroes and entertainers; their satanic music, jazz and swing, is caused from smoking marijuana. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes.” The horror of miscegenation trumped medical science. His “dangerous drug” lie lives on. Dr. Woodward called cannabis a “harmless medicine” that “was available in pharmacies” and “had appeared in the pharmacopoeia of approved medicines since 1870.” 

Robert W. Holdenvenzon
san diego


When our children were teens, my wife and I became aware that they were smoking pot. I consulted the medical library where I was a professor of surgery and found an article from Harvard that detailed the psycho-physiological effects of marijuana. It concluded that marijuana was no more dangerous than an aspirin tablet.

In those days, some of my cancer patients were being treated with chemotherapy, which caused them to vomit and lose their appetite. I knew marijuana suppressed nausea, but I could not let them smoke a joint in the hospital setting.

I was familiar with Alice B. Toklas’s recipe for brownies, which I baked and gave to my patients. They were able to eat, and many actually gained weight while on chemotherapy.

Cliff Straehley, MD, FACS
walnut creek, calif.


In 1965, we lowered the shades in the living room and for the first time partook of the weed while Bob Dylan or Ravi Shankar filled out the ambience. It was “street weed,” roughly $10 an ounce and not bad. The whole experience was clandestine and almost scary. Later, having got hold of a few seeds, we managed to grow a scraggly little plant and produce some smokable stuff—mainly the leaves. As time passed we graduated to sinsemilla, bought by the kilo, and smoked the buds. Just a couple of hits lasted a very long time, time to make a fresh peach taste like ambrosia. There was a ritual of clearing out the stems. I can still see it, piled up on the bedroom floor, awaiting distribution into baggies—not for sale, just for pleasure—stuffing the baggies was part of the ritual. 

Nature is full of great surprises—some of them as much fun and innocent as potatoes or chocolate, or as medicinally beneficial as aspirin. Put on a good Earl Gardner album and lean back and take a hit. It’s good; it’s smooth; it’s desirable; it’s nature.

Miguel Rostov
santa rosa, calif.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x