{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02157164869029276, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0030816640986132513, 'mean_word_length': 6.057971014492754, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Corporate Cannabis at Home and Abroad: International Regulation and Neoliberal Legalization

Throughout the twentieth century and into the twenty-first century, economic interests and systemic racism ensured the prohibition of cannabis. Such socio-political implications resulted in the criminalization of innumerable consumers; the infringement on civil liberties, in this regard, has been considerable. To counteract such policing, the Liberal Party of Canada legalized cannabis on 17 October, 2018. Despite motivating factors like shrinking the black market and relieving the judicial system, no significant social reparations have been realized. Rather, the publicly traded sector of the cannabis industry was prioritized and has seen enormous upside leading up to and after legalization, with corporate cannabis companies growing domestically and internationally. In this sense, Canada’s legalization continues patterns of prohibition: sacrificing civil liberties for economic interests. This prioritization of capital also affects countries in which cannabis companies established subsidiaries and partnerships—such as in Germany, Jamaica, and Colombia—where despite continued prohibition, companies receive special privileges while citizens are subject to the law. Although regulations differ on a case-by-case basis, corporate motivations inform cannabis prohibition and legalization—market interests guide the international spread of legalization. This article approaches the implications of ongoing cannabis-prohibition, in contrast to its legalization in select geopolitical regions, to analyze the Kafkaesque nature of substance-control that is inherently tied to economic motivations, and which take precedence over social equity. In this sense, the regulation of plant-material works in tandem with regulation of society, by which a certain order is sought to be maintained for the sake of political power and economic profitability.