by Alex Tabarrok
on August 31, 2013 at 8:57 am
in Food and Drink, Law, Medicine
North Korea is the only country in the world where it is legal to use, sell, transport and cultivate marijuana.
Because North Korea is a pariah state uninterested in being a party to this –
‘The Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs makes a distinction between recreational and medical and scientific uses of drugs. Numerous provisions state that nations are allowed to permit medical use of drugs. However, recreational use is prohibited by Article 4:
The parties shall take such legislative and administrative measures as may be necessary . . . Subject to the provisions of this Convention, to limit exclusively to medical and scientific purposes the production, manufacture, export, import, distribution of, trade in, use and possession of drugs.
Furthermore, the Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances requires its Parties to establish criminal penalties for possession of drugs prohibited under the Single Convention for recreational use. If a nation wished to completely legalize marijuana, it would have to withdraw from the treaties. According to leading researchers in this area of law, every signatory has a right to do this.’ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_reform_at_the_international_level and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Convention_on_Narcotic_Drugs
Once North Korea rejoins the international community, one sign will be the participation of the new, free, and independent North Korea within this treaty system.
I could see why methamphetamine would be the preferred drug in NK, considering the physical demands of a low-automation life and scarcity of Doritos.
Officially also Uruguay, I think. Unofficially all over the place: California, Holland, all of South Asia and Morocco at least.
Well, in Netherlands it’s pretty much official for most purposes except being actually written in the law, they call it gedoogbeleid, and have a long tradition of officially unofficial tolerance of things that are so heinous they must be banned (like Catholics) but the country is better having them only in some controlled way. If it means that you can go to the shop and buy some hash without being harrased by law, like I did, I’d call it legal, the rest is wordplay to appease idiotic neighbours.
BTW. Czech lawmakers also finally written part of status quo into law, so the possession of up amounts to 15 grams is only misdemeanor punishable by “oral reprimand” or by ticket fine, like speeding, but in reality cops ignore even greater amounts as long as you don’t sell in front of school and you can smoke a joint on the street and nothing happens, though one time I was politely asked to stub it by the passing patrol.
In a few years I tell you, you’ll be able to buy a joint at a 7-11 and we’ll all marvel over how much society has changed, and how insanely taliban the world was over a harmless weed as recent ago as 2013.
At the same time, it is well possible that smoking of classical tobacco cigarettes will be a jailable offence.
All the people currently employed in suppressing MJ will need another job, right?
Something similar happened when the Prohibition was ended.
Yes, but never forget there were no criminal penalties(other than loss) for possession of alcohol.
It makes sense. If you are an autocrat, you want your population to be relatively passive, yet functional enough to do productive work. Marijuana is the perfect drug for this. Sort of like the Soma in “Brave New World”. I don’t understand why more autocrats don’t seek to create “Brave New World” like societies where their people are comfortable enough that they choose not to rebel against the autocrat. This is what I would do if I were an autocrat. It makes perfect sense. The Chinese seem to be creating such a system: economic growth and opportunity to keep people happy, no move towards representative government at all. It seems to be working so far.
I view the “Brave New World” scenario as a perfect model for an autocrat to pursue. Why so many of them don’t choose this option makes no sense to me at all.
If representative government reached its high water mark 10-15 years, as some conservative bloggers have argued, one would expect to see more societies around the world evolve into “Brave New World” types.
Comments on this entry are closed.
Previous post: From the comments
Next post: American violence is higher than you think
Email Tyler Cowen
Follow Tyler on Twitter
Email Alex Tabarrok
Follow Alex on Twitter
Subscribe in a reader
Follow Us on Twitter
Marginal Revolution on Twitter Counter.com
Get smart with the Thesis WordPress Theme from DIYthemes.