Should marijuana be grown in Uruguay's gardens and parks?

Marijuana gardening in South America

Marijuana gardening in South America


The muscular men on the left appear confident of their own virtue. The young man on the right has the diffident sensitivity of a poet, wondering if drugs should be legalised. Uruguay, it has been announced, has decided to make marijuana a state enterprise. The government will grow marijuana and sell marijuana. Their aim is to put the criminal drug barons out of business and ensure those who smoke marijuana can get a clean uncontaminated product. I support the policy of putting the barons out of business – and wonder where the stuff should be grown. Should marijuana be grown in secure government barbed wire compounds? Or in private gardens? Or in public parks? Could it be a forbidden fruit symbol, fostering our hatred of sin? What involvement might the church have in this enterprise?
The aspect of the Uruguay drugs policy I question is the government making money from it. This could lead officials to encourage consumption. Politicians do not always reek with virtue. Why not give the stuff away? – but plan the distrubition so that users have to walk past an exhibition showing the ill-effects of drug use. They could also revive the Order of Penitents and have lines of former drug users bewailing their fates and showing their scars.

See also http://www.gardenvisit.com/blog/2010/12/25/opium-and-cocaine-as-recreational-garden-plants-and-drugs/

Images courtesy U.S. Embassy Montevideo and Marcelo Acosta.

21 thoughts on “Should marijuana be grown in Uruguay's gardens and parks?

    1. Tom Turner Post author

      Current drugs policy in the developed countries has failed: (1) drug use continues to rise (2) the profit from dealing in drugs funds organized crime (3) the producer countries are de-stabilised, as is happening to Mexico.
      So we might as well try something else and discover if it has fewer harmful side-effects.

      Reply
  1. Adam

    If our Government is taking a big chunk of tax from every tobacco smoker it seems an intelligent paralell to do as the Uruguayan Government are doing. Can lung cancer and the other associated nasties associated with tobacco be better than Marijuana ?

    Reply
    1. Tom Turner Post author

      True, but it is often suggested that the UK government has lacked determination in restraining smoking because it values the tax revenue it generates. I doubt if this is true but (1) revenue departments, like Caesar’s wife, must be above suspicion (2) making a profit from vice seems immoral. It would be better if the revenue from tobacco went to the foreign aid budget or was hypothecated to another ‘good cause’.

      Reply
  2. Christine

    A good beginning perhaps would be to use the technology used in archaeology to do a comprehensive map of the border between the US and Mexico and to continue to monitor the border for new activity.
    [ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/centralamericaandthecaribbean/mexico/9396418/Mexican-drug-smuggling-tunnel-unearthed.html ] and [ http://uknow.uky.edu/content/uk-archaeologists-plan-excavations-fort-boonesborough ]

    The Stasi must have been pretty efficient at dealing with cross border movements during the partition of Germany into East and West. Perhaps this know how could now be put to some good? [ http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/year-of-germany-will-commence-without-putin/460572.html ]

    Reply
  3. Christine

    Although it seems to be politically difficult to fund drug courts they do seem to both prevent young people from being criminalised and assist them to deal with their addiction. [ http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-07-03/experts-baffled-as-axe-falls-on-youth-drug-court/4108366 ]

    Perhaps this is a model that could be improved on to increase the emphasis on treating addiction and assisting with underlying issues.
    [ http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/info/addiction/ ]

    Do the statistics distinguish between use and addiction?

    Reply
    1. Tom Turner Post author

      One could view ‘addiction’ as an example of the ‘medicalisation of crime’.
      Re drug courts, it seems better to spend money raised from selling drugs on treating ‘victims’ (of drug pushers) than on other societal goods. But it feels like morally dodgy territory to me and the people who run the programmes would soon be clamouring for more money. I think the best plan is to make hardly any distinction between tobacco, alcohol and other drugs – and to keep remembering the story of prohibition in the US.

      Reply
  4. Christine

    Isn’t the distinguishing feature of addiction the compulsive element and the fact that an addiction usually start from activities and habits that are at some level controlled and socially acceptable? Therefore there is a threshold question that distinguishes its medical treatment.

    “But it feels like morally dodgy territory to me and the people who run the programmes would soon be clamouring for more money.” Perhaps the mainstreaming of medical treatment for addiction within healthcare could assist in addictions being treated like any other medical condition requiring a cure?

    So yes I agree to that tobacco, alcohol and other drugs could be treated alike if the threshold question of addiction was addressed.

    Reply
    1. Tom Turner Post author

      Julie Burchill, who knows more about drugs than I could ever know, observed that some people master drugs and other people are mastered by drugs. The former group, including many top lawyers and bankers, are not in same category of ‘addiction’ as the people on skid row. In fact they are closer to having a ‘behavioural addiction‘.
      PS it is best not get into a public argument with Julie Burchill http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jonsimmons/julie/paglia.htm

      Reply
  5. Christine

    There are a number of factors that need to be considered in addiction including tolerance levels[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_tolerance ] and the transformation of a habit through a crisis situation to an addiction. There is a difference between use which is mood altering (to ease social situations, relieve stress etc) and use which is associated with social situations (ie drinking at a restuarant with dinner). Observing a smoker giving up the habit demonstrates this dynamic. Usually if there is an addiction and a habit the addiction will respond to emotional triggers and the habit to social triggers.

    Yes, Julie does seem like a formidable person…

    Reply
  6. Lawrence

    The Dutch approach to marijuana has certainly grown strange fruits. Their policy has had the effect of giving the free market total dominance. How has it reacted? Firstly, to cut out risk. Importation over several customs borders, with the accompanying risk of imprisonment in non-liberal countries, was the first to go, and the Dutch naturally turned to their market gardening expertise to enable the growth of marijuana under artificial conditions in northern Europe. It is now very difficult indeed to find those products of the 1970’s – “paki black”, “afghani black”, “nepalise temple balls”, “lebanese red”, “thai sticks” outside of the specialist coffee shops of Amsterdam. Secondly, to reduce bulking. Again, the Dutch market gardeners have been breeding increasingly powerful forms of marijuana for over two decades. “Skunk” has a thc content – the active ingredient – that is estimated at now 20 times the concentration of native products. Thirdly, to increase harvesting times. In Asia, marijuana has an annual cycle, the plants are ready for harvest in August to September. Dutch strains now allow for harvesting on a 6 week cycle. Does all of this matter? My answer is yes, it does. Marijuana was once a social drug, like drinking prosecco it encouraged conversation and the appreciation of music and visual arts. To smoke “skunk” on the other hand is like exchanging your prosecco for half a bottle of vodka, one only has to spend a few hours in Amsterdam in the evening to see all of the zombies gazing blankly at the video screens that are a feature of all of the bars in the canal district to see the results. I am always surprised, given the strength of opinion in Europe against gene-manipulated vegetables, that this state of affairs does not lead to more – or any – critical comment. I am in support of the Uruguay initiative because – as we can see in so many other areas of our lives – an unrestricted free market will take a logical course that can prove to be self-destructive. On another note: the knee jerk reaction to open a conversation about drug related issues by talking about addiction is not helpful. Addiction is a minority problem, one that must be addressed, but not one that should drive the debate.

    Reply
    1. Tom Turner Post author

      I very much like Lawrence’s last remark that ‘talking about addiction is not helpful. Addiction is a minority problem, one that must be addressed, but not one that should drive the debate’. Somehow, there has to be an intelligent debate which includes all the social, economic, health etc dimensions of drugs. Two other points:
      1) just as the health hazards of tobacco are listed on packets, the health hazards of marijuana should also be explained and, indeed, compared with those of alcohol and tobacco
      2) the negative side effects of banning drugs should be analysed and quantified. They include providing vast revenues to organized crime and destabalizing producer countries. The Taliban is thought to get about half its income from drug.

      Reply
  7. Christine

    Worse still is the links in the drug trade to human trafficking. In Afghanistan the war on drugs (and the attempts to replace drug crops with food crops) has resulted in the indebtedness of farmers and the kidnapping or sale of their children to traffickers. [ http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1052605.html ],[ http://www.payvand.com/news/06/sep/1048.html ] and [ http://www.iom.int/jahia/Jahia/featureArticleAS/cache/offonce?entryId=20387 ]

    The first and third world effects of the drugs trade are very different but they are linked as with other economic activity.

    Reply
    1. Tom Turner Post author

      It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that those who intervene in Afghanistan ‘get what they deserve’. Rich industrialised countries should not spend their resources in blowing poor people to smitherines. What would we think if the Taliban decided that tobacco and alcohol were such evils that they were justified in rolling their military into Europe or America?
      Part of the problem is that any politician who tries to talk sense about drugs is immediately attacked by the propular press as an outlandish heretic.

      Reply
  8. Adam

    I wonder if the Afghans are aware of the significant returns that can be earnt from growing Guar. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guar
    Many Indian farmers are starting to see some major beneficial changes to their wealth and consequently to the local economy from growing Guar bean, which is increasingly being used to a great extent in the intrnational mining industry. It might be a better crop than Marijuana both economically and in terms of soil husbandry, as it also fixes nitrogen in the soil.

    Reply
  9. Christine

    Thankyou Tom. If it is ever necessary to illustrate bad taste in architecture the Poppy Palaces and Narcotecture will be great exemplars! Perhaps they need a scheme like there is in Australia which attempts to confiscate the proceeds of crime?

    “The Criminal Assets Confiscation Taskforce brings together resources from the Australian Federal Police (AFP), Australian Crime Commission (ACC), Australian Taxation Office (ATO) and the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (CDPP) with the aim of enhancing the identification and pursuit of the profits of organised crime, where there is a link to a Commonwealth offence.

    The Taskforce has been established as a Commonwealth-level measure to address the threat posed by organised crime. It has been estimated that organised crime costs Australia between $10-$15 billion dollars every year, representing a significant threat to Australian society. Organised criminal syndicates have become more business-like in their approach to laundering money and acquiring assets.”

    Goodness knows what you could use these palaces for once they were confiscated?

    I am not sure that Guar is the best alternative crop as it would seem that it is most useful as an export. Afganistan seems to need to have its own sustainable agriculture to build a domestic economy and feed the nation in peace time?
    [ http://www.fwi.co.uk/Articles/29/07/2012/134135/Afghan-farmers-a-force-for-good.htm ]

    Reply
    1. Tom Turner Post author

      You can’t legislate for ‘good’ taste but drawing attention to ‘bad’ taste seems a fair policy, for architecture and for gardens http://www.gardenvisit.com/blog/2010/04/28/bad-garden-design-america/
      The UK had something similar to Australia’s Criminal Assets Confiscation Taskforce. It was called the Assets Recovery Agency and in 2005 had 180 staff, and an annual budget of £15.5m. Unfortunately it only recovered £4.6m in 2005 and it was merged with another agency in 2008. Fighting crime pays as well, or perhaps better, than crime itself.

      Reply
  10. Adam

    The article ‘Afghan farmers a force for good’ ends by confirming how poor the locals are and how long it’ll be to develop some wealth to pay for the necessary infrastructure. I suggest this is were Guar comes into its own,, especially if the farmers can sell into a copoerative that can then sell on the world mrket. Bigger profits will get back to the farmers quickly and percolate through the economy.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Adam Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *