Talk:Harry J. Anslinger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
A mortarboard This article is part of WikiProject Drug Policy, an attempt to improve Wikipedia's coverage of drug policy. Feel free to participate by editing this article or by visiting the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Revised

I did some major revising of the article. I did my best to make it seem a little more neutral, and put how Mr. Anslinger acted in historical context. Of course, he was still a very stubborn man, and effectively profited off a base-less fear in marijuana. Regardless, I think now it is important to add information that does not have to do with his anti-marijuana/political attitudes. --Howrealisreal 17:52, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

That's a major improvement. Nicely done. -- Xerxes 22:48, 2004 Dec 17 (UTC)

The neutrality of this article seems highly suspect. I mean, he sounds like a bad guy to me, but all the sources are just diatribes by pro-marijuana groups. -- Xerxes 21:54, 2004 Sep 28 (UTC)

Any facts, dates or quotes you take issue with? That neutrality label has been so debased at Wikipedia, many more fastidious users won't touch it. Perhaps you'd like to add some more positive data. Wetman 00:56, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

A cleanup notice has been applied by User:Poccil.

There is also Harry Anslinger. Howrealisreal 03:33, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

From what I've read, the guy is an awful was of a human being would make a great poster child for retroactive abortion. But my (hyperbolic) feelings aside, the article is simply not acceptable. I'll see what I can do with it over break, but no promises. User:Knotanutt

I hate to break the wikipedia vow of neutrality, but if you read his own memoir, it's hard not to see him as a pretty sleazy figure. He paints himself as a character from Dragnet, but it only take a cursory glance between the lines to see how he supplied drugs and easy sentences to the powerful while coming down hard on the disadvantaged.

_____

Opinion within the federal law enforcement community views Anslinger as simply a power-hungry bureaucrat who used the marijuana issue as a means to attain personal power and influence.

Just wanted to point out that www.drugwarlibrary.org seems to be nonexistant any more, because there were two articles there that I relied on, http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/LIBRARY/studies/vlr/vlrtoc.htm and http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm which now result in default 'error' pages full of ads for other companies/products, claiming 'This page is parked free, courtesy of GoDaddy.com'. Those two links are closely related to the book written by Profs. Whitebread and Bonnie entitled 'The Marijuana Conviction,' which is thankfully now available on half.com here: http://product.half.ebay.com/_W0QQprZ994447QQcpidZ1442757 which was written after extensive research into the DEA's own library. I highly recommend anyone who wants to be knowledgable on the matter to read it; I got my copy from the half.com link posted above and it cost me under $14, including s/h. I also really need to learn how to edit text wiki-style so i can enhance my posts. User: davesilvan

I found a lot of reference errors in the Whitebread and Bonnie book, which they failed to address in a letter I sent them.
The 2 links to druglibrary above aren't on drugwarlibrary.org, and they work fine for me.~Uncle Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.227.254.141 (talk) 12:58, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mr. Anslinger's place in history

Mr. Anslinger has been a source of curiosity to me. Largely because everything we think we know about him comes from pro-Marijuana advocates, including great recorded footage of Anslinger in the 1990 documentary-esque "Grass". Yet for as powerful a post he held for as long as he did—second only to Hoover at the FBI—reference and government sources barely recognized him. Even the Bush II's DEA website makes only a tiny mention of him; Clinton's DEA had a page dedicated to him, with only his picture and years of tenure, not even his birth and death dates. Just the picture.--RickAguirre 17:57, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Removed the following sentence from the intro:

"This is understandable, as those currently fighting the War on Drugs would logically not want to associate themselves with a man who has been so widely discredited."
In fact, Mr. Ansligner has not been "widely discredited" ; moreover, he hasn't received much governmental credit for his role, which is different from being discredited. Further, the statement "would logically not want to associate themselves" is a supposition that suggests POV. This article can further stand to be modified against a few weasel terms; I just haven't gotten around to it yet. --RickAguirre 04:19, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
As a pro-marijuana activist I hate to put in a good word for Anslinger, but I feel I must. Contrary to what a lot of authors say, Anslinger wasn't fired dishonorably. He was forced to retire amidst the 1960's drug war controversy, but was honorably "cited" for his service by President Kennedy. Surprisingly, the president praised Anslinger stating he was, "a dedicated defender for the interest of people all over the world." Although a lot of his constituants at the time thought Anslinger was terribly misguided in his drug war tactics, evidently they thought his heart was in the right place and cited him for his work at his retirment send off. (Narcotics Bureau Head Retiring, US Bids 400 Map Help for Addicts, New York Times, July 2, 1962, p. L15 & L19).~Uncle Mike

Aslinger has been widely discredited, by way of actual medical research, which prove he was absolutely wrong in his assertions that marijuana 'made people crazy' and 'turned them into homicidal maniacs.' Besides, he'd already changed his story after those original claims were rebuked, where he said it would make the user so docile that he would not even lift a weapon to defend his own country in times of war.' User: davesilvan

[edit] DuPont/petrochem influence on Anslinger anti-hemp campaign

I see this assertion repeated here without source or support. While that Anslinger was a demagogue of the worst sort, this claim appears unsubstantiated and, frankly, wrong. Nylon wasn't invented until 1935; by this article as it stands, Anslinger was already ramping up his anti-marajuana campaign before that year. Rayon had been in existence for roughly a decade, but (a) wasn't a major competitor for hemp fiber in its early form (b) is a wood-pulp product, not a pure petro product like nylon. Silverlake Bodhisattva


Silverlake, who commented on this topic at the bottom of this page is correct. The popular theory of the AHD conspiracy to outlaw marijuana has more than a few weak points. How do I know? I also happen to have the largest online collection of documents relating to that, including the most in-depth single piece of research done to date.
You will have to find it on your own though, because the editors here certainly wouldn't let me post it. It would be "spamming", according to them. The Wikipedia article is weak, at best, but it will probably never be corrected.


The idea that there might have been an influential connection between Anslinger, Hearst & Dupont already exists, and this page seems exactly the place to explore how plausible that is, including stating that Nylon had not been invented until 1935 (or mass produced until 1938). Certainly phrases like "There is some belief that Anslinger, DuPont..." (emphasis added) make such contentions less credible.
Nevertheless, Anslinger did marry a Mellon*, and Secretary Mellon's private bank was at that time the principal investor in Irenée DuPont's petrochemical company. Each of these three men held tremendous power and influence, and the idea that these men would not abuse or even use that power to benefit their own interests should not be summarily dismissed. The Great American Streetcar Scandal stands an example—in the realm of reality—of the machinations powerful interests are capable of (to say nothing about the relationship between DuPont and GM). *Whether this Mellon was at all related to Secretary Mellon's family remains to be proven (at least through my research; Wolfman97, if you have evidence that speaks directly to this, please do share). Hearst, meanwhile, doesn't add any ethical integrity to this group, but more importantly, this a fairly fascinating time in history and these conspiratorial elements—true or not, with full or partial evidence—are interesting and deserve mention. --RickAguirre 14:06, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


This reference is marked as "Citation needed". I have the citation "attibuted" to the Harry Anslinger--Andrew Mellon connection. My extensive research has failed to find evidence of their family connection through the marrage of Martha Anslinger (maiden name Denniston). There was no mention of the family connection thought to reside in the Altoona Mirror Newspaper obituary of Martha Anslinger on October 10, 1961 p.22. The source of the reference came from Professor McWilliams' book "The Protectors". As you can see by the e-mail below, he can not prove the conection, so lets drop the citation and any mention of it. (Blank lines and some spaces removed.)4.227.252.183 13:38, 11 September 2007 (UTC)Uncle Mike
Dear Professor McWilliams, I'm very interested in history, like you, and greatly enjoyed your book on Anslinger. In doing my own research on the history of marijuana, I have studied many of the sources you referenced in "The Protectors". All but one of the references I was interested in panned out for me. The one reference in question is that of Mellon being related to Anslinger by way of his marriage to Martha Denniston referenced in chapter 1, page 30 as #19 (Obituary of Martha Anslinger, Altoona Mirror, 10 September 1961). I located the obituary on October 10, 1961, page 22, but it didn't include any mention of Mellon. Can you provide me with an original source reference regarding this important connection?
Mike, I appreciate your interest in my work and am pleased it has facilitated your research. As I recall, the Mellon reference was from interviews with several of Anslinger's hometown acquaintances in the Altoona/Hollidaysburg area. I completed my research for "The Protectors" about 15 years ago and no longer have much of what I used for the book. Over the past few years I have gradually been disposing of files I didn't think I would have much use for. Sorry I can't be more helpful.
Good luck with you project.
John C. McWilliams
Associate Professor of History
Penn State University
 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.227.248.122 (talk) 03:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Note in response to previous posters

For those previous posters who noted that druglibrary.org was down for a while let me assure you that it is back up and in operation. Thank you for your concern and thank you for making the effort to keep those documents in public view.

Now we have another issue, of course. Regular readers of druglibrary.org know that is has the largest online collection of documents by and about Harry Anslinger (among other things). The reason that collection is there is because I OCRed and/or handtyped most of them from rare originals way back before Wikipedia was even a fond idea.

So -- those of you who know the Schaffer Library and are familiar with it -- you would probably think that it would be entirely appropriate to post a link to the largest collection of personal Anslinger documents in the Wikipedia article on Anslinger. Now doesn't that seem logical? I thought so, so I tried to post the link.

The link was immediately deleted by an editor who claimed that, because the link comes from my site, it is "spamming". Never mind that it links to the most complete collection of relevant documents.

Never mind that the same documents have been linked from other pages on Wikipedia for many years. On one page, my link is OK, on another it is "spam" and I have to post it here in the discussion. Never mind even that my site is already mentioned as a valuable resource on this very discussion page. Go figure.

Perhaps even more interesting was the edit on the book "The Traffic in Narcotics". I put in a link to the full text of Anslinger's own book "The Traffic in Narcotics". That was also deleted. At the same time, they retained the link to an article "The Traffic in Narcotics" that originally came from that book. What was the difference? The article comes from the "neutral" UNODC site while mine comes from a "personal" site. Mine is therefore "spam".

OK, so let's get this settled once and for all. On this page, I posted two links. They were:

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/people/anslinger/traffic/default.htm -- This is the full text of the book "The Traffic in Narcotics" -written by Harry Anslinger

http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/people/anslinger/index.htm - This is a link to the largest online collection of documents by and about Anslinger.

Just for the record, let me note that 1) I put all those documents on the net so, if they are linked from any other site, then that site copied them from mine. 2) All the documents are presented in their full text without my editorial comments. You know, just like you would find in any ordinary library. 3) I don't even agree with some of the documents. My opinion of Anslinger is that he was something of a nut case but I have just presented his writings as I found them so others can read them and make their own opinions. You know, I wanted to be "neutral" in that regard.

Now I would have thought that a collection of Anslinger's personal documents was a perfectly appropriate link for the article on Harry Anslinger. I got told that sort of thing was not allowed, and I have to go through this process and ask permission from the general consensus of readers before posting such "spam". OK, so here it is.

What is the public consensus on putting a link to a collection of Anslinger's own documents on the Harry Anslinger page? How do you vote? Is it:

1) "spamming"

2) absolutely essential to the article

And, just for the record, I have numerous other documents that are simply the best references in the world on the subject. For some examples, look up the Wikipedia articles on the US National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, the La Guardia Committee Report, the Marihuana Tax Act, etc. I posted all of the original documents on the web and Wikipedia has linked to me since the articles were created.

Just for the record, let's note one obvious error in Wikipedia right now. The Wikipedia article is titled "1937 Marijuana Tax Act". This is the wrong spelling. The US Government has traditionally spelled it "Marihuana" - with an "h". I would try to correct it but I have been told that I am not qualified to do so.

Therefore, can we also have a quick vote on whether Cliff Schaffer -- the largest publisher of the major drug policy research in history -- is qualified to edit Wikipedia articles? How say you all?

Thanks.

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfman97 15:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree that the above web pages are strongly related to the article. However, they are also heavily commercial. I think links to non-commercial web sites with the same material would be preferable. However, if none exist, then using the links above should be just as acceptable as linking to material on other commercial websites, such as those of various news agencies. -- Moecazzell 06:18, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Intense abhorrence"

Anslinger must be unpopular with some Wiki-editor.

  • First, tell us what you don't know: While little is known about his private life or personal views,
  • Then, the editor avoids the word hate but says so in other words in the passive voice: there are examples in Anslinger's writings and behavior that justify today's intense abhorrence of his character.

If the reader wants to abhor his character, intensely, or moderately, we can let the reader read the article further. patsw 00:48, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of Gossip

I deleted what can only be gossip, as it is not sourced. The deleted section was a quote attributed to Anslinger about "darkies".

"Colored students at the Univ. of Minn. partying with female students (white), smoking [marijuana] and getting their sympathy with stories of racial persecution. Result pregnancy"[citation needed]
"Two Negros took a girl fourteen years old and kept her for two days under the influence of marijuana. Upon recovery she was found to be suffering from syphilis."[citation needed]

[edit] Absolutely non-neutral POV article

I deleted the following line a few weeks ago because it is not sourced, but is clearly gossip:

During a conference for the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, Anslinger was heard saying:

   "Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."


Since it's not sourced, and there's no evidence he ever said it than it doesn't deserve to be in an encyclopedia. So I'm deleting this piece of slanted, biased slander once again.

I also deleted a number of quotes attributed to Anslinger because once again none were sourced. There's no evidence that he ever said them. Okaythere 22:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Appears to be attributed to a quote from Harry Anslinger at a Federal Bureau of Narcotics conference in 1937. It probably appears in Jack Herer's book, but I'm guessing. Another website claims that Anslinger said it in 1931, and cites Grinspoon's Marihuana Reconsidered. Considering the racist arguments used to demonize Cannabis, and further evidence that Anslinger has made other racist arguments in favor of prohibition, if the source can be verified, the quote should be added back into the article with a clear description of its reliability. —Viriditas | Talk 12:06, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More changes

I deleted the following lines:

" Currently, many firmly oppose Anslinger's legacy against marijuana, fueling decades of misinformation about the drug. Some contend that Harry J. Anslinger was really just a representative puppet for a thriving political belief. In other words, although it would appear that Anslinger was a conservative who truly believed marijuana to be a threat to the future of American civilization, his biographer maintained that he was an astute government bureaucrat who viewed the marijuana issue as a means for elevating himself to national prominence. "

The reasons for doing so are: 1. The POV in the first line is that there has been "decades of misinformation" about marijuana. Exactly what this misinformation consists of isn't discussed and isn't clear. It's an opinion inserted into an article. "Some contend" in the next sentence is meaningless. If it's to be neutral, then whatever anyone contends about Harry Anslinger should also be included. Since that's clearly not possible, having one negative opinion about him doesn't show a neutral point of view.

We're dealing with facts, not non-sourced editorial opinions.Okaythere 07:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

It's poorly written and too wordy, but it is essentially historically accurate. The "decades of misinformation" about marijuana should be explained. —Viriditas | Talk 11:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
The bureaucrat statement is important for NPOV (although it's true it wasn't written in the best way). This is because lots of people tend think that Anslinger personally hated cannabis and that motivated his crusade. On the other hand, that's not what his biographer asserts and it's important to note that he used the anti-cannabis sentiment to become a prominent political figure. I moved this statement (minus the "some contend.." sentence) out of the intro and into an appropriate subheading. --Howrealisreal 18:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hollidaysburg Mercy Hospital

Can someone verify the existence of "Hollidaysburg Mercy Hospital", where the article says Anslinger diead? I've lived in Hollidaysburg for quite a while, and I've never heard of this hospital (it certainly doesn't exist today). There was a hospital in nearby Altoona named "Mercy Hospital" (later known as Bon-Secours), perhaps this is the hospital that Anslinger died at.Shanafme 12:25, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I have Anslinger's newspaper obituary from the Altoona Mirror, Altoona, PA., Nov. 15, 1975, p. 1, The first paragraph reads as follows: "Harry Jacob Anslinger, one of Blair County's most distinguished citizens, died at 1:05 p.m. Friday, Nov. 14, 1975, in Mercy Hospital. He was 83." 4.227.248.122 04:34, 7 September 2007 (UTC)Uncle Mike
It's definitely Altoona's Mercy Hospital then. As far as I know, Hollidaysburg itself never had a hospital. Hospital services are provided by either Altoona Hospital or Bon-Secours (formerly Mercy). I'll update the page.Shanafme 12:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Enforcement - First Federal Enforcement Agency

I would be interested in hearing facts on how Anslinger turned the FBN into a powerful enforcement agency. This article talks about his role with marijuana, but avoids mentioning the indirect role he played strengthen federal power and establishing a interstate and international enforcement agency, predating the FBI. --Rektide 22:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] His opponents has in later years claimed him for a lot of things

I am removing this paragraph. It is poorly written (poor English) and unrelated. The author of this paragraph implies that the included quote was made by opponents of Anslinger elsewhere on Wikipedia. However, it does not give reference to this alleged Wikipedia material. Nor does it show in what way the alleged opponents connected Anslinger to the Montana Standard's reporting.

Although Anslinger is mentioned many times in the referenced source material (Richard J. Bonnie & Charles H. Whitebread, "II:THE FORBIDDEN FRUIT AND THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE: AN INQUIRY INTO THE LEGAL HISTORY OF AMERICAN MARIJUANA PROHIBITION"), I can find no relationship of the quote to Anslinger in that material.

Please do not reinstate this material without at least fixing the English and properly attributing the quote to the page on Wikipedia to which it allegedly refers.

The section removed follows:

His opponents has in later years claimed him for a lot of things in this process, also when it is very unlikely that he was involved. One example from Wikipedia:

"During the 1920s, an emerging movement of legislators, yellow journalists, and concerned citizens started pressing Washington for federal legislation against marijuana. A publication in the Montana Standard, on January 27, 1929, records progress on a bill in that state to amend the general narcotic law:"
"There was fun in the House Health Committee during the week when the marijuana bill came up for consideration. Marijuana is Mexican opium, a plant used by Mexicans and cultivated for sale by Indians. 'When some beet field peon takes a few rares of this stuff,' explained Dr. Fred Fulsher of Mineral County, 'he thinks he has just been elected president of Mexico so he starts to execute all his political enemies...' Everybody laughed and the bill was recommended for passage." (1)

Moecazzell 05:30, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

This whole article seems slightly biased in his favor, making remarks that go out of the way to defend his legacy, several of them completely unsourced. Agnapostate (talk) 21:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Gore File ???

Does anyone know who originally coined the term “Gore Files” when referring to Harry Anslingers collection of newspaper articles professing the evils of marijuana? Was it Anslinger himself or a pro-marijuana author? Uncle Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.208.176.86 (talk) 02:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Reference to race appears to lack prior context

After the heading "Legal history of marijuana in the United States" there is a passage which includes, "Concern about marijuana was related primarily to the fear that marijuana use would spread, even among whites, as a substitute for the opiates."

The article doesn't explicitly mention any racial motivation or subtext to anti-marijuana efforts until later: "A common theme is that Anslinger was responsible for racist themes in articles, not written by Anslinger, against hemp in the 1930s..."

As the article currently stands, the phrase "even among whites" appears to be a non-sequitur. Perhaps other text had been removed, which (before being excised) would have made the earlier reference to race seem more relevant.drone5 (talk) 09:02, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reference to Race copied from THE FORBIDDEN FRUIT AND THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE: AN INQUIRY INTO THE LEGAL HISTORY OF AMERICAN MARIJUANA PROHIBITION, by Richard J. Bonnie & Charles H. Whitebread, II

[edit] THE HANDIWORK OF A SEMILITERATE HACKER?

Although Harry J. Anslinger, from what I've read of him, appears to have been one of the more despicable figures in the United States' long and losing battle to dictate what chemical substances its inhabitants may or may not ingest, the following lines about him, in the first and sixth paragraphs, are way over the top, as well as unprofessional, and appear to be the handiwork of a semi-literate hacker.

"He was . . . an outspoken racist and [sic] ruined many families [sic] lives. He used propoganda [sic] and lies to instill fear in people, similar to adolf hitler [sic] and stalin [sic]. He derserves [sic] nothing more than a life in the fiery depths of hell [sic] with the other monsters of history."

"Anslinger gained notoriety early in his career for being a fucking punk ass racist."

[edit] END OF COMMENTS