A small distinction with a big difference: prohibiting “drugs” but not alcohol, from the conquest to constitutional law

3Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This essay traces the origins, explores the context, and analyzes the consequences of a governmental campaign based on wording that appears in Article 73 of the Mexican Constitution of 1917. Article 73 was—and remains—the legal basis for a complex governmental strategy that, as of its inception, has given shape to a juridical framework that is applied unevenly and in a differentiated manner to drug and alcohol policy in Mexico. Based on an analysis of the most relevant alcohol and drugs norms promulgated during the last five centuries in what is now Mexico, this essay aims to review the historical process that led, first, to a national “campaign” and, subsequently, to a public policy that, on the one hand, attempted to control problems relating to alcoholic beverages through an administrative approach, but which, on the other, endeavored to suppress—through the implementation of a punitive juridical scheme—what the Mexican government abstractly conceptualized as drugs “that poison the individual and degenerate the race.”.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Schievenini, J. D. (2020). A small distinction with a big difference: prohibiting “drugs” but not alcohol, from the conquest to constitutional law. Social History of Alcohol and Drugs, 34(1), 15–47. https://doi.org/10.1086/707681

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free