The criminalization of industrial hemp is a puzzling chapter in the history of agriculture and in its legalization. Hemp has always been a profitable and adaptable crop with a wide range of industrial uses. But a number of legislative limitations put in place during the 20th century resulted in its outlaw ship and marginalization.
We shall look at the factors that led to the decision to outlaw industrial hemp in this article, as well as the historical setting that influenced it. We may dispel the myths and biases that have surrounded this wonderful plant for years by comprehending the causes that led to its prohibition.
Historical Background of the Criminalization of Industrial Hemp
We must examine industrial hemp’s lengthy and heavily impacted historical past in order to comprehend why it was rendered illegal. Beginning in the early 20th century, the plot is set mostly in the United States, where hemp farming was a booming agricultural industry.
Hemp was highly prized during this time period for its adaptability and used as a main raw material for many different industries. It served as a raw material for the manufacture of textiles, paper, rope, fuel, and even food. Government programmer encouraged and supported hemp production, and farmers were given incentives to do so. The growth of anti-cannabis sentiment in the 1930s, however, marked a turning point in the situation.
A number of events came together in the 1930s to make cannabis, which comprised both industrial hemp and marijuana, illegal. The political environment around drug control and racial prejudices was one of the main initiators. Moral panic and public image, which was frequently fostered by disinformation and fear, had an impact on the prevailing views towards cannabis.
The 1936 release of the movie “Reefer Madness” was one significant factor. In this propaganda movie, marijuana—including industrial hemp—was depicted as a deadly narcotic that might cause addiction, violence, and moral decline. It portrayed false and exaggerated scenarios that caused fear in the public by associating marijuana with criminal activity. The movie “Reefer Madness” significantly influenced popular opinion and helped to paint an unfavorable picture of marijuana.
The Marijuana Tax Act was enacted by the US Congress in 1937, building on this momentum. Although hemp was not specifically prohibited by the act, it was subject to harsh tariffs and controls regarding its production, possession, and distribution. Hemp output significantly decreased as a result of these regulations, which rendered it unfeasible from an economic standpoint for farmers and enterprises to continue cultivating it.
Behind the scenes, political and business forces also contributed to the prohibition of hemp. Industries pushed for hemp’s ban because they were threatened by its adaptability and rivalry. For instance, the paper industry considered hemp as a direct rival, especially in the process of making paper pulp. Influential people with ties to the lumber business, including William Randolph Hearst, actively contributed to the stigmatization of hemp through the media.
Additionally, the development of synthetic materials and fibers like nylon and polyester posed a direct threat to goods made from hemp. These sectors see hemp as a danger to their market share and financial success. The public’s opinion of cannabis as a whole, including industrial hemp, as a harmful substance, has been affected by the combined efforts of many companies, with political support.
The lack of differentiation between hemp and marijuana also contributed to the banning of industrial hemp. Although they both come from the Cannabis sativa plant species, hemp and marijuana have different chemical makes-ups. The psychoactive substance tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which is the cause of the “high” associated with marijuana, is present in hemp in very small amounts. Confusion and misunderstandings resulted from the general public’s lack of understanding of this scientific distinction.
Finally, it should be noted that the prohibition of industrial hemp was a difficult process driven by sociological, political, and economic considerations. The moral panic, racial prejudices, and disinformation that fed the anti-cannabis fervor played a big part.
Additionally, hemp’s ban was influenced by lobbying by sectors that were threatened by its adaptability and competition, as well as by the ambiguity surrounding the distinction between hemp and marijuana. It is essential to comprehend this historical background in order to debunk myths and appreciate the potential advantages of industrial hemp.
Why was Industrial Hemp Made Illegal?
Political, economic, and societal issues all had a role in the banning of industrial hemp. Even if it could be perplexing at the moment, knowing the circumstances that led to its ban clarifies the thinking behind this choice. The following are some important elements that helped make industrial hemp illegal:
- Anti Cannabis Sentiment: Early in the 20th century, there was an increasing anti-cannabis sentiment that was mostly motivated by moral panic and racial prejudices. Cannabis, which includes both marijuana and hemp, came to be linked with demeaning stereotypes, criminal activity, and degradation of society. Propaganda tactics, like the movie “Reefer Madness,” which presented cannabis as a harmful narcotic that leads to lunacy and immorality, strengthened this perception.
- Lack of Differentiation: The failure to separate industrial hemp from marijuana was a significant contributor to its prohibition. Although they both come from the Cannabis sativa plant, hemp and marijuana have different properties. Low concentrations of THC, the psychoactive substance that gives marijuana its euphoric effects, can be found in hemp. However, the general public and policymakers frequently did not understand this distinction, which resulted in a blanket approach to prohibiting all cannabis products.
- Economic and Corporate interest: Economic and business concerns have had an impact on the banning of industrial hemp. Hemp was viewed as a threat to the earnings and market domination of several sectors. For instance, because hemp fiber can be used to make paper and pulp, the paper industry perceived hemp as a direct competitor. Along with the petrochemical industry, the developing synthetic fiber industry regarded hemp as a competitor to its goods. These sectors had a big impact in influencing public opinion and pushing for its outlawry.
- Political factors: The outlawing of industrial hemp was influenced by political forces. Legislation and policies were impacted by the lobbying activities of powerful individuals and special interest organizations. For instance, media tycoon William Randolph Hearst, who had substantial holdings in the wood sector, was instrumental in the demonization of hemp through his publications. In addition, the Great Depression and the demand for centralized government control created a political environment that was favorable to severe controls on drugs that were seen as hazardous.
- Limited Knowledge and Research: At the time of its prohibition, there was little thorough scientific knowledge on cannabis. There has been little research on the characteristics and possible advantages of hemp, and there are many myths. This lack of information made it difficult to distinguish industrial hemp from marijuana and to emphasize its potential benefits to the economy and the environment.
- It is essential to remember that industrial hemp’s prohibition was not a global occurrence. While hemp was illegal, certain nations, like China and Canada, continued to grow the crop. Hemp was subject to rigorous regulations and was regarded as a restricted drug in the US and many other nations.
- The tide has started to change in recent years as myths and biases against hemp have been addressed by increased knowledge, academic study, and changing public views. Because of hemp’s potential for economic growth, advantages for the environment, and adaptability across a range of industries, efforts to legalize and control its production have gained traction.
Conclusion
Finally, it should be noted that the prohibition of industrial hemp was a difficult process driven by sociological, political, and economic considerations. The moral panic, racial prejudices, and disinformation that fed the anti-cannabis fervor played a big part. Additionally, hemp’s ban was influenced by lobbying by sectors that were threatened by its adaptability and competition, as well as by the ambiguity surrounding the distinction between hemp and marijuana.
It is essential to comprehend this historical background in order to debunk myths and appreciate the potential advantages of industrial hemp.