More than a decade ago, my fitness coach and friend, Jenny, called me in distress. She had just been attacked and severely beaten by her ex-boyfriend, a member of a German police arrest unit. He had called her to return his apartment keys a few days after their breakup. She waited in the hallway outside his apartment, and he showed up drunk, fresh from Stuttgart’s massive October beer fest. He started to scream at her, then he began to beat her up. She was fit, in shape, tall, and in training to become a police officer, but she said the only thing she could do was to curl up in a ball, hoping to survive.
Neighbors called the police. Officers arrested him and searched his apartment, where they found a bag with one gram of cannabis in his safe when they took his service weapon. He immediately claimed the cannabis bag was hers.
Guess who faced the more severe consequences? The attacker received a mild disciplinary penalty. Jenny endured hair testing with a result in a “grey zone”; she nearly lost her career as a police officer in training before it even began. A drunk cop beats his girlfriend? Manageable. But the possession of a gram of cannabis? Almost career-ending.
Germany’s Partial Legalization is Working, But Conservatives Want it Gone
When Germany introduced the “Cannabis-Gesetz” (CanG) to partially legalize cannabis in April 2024, it faced criticism not only from conservatives but also from proponents of legalization, who argued it could not achieve its goals without a fully regulated adult-use market. The reform came in two phases: Pillar 1 legalized home cultivation and non-profit cannabis cultivation associations similar to cannabis social clubs in Spain, but without permission for a space for common consumption. Pillar 2 promised regional pilot programs for licensed retail sales.
However, after the progressive, social-liberal, and environmentalist “Traffic Light” government coalition collapsed, the new government, led by the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) with the Social Democrats (SPD) as a partner, announced a legislative revision of the CanG. Conservatives seem determined to roll back what one of their leading figures dismissively calls a “shit law” and have proposed a restrictive amendment to outlaw telemedicine services for cannabis flowers. The final readings of this amendment are anticipated for spring 2026, with a final vote in the Bundestag expected in early 2026.
But here’s what the CDU doesn’t want you to know: the reform is working. The federal government’s first official assessment, the EKOCAN interim report published in October 2025, paints a picture that contradicts every doomsday prediction. The problem is, the system is only half-built. Home growing requires space and know-how many Germans lack, and cannabis associations are rolling out slowly due to licensing delays in conservative-led federal states. So far, these associations serve less than 0.1% of the country’s demand, forcing the medical cannabis system to carry a weight it was never designed for, a pressure conservatives are now exploiting to torpedo the project.
Patient Access Has Exploded – For Now
One of the biggest achievements of Germany’s reform has been the explosion in patient access. With the reclassification of cannabis, doctors can now prescribe it on a standard prescription rather than a special narcotic one. This change alone has been a game-changer for tens of thousands of patients. Telemedicine platforms have stepped in to fill the void left by Germany’s shortage of cannabis-literate doctors, connecting hundreds of thousands of patients with physicians who understand their needs. They have also contributed significantly to patient education regarding safer and more productive use.
As a result, cannabis imports reached record levels in 2025, with official BfArM data showing over 43 tonnes imported in the second quarter alone. For the first time, a significant portion of German consumers has a safe, legal, and reliable way to access regulated cannabis products.
The Black Market is Shrinking, and Public Health is Improving
Despite the incomplete rollout, evidence shows that even this partial legalization is achieving its core goals. Police-recorded cannabis offenses have plummeted, reflecting the new legal thresholds and freeing up resources for serious crime. Meanwhile, the public health crises predicted by conservatives have not materialized, just as they didn’t in the U.S., the Netherlands, Portugal, or Uruguay after their significant legal steps towards legalizing cannabis.
Youth consumption in Germany continues a downward trend that began in 2002, and wastewater monitoring shows adult consumption remains stable. Most importantly, the black market is shrinking. The EKOCAN report explicitly states that the legal market share is growing as the illicit market contracts. While Canada took four years to reach a 78% legal market share, Germany is finally heading in the right direction.
A Story of Beer, Power, and Hypocrisy
So why does the CDU want to reverse this progress? One reason lies in a well-documented network of political and economic interests. The party’s actions reveal a deep-seated allegiance to Germany’s powerful alcohol industry. In 2009, when a federal drug commissioner proposed an alcohol prevention plan, the head of the Bavarian Brewers’ Association coordinated with CSU leaders (the CDU’s Bavarian sister party) to kill it. The CSU’s Peter Ramsauer later boasted, “I think with this approach we have succeeded in preventing the drug commissioner’s plans for new and completely inappropriate restrictions on alcohol consumption”.
The ties are structural. The German Brewers’ Association is an official member of the CDU’s Economic Council and regularly bestows the title “Ambassador of Beer” upon the very politicians responsible for regulating their industry. This explains the blatant double standard: at a brewery anniversary in 2022, Bavarian Minister-President Markus Söder (CSU) declared that people should stick with Bavarian beer as it is “much healthier” than cannabis. This is a political choice, not a scientific one, aimed at protecting an established industry from a market competitor—a playbook the U.S. alcohol industry has used for years.
The Cultural Fear of Looking Inward
This political hypocrisy is built on a deeper cultural fear. In his landmark 1966 book, On Intoxication in the Orient and Occident, the Swiss scholar Rudolf Gelpke argued that Western culture embraces alcohol because it promotes extroverted, social behaviors that serve a productivity-obsessed society. Gelpke observed that societies favor drugs that reinforce their core values. For the West, alcohol is the ideal intoxicant: it lowers inhibitions and fuels the kind of boisterous, outward-facing energy that can be channeled into work.
Cannabis, he argued, encourages introspection and contemplation, states of mind less useful to a system built on external achievement. It fosters a reflective, often critical, perspective. This inward turn potentially calls into question the relentless drive for productivity and external validation. My friend and mentor, the late cannabis expert and Harvard Associate Professor of Psychiatry Lester Grinspoon, came to a similar conclusion independently of Gelpke in his landmark book Marihuana Reconsidered in 1971.
Thus, the resistance to cannabis isn’t about protecting people from a dangerous drug; it’s about protecting a cultural worldview that privileges one kind of intoxication over another. Gelpke also predicted that Western culture would eventually dominate the Eastern hemisphere, a prediction that has largely come true, bringing shifted cultural attitudes toward cannabis with it.
A New Era of German Militancy and the Shifting Narratives of Prohibition
This cultural bias is gaining relevance as Germany enters a new historical phase. Facing a resurgent Russia, Germany is undergoing its most significant military rearmament since World War II. The nation’s leaders have declared a Zeitenwende(historic turning point), expanding the Bundeswehr to become the backbone of European defense. This shift brings a cultural emphasis on aggression, readiness, and collective defense. A substance with a reputation for making people more peaceful and introspective may be seen not just as counter-cultural, but as a national security threat.
History provides a chilling parallel in the United States. In the 1930s, Harry Anslinger, the first commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, portrayed cannabis as a drug that turned users into violent killers to back up his prohibition. Two decades later, in the anti-communist climate of the McCarthy era, his propaganda did a complete 180. Anslinger and other “Cold Warriors” claimed cannabis was a weapon used by Communist China to “pacify” the American population and undermine its will to fight. The narrative was never about the drug’s actual effects; it was about leveraging public fear to serve a political agenda.
What Happens Next
Germany stands at a crossroads. Cities like Berlin and Frankfurt are ready to launch Pillar 2 pilot projects for licensed sales. The infrastructure is ready; what’s missing is political will. If the CDU succeeds in rolling back reform, hundreds of thousands of patients will be forced back to the black market, and the country will trade a regulated, tax-paying industry for a return to failed prohibitionist policies. The world is watching. The data from Germany provides further evidence for reformers everywhere: legalization, even when partial, can work and make a profound difference for society.
The question is whether Germany’s politicians will listen to evidence or ideology, to scientifically informed public health experts or the alcohol lobby. Our attitude toward cannabis is not only rooted in cultural history but also responds to its perceived impact on society in specific historical situations.
As the case of US propaganda shows, these perceptions are usually disconnected from science and shaped by cultural biases, political opportunism, and irrational beliefs. History teaches us that prohibitions built on fear and protectionism create havoc. The haunting question is whether anyone still seeks a rational perspective in this dawning post-truth era.
This article is from an external, unpaid contributor. It does not represent High Times’ reporting and has not been edited for content or accuracy.
