In 1973 President Richard Nixon's "Reorganization Plan Number Two" proposed the creation of a single federal agency to enforce federal drug laws and Congress accepted the proposal, as there was concern regarding the growing availability of drugs. As a result, on July 1, 1973, the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD) and the Office of Drug Abuse Law Enforcement (ODALE) merged to create the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). On December 1, 1975, the Supreme Court ruled that it was "not cruel or unusual for Ohio to sentence someone to 20 years for having or selling cannabis."

It always blows my mind that literally right after the end of alcohol prohibition (1933), marijuana prohibition began (1937 though lighter than the '70s kind of illegal). Basically historical mistakes repeated within literally years of one another. That second error is still not corrected 40+ years later. Criminalizing drug use is absolutely barbaric and has wreaked more havoc than any drug could on society.

https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/

The parent commenter is overly mood-affiliated, but Eric Schlosser's book Reefer Madness: Sex, Drugs, and Cheap Labor in the American Black Market is good on this topic (http://www.amazon.com/Reefer-Madness-Drugs-American-Market/d...). I don't have a copy of it at hand, but making weed and other drugs illegal was wrapped up in racial fear and fears of what become known as counterculture.

Wade Davis's One River is about many things, including the ways hallucinogens came to the U.S., how they fit many indigenous religions, and why they're far more legitimate than the US makes them out to be. It's also an adventure story about the exploration of the deep Amazon and other South American rivers.

“There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”

I've heard the idea of anti-drug laws as dog-whistle politics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics) from a few people.

As far as "evidence" here, I don't know what kind is suitable.

The 1875 San Francisco Opium Den ordinance law is widely seen as anti-chinese[1]. There's certainly historical people, like Harry J Anslinger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_J._Anslinger#The_campaig...) who justified drug prohibition through racist prejudice.

The world isn't black and white of course, and how much race played in this can't be quantified reasonably. However, it's safe to say that it's non-zero.

IMHO, all the war on drugs is doing is inflaming a constant Streisand Effect for drug use. Also, I think that notionally, all drugs would be illegal under the current mindset. The reason that some are not has less to do with race I believe than it has to do with the billions of dollars alcohol and tobacco has to carve legislation in their favor.[2]

--

1. California is the starting point for quite a bit of anti-drug legislation. Although now, in 2016, we ostensibly live in relative racial harmony, the state has a notoriously terrible history of regrettable regressive racialized politics. This completely factual history runs up against most people's current perception of the politics of the state.

2. It's worth noting that when you ban the sale of something, in ways you are creating a more "free" (nominally in the pejorative sense) market then if you sunlight it. If you search "marijuana easier than alcohol" you'll see many saying that, for children, pot is easier to buy than beer. Basically by the state not acknowledging the market, they lose out on the opportunity to influence it. Prostitution-based STD transmission being much higher in places of illegal prostitution is another supporting argument for this.

And finally, in markets such as liquor and tobacco, competing firms don't resolve dispute through violent armed gangs of militias cartelling territories like is done through gangs and illicit drugs. Can you imagine someone working for PBR murdering someone in the competition to gain market penetration?