AHC: Legal Marijuana in the C.S.A.

This is a challenge I came up with yesterday, when I was thinking about the OTL drug wars and Turtledove's TL-191, and this idea came into my head.

Okay, so basically, marijuana needs to be legal as of 1950 in a surviving CSA, and there are only two requirements:

1.)Slavery MUST either be in decline by no later than 1914(the start of OTL's WWI, but the decline doesn't have to be terribly sharp) or have been phased out.

2.)Significant amounts of racism, particularly against Mexicans, can still exist, but must not be more severe than OTL overall.

Edit: Also, I will allow for scenarios in which marijuana may be restricted or illegal in some states.


Okay then, have at it. :)
 
Last edited:
I'd have them become independent, then have the big tobacco companies in Virginia and North Carolina decide, for whatever reason, to support the legalization of marijuana so that they could sell it. With a smaller, more agrarian nation, their influence would be greater.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
I could see it used to grow hemp. I could see it used to zonk-out slaves. I could see it used by poor whites to make ends meet.

I could also see the Confederacy importing and trying to grow coca to distribute to slaves.
 
I'd have them become independent, then have the big tobacco companies in Virginia and North Carolina decide, for whatever reason, to support the legalization of marijuana so that they could sell it. With a smaller, more agrarian nation, their influence would be greater.

The problem is, a significant part of the reason why marijuana got banned IOTL was thanks to influence from major corporations selling certain types of products, including the tobacco companies, because it was cutting into their profits(don't forget the chemical makers of course!).

Anti-trust laws could help, I suppose, but most of the Eastern tobacco planters, at least the wealthier ones, would likely raise all kinds of hell once marijuana starts really cutting into their profits. It wouldn't necessarily lead to nationwide prohibition, especially not if Texans or Louisianans(mainly because of New Orleans, though) have something to say about it, but certainly, it could lead to it being banned at least in a few states if enough momentum gets built up. At the very least, I can see hemp farmers being intimidated for being the purveyors of "greaser weed".

@Petike: That would be awesome. The planters probably wouldn't like that, though. :(

@Wolfpaw: It's an interesting possibility. And some poor whites certainly would be able to make a somewhat better living for themselves, too. IMHO, if enough of these small farmers get organized enough they could form a firewall of sorts should anyone attempt to start prohibition up.

And also, coca may not be that big of an issue because from what I understand now, because it probably wouldn't be nearly as exclusively associated with Mexicans as marijuana was IOTL. And if coca happens to be illegal in some U.S. states.....well, the possibilities are very interesting to think about, really.
 
The problem is, a significant part of the reason why marijuana got banned IOTL was thanks to influence from major corporations selling certain types of products, including the tobacco companies, because it was cutting into their profits(don't forget the chemical makers of course!).

Anti-trust laws could help, I suppose, but most of the Eastern tobacco planters, at least the wealthier ones, would likely raise all kinds of hell once marijuana starts really cutting into their profits. It wouldn't necessarily lead to nationwide prohibition, especially not if Texans or Louisianans(mainly because of New Orleans, though) have something to say about it, but certainly, it could lead to it being banned at least in a few states if enough momentum gets built up. At the very least, I can see hemp farmers being intimidated for being the purveyors of "greaser weed".
What if the tobacco companies decided to buy them out instead of banning them?
 
I'd have them become independent, then have the big tobacco companies in Virginia and North Carolina decide, for whatever reason, to support the legalization of marijuana so that they could sell it. With a smaller, more agrarian nation, their influence would be greater.

This is pretty much all you need. If the big tobacco companies are willing to expand their product portafolios it is rather simple.

The problem is that this type of marketing philosophy did not happen, in OTL, until the 1980s and many companies still have a hard time realizing it is easier and more profitable than fighting the rival product.

Anyways if the tobacco companies are behind it, I don't see why not. The major lumber companies that opposed the hemp industry would be based in the US in TTL. The CSA might even find it as a good way to compete in some markets.
 
What if the tobacco companies decided to buy them out instead of banning them?

That could be doable, but mainly for reasons I've stated, it's more likely that they'd just replace cannabis with more tobacco, at least out east.
The states west of the Mississippi could be different, though.

This is pretty much all you need. If the big tobacco companies are willing to expand their product portafolios it is rather simple.

The problem is that this type of marketing philosophy did not happen, in OTL, until the 1980s and many companies still have a hard time realizing it is easier and more profitable than fighting the rival product.

Anyways if the tobacco companies are behind it, I don't see why not. The major lumber companies that opposed the hemp industry would be based in the US in TTL. The CSA might even find it as a good way to compete in some markets.

Definitely true that the lumber companies, too, played a role in this problem IOTL.

It is possible, though, that companies in states like Texas, Arizona(if the CSA gets that, that is), Arkansas and Louisiana might be in a position to do so, partly because there was less of an influence of wealthy, old-money slaver aristocrats in those places than in, say, Georgia, the Carolinas, or Virginia.

However, though, problems do remain, such as the fact that marijuana is still going to be seen as a Mexican thing, and not a white man's opiate like alcohol or tobacco. And there would certainly be opposition from reactionaries.

But again, as I said, I betcha if enough small farmers make enough of a fuss, then certainly, prohibition probably wouldn't go nationwide, especially if they have a presence out East as well as in Texas, Louisiana, etc.(And of course, there is the possibility that a Texan or Louisianan company might become influential enough to compete with Eastern conglomerates, and if they side with the little guys, and I think it's possible, then it might become quite a bit less challenging. What do you guys think of that?).
 
One thing about the Confederacy was due to its confederate nature, one state could legalize marijuana while another could ban it at the same time, perhaps depending on what grew well and made a lot of money in their state.
 
Top