Exactly. The history said, in this case, that money and power did not win the dispute, not that their influence does not exist or should be considered negligible.
So, if in the case of drugs, society moral standards, money and power are all at the same side; what's the chance of grassroot movement changing the laws?
That question was not rethorical, but giving my own answer, I think the path is changing the perception about drug addicts. That they are ill people, not criminals. If the social perception of a drug addict is the same as an alcoholic, then there is a chance of stopping the war on drugs.
So, if in the case of drugs, society moral standards, money and power are all at the same side; what's the chance of grassroot movement changing the laws?
That question was not rethorical, but giving my own answer, I think the path is changing the perception about drug addicts. That they are ill people, not criminals. If the social perception of a drug addict is the same as an alcoholic, then there is a chance of stopping the war on drugs.