Causes and Impact of the Great Depression Globally

1902
Caffeine replaces cocaine

in the composition of Coca-Cola. 1910 Dr Hamilton Wright, instigator of
US anti-narcotics laws, reports that American contractors give cocaine to their
black employees to improve their work rate. 1910 The British dismantle
the India-China opium trade. 1912 MDMA first synthesised by German
company Merck Pharmaceuticals. 1914 Forced March tablets containing
cocaine are given to troops by the British Army. 1918 The death in London
of Billie Carleton, a rising star of stage musicals, is one in a series of high
profile cocaine-related scandals. 1920 Cocaine is banned in the UK under
the Dangerous Drugs Act, following stories of 'crazed soldiers' in
WWI. 1930s This report reviews federal domestic drug enforcement.
First, it provides a history andbackground of drug enforcement in the United States
including how drugs came under the controlof federal justice authorities and how
legislation and administrative actions changed domesticdrug enforcement. It then
provides a brief overview of drug enforcement in the United States andsummarizes
U.S. drug policy. Finally, the report presents trends in federal drug enforcement
andconcludes with a discussion of drug enforcement issues going forward.History and
Background of U.S. Drug EnforcementThis section outlines historic development and
major changes in federal drug enforcement to helpprovide an understanding of how
and why certain laws and policies were implemented and howthese developments and
changes shaped current drug enforcement policy.Late 19th Century–Early 20th
CenturyBoth recreational and medical use of drugs, including cocaine and opium,
were popular in the 19thcentury, but the federal government was not involved in
restricting or regulating their distributionand use.8 During this time, the federal
government did not have any agencies that regulatedmedical and pharmaceutical
practice,9 and doctors freely prescribed cocaine and morphine astreatment for pain.
By the end of the 19th century, abuse of these drugs was a significant socialissue,
and public concern was growing.10Scholars identify the separation of federal and
state power as a major reason for an unregulatedU.S. drug market in the 19th
century. Attempts to establish federal control over drugs were metwith strong
opposition from patent medicine firms11 and state officials. The
Harrison ActFederal control of drugs began to take shape in the early 20th century.
In response to growinglevels of drug abuse, the federal government sought to
regulate and control drugs throughtaxation. The Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914
(Harrison Act; P.L. 63-223), among other things,required importers, manufacturers,
and distributors of cocaine and opium to register with the U.S.8 In some instances,
state and local governments were involved in restriction and regulation of drugs.
For example, theAnti-Opium Smoking Act was enacted in San Francisco in 1875 to
prohibit opium dens. After San Francisco passedthis ordinance, states began to ban
the smoking of opium.9 Attempts were made to regulate drugs. For example, U.S.
Customs laboratories had been established to administerprovisions of the Import
Drugs Act of 1848 to enforce drug potency and purity standards of imported drugs,
butenforcement of this act was short-lived. For more information,
see Wesley J. Heath, “America’s First Drug RegulationRegime: The Rise and Fall of
the Import Drug Act of 1848,” Food and Drug Law Journal, vol. 59, no. 169
(March2004).10 David T. Courtwright, Dark Paradise: A History of Opiate Addiction
in America (Harvard University Press, 2001);David F. Musto, “The American
Experience with Stimulants and Opiates,” in Drugs, Crime, & Justice, ed.
LarryGaines and Janine Kremling, 3rd ed. (Waveland Press, Inc., 2013).11 In the
1800s, over-the-counter products were often referred to as “patent medicines”
although typically theseproducts were trademarked and not patented.12 Wallace F.
Janssen, The Story of the Laws Behind the Labels: Part I: The 1906 Food and Drugs
Act, U.S. Food andDrug Administration, June 1981,
http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WhatWeDo/History/Overviews/ucm056044.htm. Drug Enforcement in the United States: History, Policy, and
TrendsCongressional Research Service 3Department of the Treasury (the Treasury),
pay a special tax on these drugs, and keep records ofeach transaction. Under the
Harrison Act, practitioners were authorized to prescribe opiates andcocaine;
however, the law was subject to interpretation.13 The Treasury viewed patient
drugmaintenance14 using these substances as beyond medical scope, and many
physicians werearrested, prosecuted, and jailed.15 Under authority of the Harrison
Act, the Narcotic Division ofthe Internal Revenue Bureau16 closed down state and
city narcotic clinics and sent drug violatorsto federal penitentiaries.17
Enforcement agents were referred to as “narcs.” Ultimately, physiciansstopped
prescribing drugs covered under the Harrison Act, thereby sending users to the
blackmarket to seek out these substances.18The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937During the
1920s, narcotic enforcement was closely tied to Prohibition enforcement.19 In
1930,Prohibition enforcement was transferred to the Department of Justice while a
standalone federalagency, the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN), was established
within the Treasury to handlenarcotic enforcement.20 During Prohibition, a new
recreational drug—marijuana—had quicklybecome unpopular with law enforcement,
especially in the southwestern United States.21 AsProhibition ended, marijuana
caught the attention of Congress and the FBN.Until 1937, the growth and use of
marijuana was legal under federal law.22 During the course ofpromoting federal
legislation to control marijuana, Henry Anslinger, the first commissioner of
theFBN, and others submitted testimony to Congress regarding the evils of marijuana
use, claimingthat it incited violent and insane behavior.23 Of note, Commissioner
Anslinger had informedCongress that “the major criminal in the United States is the
drug addict; that of all the offensescommitted against the laws of this country,
the narcotic addict is the most frequent offender.”2413 Prescribers were allowed to
prescribe opiates and cocaine “in the course of their professional practice
only.”14 Doctors prescribed narcotics to addicts or habitual users of these
substances.15 David F. Musto, The American Disease: Origins of Narcotic Control,
3rd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press,1999), pp. 183-200. Hereafter The
American Disease: Origins of Narcotic Control.16 At this time, the Narcotic
Division of the Prohibition Unit of the Internal Revenue Bureau was responsible for
federaldrug enforcement.17 The American Disease: Origins of
Narcotic Control; Charles F. Levinthal, Drugs, Society and Criminal Justice, 3rded.
(Boston: Prentice Hall, 2012), p. 56. Hereafter Drugs, Society and Criminal
Justice.18 Drugs, Society and Criminal Justice, p. 56.19 In 1919, Congress passed
the 18th Amendment to the Constitution which prohibited the manufacture,
transportation,and sale of alcohol. In 1933, Congress passed the 21st Amendment and
repealed the 18th Amendment. In 1927, theNarcotic Division was transferred from the
Internal Revenue Bureau to the Bureau of Prohibition in the Department ofthe
Treasury and remained there until 1930.20 The American Disease: Origins of Narcotic
Control; National Archives, Records of the Drug EnforcementAdministration, Record
Group 170; 170.1 Administrative History, http://www.archives.gov/research/guide-
fed-records/groups/170.html.21 The American Disease: Origins of Narcotic Control,
p. 219; and Drugs, Society and Criminal Justice, p. 58.22 It was also legal under
state law. States regulated marijuana and did not begin to ban it until after
1937.23 See statements by H. J. Anslinger, Commissioner of Narcotics, Bureau of
Narcotics, Department of the Treasury andDr. James C. Munch, before the U.S.
Congress, House Committee on Ways and Means, Taxation of Marihuana, 75thCong., 1st
sess., April 27-30, May 4, 1937, HRG-1837-WAM-0002.24 U.S. Congress, House
Committee on Ways and Means, Taxation of Marihuana, 75th Cong., 1st sess., April
27-30,May 4, 1937, HRG-1837-WAM-0002, p. 7.
 The Great Depression in Global
Perspective Previous Next
Digital History ID
3433 The Great Depression was a global
phenomenon, unlike previous economic downturns which generally were confined to a
handful of nations or specific regions. Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, and North
and South America all suffered from the economic collapse. International trade
fell 30 percent as nations tried to protect their industries by raising tariffs on
imported goods. "Beggar-thy-neighbor" trade policies were a major reason why the
Depression persisted as long as it did. By 1932, an estimated 30 million people
were unemployed around the world.Also, in contrast to the relatively brief
economic "panics" of the past, the Great Depression dragged on with no end in
sight. As the depression deepened, it had far-reaching political consequences. One
response to the depression was military dictatorship--a response that could be
found in Argentina and in many countries in Central America. Western
industrialized countries cut back sharply on the purchase of raw materials and
other commodities. The price of coffee, cotton, rubber, tin, and other commodities
dropped 40 percent. The collapse in raw material and agricultural commodity
prices led to social unrest, resulting in the rise of military dictatorships that
promised to maintain order.A second response to the Depression was fascism
and militarism--a response found in Germany, Italy, and Japan. In Germany, Adolph
Hitler and his Nazi Party promised to restore the country's economy and to
rebuild its military. After becoming chancellor in 1932, Hitler outlawed labor
unions, restructured German industry into a series of cartels, and after 1935,
instituted a massive program of military rearmament that ended high unemployment.
In Italy, fascism arose even before the Depression's onset under the leadership of
Italian dictator Benito Mussolini. In Japan, militarists seized control of the
government during the 1930s. In an effort to relieve the Depression, Japanese
military officers conquered Manchuria, a region rich in raw materials, and
coastal China in 1937.A third response to the Depression was totalitarian
communism. In the Soviet Union, the Great Depression helped solidify Joseph
Stalin's grip on power. In 1928, Stalin instituted a planned economy. His First
Five Year Plan called for rapid industrialization and "collectivization" of small
peasant farms under government control. To crush opposition to his program, which
required peasant farmers to give their products to the government at low prices,
Stalin exiled millions of peasant to labor camps in Siberia and instituted a
program of terror called the Great Purge. Historians estimate that as many as 20
million Soviets died during the 1930s as a result of famine and deliberate
killings.A final response to the Depression was welfare capitalism, which
could be found in countries including Canada, Great Britain, and France. Under
welfare capitalism, government assumed ultimate responsibility for promoting a
reasonably fair distribution of wealth and power and for providing security
against the risks of bankruptcy, unemployment, and destitution.Compared to
other industrialized countries, the economic decline brought on by the Depression
was steeper and more protracted in the United States. The unemployment rate rose
higher and remained higher longer than in any other western society. European
countries significantly reduced unemployment by 1936. However, the American
jobless rate still exceeded 17 percent as late as 1939, when World War II began in
Europe. It did not drop below 14 percent until 1941.The Great Depression
transformed the American political and economic landscape. It produced a major
political realignment, creating a coalition of big city ethnics, African Americans
and Southern Democrats committed, to varying degrees, to interventionist
government. The Depression strengthened the federal presence in American life,
producing such innovations as national old age pensions, unemployment
compensation, aid to dependent children, public housing, federally subsidized
school lunches, insured bank deposits, the minimum wage, and stock market
regulation. It fundamentally altered labor relations, producing a revived labor
movement and a national labor policy protective of collective bargaining. It
transformed the farm economy by introducing federal price supports and rural
electrification. Above all, the Great Depression produced a fundamental
transformation in public attitudes. It led Americans to view the federal
government as the ultimate protector of public
well-being. The first description of the use of cocaine
by humans can be found in the memoirs of the Florentine traveller Amerigo Vespucci
(1451-1512). For the next 300 years mostly the advantages of cocaine use, also as
a medication, were emphasized. In 1860 Albert Niemann (1834-1861) isolated an
active ingredient of coca leaves, which he named cocaine. After his death, his
work was carried on by his disciple Wilhelm Lossen (1838-1906), who finally, in
1865, determined its proper chemical formula. Although the first observations
concerning the effect of cocaine on mucous membranes were made by Niemann and
Lossen, the first experimental studies involving the application of cocaine to
animals were performed by the Peruvian surgeon Moréno y Maïz. In 1880 Basil von
Anrep (1852-1925) published the results of his studies concerning the application
of cocaine to humans. In the conclusion of his work he recommended cocaine as a
surgical anaesthesia. But it was finally Carl Koller (1857-1944) who, in 1884,
empirically demonstrated the benefits of cocaine use in medicine, most of all in
ophthalmology. Subsequently, within a couple of months, the medical world learnt
about and got interested in the use of cocaine for local anaesthesia. William
Stewart Halsted (1852-1922) and his collaborator Richard John Hall (1856-1897)
began their own research on cocaine injections. Eventually they developed the
nerve and regional blocking techniques. Nowadays, due to the potential harmful
effects of cocaine and the risk of addiction, the indications for the use of
cocaine as an anaesthetic are strictly limited.Popularization of cocaine is
first evident with laborers who used it as a stimulant to increase productivity,
[96] often supplied by employers.[97] African American workers were believed by
employers to be better at physical work and it was thought that it provided added
strength to their constitution which, according to the Medical News, made blacks
“impervious to the extremes of heat and cold.”[96] Instead, cocaine use quickly
acquired a reputation as dangerous and in 1897, the first state bill of control
for cocaine sales came from a mining county in Colorado.[98] Laborers from other
races used cocaine, such as in northern cities, where cocaine was often cheaper
than alcohol.[97] In the Northeast in particular, cocaine became popular amongst
workers in factories, textile mills and on rail roads.[99] In some instances,
cocaine use supplemented or replaced caffeine as the drug-of-choice to keep
workers awake and working overtime.[99]Extravagant claims of its curative
powers increased cocaine’s popularity; by the early 1900s, it was the main active
ingredient in a wide range of patent medicines, tonics, elixirs, and fluid
extracts. It is believed that the original formula of Coca-Cola® that was
developed in 1886 by Georgia pharmacist John Pemberton contained approximately 2.5
mg of cocaine per 100 mL of fluid (Coca-Cola Bottling of Shreveport, Inc., et al.,
vs. The Coca-Cola Company, a Delaware Corporation, 769 F.Supp.671). This formula
was sold as a headache cure and stimulant. Another pharmacist bought the rights
and founded the Coca-Cola Company in 1892.Hyperbolic reports of the effect
of cocaine on African Americans went hand-in-hand with this hysteria. In 1901, the
Atlanta Constitution reported that “Use of the drug [cocaine] among negroes is
growing to an alarming extent.”[103] The New York Times reported that
under the influence of cocaine, “sexual desires are increased and perverted …
peaceful negroes become quarrelsome, and timid negroes develop a degree of 'Dutch
courage' that is sometimes almost incredible.”[104] A medical doctor even wrote
“cocaine is often the direct incentive to the crime of rape by the negroes.”[104]
To complete the characterization, a judge in Mississippi declared that supplying a
“negro” with cocaine was more dangerous than injecting a dog with
rabies.[105]These attitudes not only influenced drug law and policy but also
led to increased violence against African Americans. In 1906, a major race riot
led by whites erupted; it was sparked by reports of crimes committed by black
‘cocaine fiends.’[103] Indeed, white-led, race riots spawning from reports of
blacks under the influence of cocaine were not uncommon.[106] Police in the South
widely adopted the use of a heavier caliber handguns so as to better stop a
cocaine-crazed black person – believed to be empowered with super-human strength.
[107] Another dangerous myth perpetuated amongst police was that cocaine imbued
African Americans with tremendous accuracy with firearms and therefore police were
better advised to shoot first in questionable circumstances.[108] Ultimately
public opinion rested against the cocaine user. Criminality was commonly believed
to be a natural result of cocaine use.[109] Much of the influence for these kind of
perceptions came from the widespread publicity given to notorious cases.[95] While
the historical reality of cocaine’s effect on violence and crime is difficult to
disentangle from inflamed perceptions, it does appear that public opinion was
swayed by the image of the violent, cocaine-crazed fiend and pushed over the edge
by a few violent episodes.[109] It was an image of the cocaine-user that carried
acute racial overtones.[95]Before any substantive federal regulation of
cocaine, state and local municipalities evoked their own means to regulate
cocaine. Because of the initial lack of targeted legislation, on both federal and
state level, the most typical strategy by law enforcement was the application of
nuisance laws pertaining to vagrancy and disturbing the peace.[110] Subsequent
legislative actions aimed at controlling the distribution of cocaine rather than
its manufacture.[111] Reformers took this approach in part because of legal
precedents which made it easier to control distributors such as pharmacies; state
and local boards of health or boards of pharmacy often took the place of
regulatory bodies for controlling the distribution of cocaine.[111] Some states
took the position of outright banning of all forms of cocaine sale; Georgia was the
first to do this in 1902.[112] A New Orleans ordinance banned cocaine sales as well
but left an ill-defined exception
for therapeutic uses.[111] A more common requirement was to restrict the sale of
cocaine or impose labeling requirements. A 1907 California law limiting sale of
cocaine to only those with a physician’s prescription resulted in the arrest of
over 50 store owners and clerks in the first year.[111] A 1913 New York state law
limited druggists’ cocaine stocks to under 5 ounces. Labeling requirements
initially operated on a state level with some states even going so far as to
require that cocaine and cocaine-containing products be labeled as
poison.[113]Eventually the federal government stepped in and instituted a
national labeling requirement for cocaine and cocaine-containing products through
the Food and Drug Act of 1906.[113] The next important federal regulation was the
Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914. While this act is often seen as the start of
prohibition, the act itself was not actually a prohibition on cocaine, but instead
set up a regulatory and licensing regimehe Harrison Act left manufacturers
of cocaine untouched so long as they met certain purity and labeling standards.
[115] Despite that cocaine was typically illegal to sell and legal outlets were
more rare, the quantities of legal cocaine produced declined very little.[115]
Legal cocaine quantities did not decrease until the Jones-Miller Act of 1922 put
serious restrictions on cocaine manufactures.By the early 1900s, public
health officials were becoming alarmed by the medical, psychiatric, and social
problems associated with excessive cocaine use. These concerns from health
officials and legal authorities played a major role in initiating and supporting
the effort to pass the Harrison Narcotic Act of 1914. This Federal legislation
severely restricted the legal uses for cocaine and, for all practical purposes,
ended the extensive use and abuse of cocaine in the early part of the 20th
century. Interestingly, cocaine hit a low during the 1930s when the advent of
amphetamine almost eradicated demand. The Great
Depression was a severe worldwide economic depression in the decade
preceding World War II. The timing of the Great Depression varied across nations,
but in most countries it started in 1930 and lasted until the late 1930s or middle
1940s.[1] It was the longest, deepest, and most widespread depression of the 20th
century.[2]The Great Depression had devastating effects in countries rich
and poor. Personal income, tax revenue, profits and prices dropped, while
international trade plunged by more than 50%. Unemployment in the U.S. rose to
25%, and in some countries rose as high as 33%.[3]Cities all around the
world were hit hard, especially those dependent on heavy industry. Construction
was virtually halted in many countries. Farming communities and rural areas
suffered as crop prices fell by approximately 60%.[4][5][6] Facing plummeting
demand with few alternate sources of jobs, areas dependent on primary sector
industries such as mining and logging suffered the most.[7]Some economies
started to recover by the mid-1930s. In many countries, the negative effects of
the Great Depression lasted until after the end of World War II.[8]***not a
single mention in the wikipedia page fer great depression bout
cocaine! Popularization Pope Leo XIII purportedly carried a hipflask of the coca-treated Vin Mariani
with him, and awarded a Vatican gold medal to Angelo Mariani.[90]In 1859, an
Italian doctor, Paolo Mantegazza, returned from Peru, where he had witnessed
first-hand the use of coca by the local indigenous peoples. He proceeded to
experiment on himself and upon his return to Milan he wrote a paper in which he
described the effects. In this paper he declared coca and cocaine (at the time
they were assumed to be the same) as being useful medicinally, in the treatment of
"a furred tongue in the morning, flatulence, and whitening of the teeth."A
chemist named Angelo Mariani who read Mantegazza's paper became immediately
intrigued with coca and its economic potential. In 1863, Mariani started marketing
a wine called Vin Mariani, which had been treated with coca leaves, to become
cocawine. The ethanol in wine acted as a solvent and extracted the cocaine from
the coca leaves, altering the drink's effect. It contained 6 mg cocaine per ounce
of wine, but Vin Mariani which was to be exported contained 7.2 mg per ounce, to
compete with the higher cocaine content of similar drinks in the United States. A
"pinch of coca leaves" was included in John Styth Pemberton's original 1886 recipe
for Coca-Cola, though the company began using decocainized leaves in 1906 when the
Pure Food and Drug Act was passed. The actual amount of cocaine that Coca-Cola
contained during the first 20 years of its production is practically impossible to
determine.[citation needed]In 1879 cocaine began to be used to
treat morphine addiction. Cocaine was introduced into clinical use as a local
anesthetic in Germany in 1884, about the same time as Sigmund Freud published his
work Über Coca, in which he wrote that cocaine causes:[citation
needed]<blockquote>Exhilaration and lasting euphoria, which in no way
differs from the normal euphoria of the healthy person. You perceive an increase
of self-control and possess more vitality and capacity for work. In other words,
you are simply normal, and it is soon hard to believe you are under the influence
of any drug. Long intensive physical work is performed without any fatigue. This
result is enjoyed without any of the unpleasant after-effects that follow
exhilaration brought about by alcoholic beverages. No craving for the further use
of cocaine appears after the first, or even after repeated taking of the
drug.</blockquote>In 1885 the U.S. manufacturer Parke-Davis sold cocaine in
various forms, including cigarettes, powder, and even a cocaine mixture that could
be injected directly into the user's veins with the included needle. The company
promised that its cocaine products would "supply the place of food, make the
coward brave, the silent eloquent and render the sufferer insensitive to
pain."By the late Victorian era cocaine use had appeared as a vice in
literature. For example, it was injected by Arthur Conan Doyle's fictional Sherlock
Holmes, generally to offset the boredom he felt when he was not working on a
case.In early 20th-century Memphis, Tennessee, cocaine was sold in
neighborhood drugstores on Beale Street, costing five or ten cents for a small
boxful. Stevedores along the Mississippi River used the drug as a stimulant, and
white employers encouraged its use by black laborers.[91]In 1909, Ernest
Shackleton took "Forced March" brand cocaine tablets to Antarctica, as did Captain
Scott a year later on his ill-fated journey to the South Pole.[92]During the
mid-1940s, amidst WWII, cocaine was considered for inclusion as an ingredient of a
future generation of 'pep pills' for the German military code named
D-IX.[93] The properties of cocaine to cause vasoconstriction of
the arterial vasculature have been well documented [5]. However there have been a
number of case reports and series where cocaine has been implicated as the causal
agent in arterial thrombosis. There are case reports of thrombosis in the renal
artery [6], pulmonary artery [7], aorta [8], and coronary arteries. In some of
these case reports myocardial infarction has occurred where there is no evidence
of atherocsclerosis [9]. This state is often referred to in the literature as
"myocardial infarction with normal coronary arteries". [10] The postulated
mechanism of action is adrenergically mediated increases in myocardial oxygen
consumption, vasoconstriction of large epicardial arteries or small coronary
resistance vessels leading to coronary thrombosis [10]. However it has also been
postulated that such infarctions could be due to a state of blood
hypercoagulability leading to arterial thrombosis [10]. Hypercoagulability occurs
with low plasma tissue plasminogen activator activity, high tissue plasminogen
activator inhibitor activity, factor XII deficiency or abnormal platelet
aggregation [10]. This raises the hypothesis as to whether in addition to
properties of vasospasm cocaine is a pro-thrombotic agent.Cocaine has also
been implicated in cases of cerebral thrombosis [11] but also in cases of
haemorrhagic cerebrovascular accidents [11]. It has been postulated that
haemorrhagic cerebral infarcts in cocaine use are due to episodic hypertension due
to the vasoconstricting properties of cocaine [12].As well as being
implicated as the causal agent in the process of arterial thrombosis, cocaine has
also been implicated as the causal agent in venous thrombosis as it has been
associated with case reports of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis
[13].The evidence from in-vitro studies is conflicting with some results
showing an increase in platelet activation following cocaine administration [14]
and other results showing cocaine to be an inhibitory factor in platelet
coagulation (and hence thrombus formation) [15,16]. However biochemical mediators
can act differently in-vitro to the human in-vivo setting. Similarly the results
of animal studies have shown conflicting reports on the ability of cocaine to
induce platelet formation [17,18]. Therefore this research sought to undertake a
systematic review of human in-vivo studies, and studies with a clinical endpoint
studying the effect of cocaine on either the arterial or venous clotting
mechanisms. coca-colasometimes during one of
the many reversal of fortune so characteristic for the North African theater of
war, German troops on the offensive stumbled across a cache of Coca-Cola left
behind by retreating Allied troops. But the welcome find came with a snag and
thirsty throats stayed dry despite the heat: The enemy had forgotten to leave some
ice as well, and since every German soldier knew that a bottle of Coca-Cola had to
be consumed eiskalt, the booty remained worthless unless somebody came up with
another method of refrigeration under the scorching African sun.Luftwaffe-
pilots stationed nearby eventually provided an ingenious answer to this let-down by
wrapping wet towels around the bottles and tying them to the wings of their
Messerschmidts 109F before take off. Once the fighters were airborne, evaporation
and the lower temperature of higher altitudes cooled the precious load down. The
subsequent scene upon the pilots' return to base must have been irresistible: The
pilots hopped out of their planes, plucked ice- cold Coca-Colas from the wings,
opened them and then let the brown juice run down their throats to celebrate the
thirsty return from another successful mission.So much for the commercial
potential of this image. Once the vision wears off, however, another question
demands an answer. Would anybody have suspected that this harmless war-anecdote
exemplifies the Coca-Cola Company's dual roles during the Second World War?
Leaving aside the accidental aspect of this incident in the North African desert,
it is still a fact that the soft drinks giant from Atlanta, Georgia collaborated
with the Nazi-regime throughout its reign from 1933 to 1945 and sold countless
millions of bottled beverages to Hitler's Germany.Unfortunately, this in
itself seems neither surprising nor exciting. Cooperation if not outright
collaboration with the Nazis was the rule for many transnational corporations with
a stake in Germany and has been the subject of extensive research. Next to
Standard Oil and I.G. Farben, for instance, Coke's story of peddling soda to
opposing trenches appears tame. The immorality of bottling Coca-Cola for the Nazis
stands in no relation to STP's selling of aviation fuel to the German war machine,
nor can it overshadow the oil- producer's cozy wartime relationship with Germany's
chemical giant I.G. Farben. Simply put, Coca-Cola's infamous deeds were not the
Second World War's only ones, nor were they particularly sinister. After all, Coke
cannot be used to fly airplanes or make bombs.The Coca-Cola Company's tale
of questionable wartime conduct would thus be comparatively insignificant and not
worth the effort of dwelling upon, were it not for the fact that its product,
namely Coca-Cola, was and is a luxuary item whose commercial success is inseparably
tied to a public image created through advertising. Like all other companies in
the business of selling goods nobody really needs, the Coca-Cola Company's
advertisements must reflect the desires of the times in order to defend its share
of the mass-market. How Coca- Cola chose to define itself through advertising was
crucial to its success during the war years in the United States and is the story
of the previous chapter. Thanks to a relentless barrage of war-supportive
advertising built upon the Company's credo that "It isn't what a product is, but
what it does that interests us," Coca-Cola after December 1941 convinced Americans
at the front and at home that drinking Coca-Cola was somehow synonimous with
fighting against the enemies of freedom and democracy. Coke wanted to be
understood as a morale- booster for the American effort.There was a moral
price attached to this sort of advertising, because Coca-Cola's managers failed to
couple the new patriotic image with a correspondent curbing of its contradictory
activities in Germany, the company's second biggest market. While Coke-drinking
GI's and other U.S. citizens had their carbonated soft-drink sweetened with
patriotic statements like the 1943 slogan "Universal Symbol of the American way of
Life," German Coca-Cola men had been busy quenching the thirst of the Third Reich
and its conquered territories for years. To say the least, catchwords like
Universal and American Way of Life were at odds with the Nazis' pursuit of their
own "universalist" goals.However, for the Coca-Cola GmbH (Inc.) odds existed
in order to be overcome. While establishing itself in Germany, a politically
difficult, but potentially rewarding market of seventy million people, the company
solved an overwhelming number of problems: In defiance of strong anti-American
sentiments within the turbulent Weimar Republic, Coca-Cola entered the country at
the onset of the Great Depresion in 1929. Despite the bad timing for launching a
consumer product, Coca-Cola overcame the intense competition of Germany's breweries
and cola-imitators, learned to combine its interests with those of Germany's Nazi-
rulers after 1933 in an overall harmonic symbiosis and thus even managed the
seemingly impossible task of surviving the war intact as an American-owned
company.What saved the Coca-Cola GmbH from being crushed by Germany's
fascist rulers was that its corporate structure and advertising philosophy came
naturally close to the Nazis' totalitarian ideas of a brave new world. The case of
Coca-Cola thus goes beyond mere collaboration: before Hitler decreed the Principle
of Leadership (Fuehreprinzip) in industry, which replaced collective bargaining by
handing dictatorial powers to company directors, the Coca-Cola GmbH was already
dominated by its own authoritarian leader. Company and government interests
subsequently overlapped: the Nazis regarded mass-production and mass-consumption as
crucial building blocks of their new society. Coca-Cola's modern means of
producing a uniform product could have only impressed them. Similar things can be
said about Coke's advertising strategy, which again reflected values central to the
National-Socialist society. Through the same modern channels that the Nazis used
for propaganda; namely film, radio, mass- publications, and sports events, Coca-
Cola appealed, among others, to workers, soldiers, and automobilists, target groups
that are significant insofar as they epitomized the Nazis' idea of
modernity.7X and Merchandise #5 aside, these were the true secret
ingredients for Coca-Cola's German success, fully confirmed by the company's sales
figures: In the ten year period spanning 1929 and 1939, the company's annual sales
of cases of beverage soared from zero to a staggering four million. Even during
the war's difficult late stages the company didn't falter; in 1944 the company
still produced a respectable two million cases of bottled beverages, selling them
to a country that was being rapidly reduced to rubble.Back in 1929, these
achievements seemed all but impossible. Germany between the wars was a humiliated
and revanchist country. Public sentiments for the World War I victor nation USA
were ambiguous at best as Dan Diner's excellent essay on the history of anti-
Americanism in Germany points out. Despite an undeniable trend toward the
"`Americanization' of the economy, technology and culture," Germany was still
seething with increasingly entrenched anti- American sentiments," a situation not
conducive to the high profile marketing of American brands.Fears of U.S.
economic domination, a country perceived as both ultra-capitalist and culturally
inferior, encompassed the whole of the political spectrum. Indeed, next to the
desire to tear down the embattled republic, virulent anti-Americanism may have been
the only characteristic shared by the many political extremists. Communist
Reichstag member Clara Zetkin's ad hoc rejection of the Dawes Plan in 1923 provides
an illustrative example for the enthusiastic response to anti- American rhetoric,
for it was met by the unusual sound of standing ovations from the gentlemen
ideologically most opposed to Communism, the National-Socialists. Zetkin began
her impromptu speech by claiming that America was bent upon turning Germany into "a
colonized country." "The United States," she continued, "represents sharp-eyed
and reckless capitalists without any of the old traditions that still sometimes
constrain capitalism in Europe, so that they would be the last to trip over the
thin thread of moral qualms. No, [the U.S. wants] to capture the German labor
force with American capital, [make] cheap labor [out of them] and to thus turn
Germany into a colony of the United States. No illusions about this
fact!"Since such rhetoric met with the approval of politicians of all
colors, it seems not too far-fetched to argue that the general public cannot have
been too warm about the United States either. Quite to the contrary: America, as
David Large sums it up, became the object of a revival of "a set of deprecatory
images [...] because doing so afforded [Germans] a measure of self-respect at a
time of great inner doubt." Large argues that, true to a tradition that continues
to this day "America [became] a kind of composite symbol for all the things that
Germans [found] unpalatable in their own country, which [was], after all, the most
Americanized in Europe."Given such hostile circumstances, the Company had no
illusions that it had to distance Coca-Cola from its American roots, were the Coca-
Colonization of Germany to be successful. One cannot help but note that this
initial strategy departed radically from the marketing ploys of the years after
1945, when, as Ralph Willett points out "Coca-Cola [came] to symbolize America and
American culture: [...] the identification was already so strong by 1948 that when
non- Americans thought of democracy, it was claimed, they instantly called to mind
Coca-Cola."The
post-war Americanized image stands in complete contrast to the pre-war situation,
a factor which helps account for the inability of Germans to recall Coke's presence
prior to the war. Indeed, Coca-Cola's original German marketing strategy so
successfully disassociated the drink from its Atlanta roots that Hans Dieter
Schaefer felt compelled to note six decades later "It is characteristic for the
state of our mind that we associate Coca-Cola only with the years of the
Wirtschaftswunder (economic miracle)."But the failure to remember once the
clock struck "Stunde Null" (zero hour) cannot alter the facts of history. Coke's
German business began with Ray Rivington Powers in 1929. The expatriate American
set up shop in the City of Essen in the Ruhrgebiet, Germany's industrial heartland
"where the thirst of workers would need quenching." He had a difficult stand
there: Not only did Powers face the powerful competition of cola-imitators Sinalco
and Afri-Cola, he also had to convince Germans that Coca-Cola was a tasty
alternative to their beer-drinking habits. This meant hard work. Hubert Strauf,
an advertising man in the service of Powers, described how this eccentric six and a
half feet tall man who had allegedly once claimed to "have done everything in the
world but murder," "filled the first bottles himself with the help of just one
worker. With him he then drove to the Ruhr to peddle the first bottles of Coca-
Cola in Germany himself - the American with his beautiful Marengo topcoat and stiff
hat, a hulking fellow who called out with a thick Southern accent: `Drinken Coca-
Cola, kostlich und erfrescht.'(which approximately means: `Drink Coca-Cola,
delicious and refreshing')"To properly introduce Coca-Cola in grammatically
correct German, Powers printed up leaflets titled "Was ist Coca-Cola?" and had them
distributed at sporting events and on the tables of restaurants in and around
Essen. "When distraught proprietors threw them out, the Coke men doggedly replaced
them," reports Mark Pendergrast and continues that "Many who picked up the folder
expected to find an analysis of the ingredients and were angered when it simply
said that Coke was a refreshing drink, but the endless repetition of the product
name had its intended effect." The effect was that an increasing number of
retailers carried Coca-Cola, most of them stashed beneath beer bottles so as not to
anger the breweries that owned most restaurants and did not like potential
competitors like Coca-Cola.Thanks to the vigorous targeting of industrial
workers with Hubert Strauf's slogan to "Mach doch mal Pause" (Come on, take a
break) apparently derived from its U.S. pendant "The pause that refreshes" and a
lot of hard work to open new outlets, Coca-Cola's annual sales rose to 111.000
cases four years later (see appendix). The Company had gained a small, but
respectable foothold by the time the crucial year of 1933 came around.It
cannot be overemphasized, however, that a big portion of this success must be
attributed to what the Coca- Cola ads failed to mention: Coke's U.S. roots. The
Company had successfully established itself as a German brand in the unconscious
mind of the soda-drinking public. The following anecdote shows just how successful
the Company was in this respect: When a group of German prisoners of war debarked
in Hoboken, New Jersey, in early 1945, one of the first things that caught their
eyes was a large Coca-Cola sign. This prompted excitement among the Germans and
when one of the guards demanded an explanation for their behaviour, he received the
answer: "We are surprised that you have Coca- Cola here too."The twelve
years separating 1933 from the end of the war provide an explanation for Coca-
Cola's boom. One year after 1933, Coke's output had already more than doubled to
234,000 cases. This was no coincidence. There were striking parallels between the
Coca-Cola GmbH and the nation at large. Firstly, the business of Coca-Cola and the
Reich was guided by similar-minded (and similar-looking) people: In Coke's case,
the name of the man now in charge was Max Keith (pronounced Kite). According to
the testimony of former employees, Keith's charisma and uncompromising nature
invited more than one analogy to the Adolf Hitler. "He was a born leader and very
charismatic," claims one. "You liked to work for him although he was almost a slave
driver . . . . Oh, yes, I was scared of him. We all were, even aides who were
older." Still, so the witness concludes, most of his followers "would have died
for this man." Keith's own words definitely betray the fanatic in him: "I was
full of activity and enthusiasm," he reported in 1963, "and the thing which then
took possesion of all that was in me and which . . . has never lost its hold on me,
was Coca-Cola. From then on and to all eternity, I was tied to this product for
better and for worse."It was mostly for the better that Keith was tied to
Coke, because, as he himself recognized, "time marched with us." To quote Felix
Gilbert, "At the time the Nazis took over, recovery from the recession was
beginning" and Germany was economically prospering. The Nazis, through a massive
public works system, which included "the construction of the systems of Autobahns,
and . . . providing industry with armament contracts," were determined to keep the
upward swing going and Germans content.Economic prosperity, however, as
catchwords like public works and infrastructure programs reveal, also meant the
continued Americanization of Germany's economy under Hitler. Indeed, the dictator
himself seems to have welcomed America's efficient methods of production. Hitler
was, for instance, a proponent of mass-consumption, as shown by his statement from
September 1941: "Frugality is the enemy of progress. Therein we we are similar to
the Americans, that we are fastidious." Detlev Peukert underlines Hitler's pro-
American stance, arguing that, not unlike the U.S., the Third Reich consciously
aimed to represent "the dawning of the new achievement-orientated consumer society
based on the nuclear family, upward mobility, mass media, leisure and an
interventionist welfare state [. . .]."The Nazis were thus not anti-
modernists, but, according to Peukert, "Agrarian romanticism notwithstanding,
[. . .] fostered enthusiasm for modern technology, not only because it needed it as
part of its armoury for conquering Lebensraum, but also because the toughness,
frictionless functionality and efficiency of the machine matched the ideal of the
fighter and the soldier, the man hard as Krupp steel." Interestingly, Peukert
assumes that the man "hard as Krupp steel" liked to quench his thirst with Coca-
Cola, for in the same paragraph he mentions that "Even Coca-Cola consumption rose
significantly in Germany in the thirties."In other words, that Coca-Cola had
tied its fortunes to the thirst of industrial workers paid out now, for the
increasingly busy workers needed the pause that refreshed more than ever. The
destruction of the trade unions resulted in longer working hours and Coke's
chairman Max Keith himself recognized that "The requirements of the people were
much higher than in the past . . . . They had to work harder, had to work faster,
the technical equipment they had to handle required soberness." What soda could do
a better job than a deliciously refreshing Coca-Cola?Beside its industrial
connection, modernization and newfound wealth opened additional avenues for Coke:
refrigeration steadily invaded German households throughout the thirties which made
home-consumption possible, whereas the massive infrastructure programs and the
ensuing infatuation with the automobile allowed Coke to sell its products along
Germany's vast network of new highways (see appendix). With the Company's
dependency on restaurants removed, expansion proved limitless.Coca-Cola's
success was thus based on the needs of a modernizing and economically prospering
totalitarian state. It was a stroke of luck that for strategy-purposes the company
could consult with the Atlanta headquarters and imitate some of the New Deal ad
campaigns pertinent to the German experience. This, however, is where the
analogies with the United States must end, for it should be emphasized that neither
Germany nor the Coca-Cola GmbH in Essen were turning distincly American under the
Nazis. Far from it, Nazi- ideology thrived on a xenophobia that did not spare the
U.S. and while Hitler might have been jealous of the efficieny of the U.S. economy,
he was nevertheless rabidly anti-American in all other respects. He openly
described the United States as a "deeply lazy country full of racial problems and
social inequities. . .", stating that his<blockquote>"feelings for America are
full of hatred and antipathy; half Jewish, half negro and everything based on the
dollar . . . Americans have the brain of a chicken. This land is a house of cards
with an unequal standard of living. Americans live like swines, even if in a
very luxurious pigsty."</blockquote><blockquote>During the 21 years of its
existence in Germany, the producers of Coca-Cola could have easily constructed a
mammouth concern. . . . with its own bottling plants, packaging, ice box
producers, its own storage spaces, advertising companies and printing presses.
They didn't do so but instead passed all contracts along to independent
industries.</blockquote>But Coke was not above moving behind the scenes and
handing out bribes when their policy of limited greed failed to calm down
xenophobic nazi-officials. Thus was the case when Hermann Goering in 1936
introduced a Four-Year Plan, which restricted imports to a bare minimum in order to
make Germany self-sufficient and ready for war. When Coke's main lawyer
could not convince the authorities that Coca-Cola was a German business which
deserved government support, the company announced that it would from now on
produce all of the concentrate's elements, with the exception of Merchandise No.5
and 7X, within Germany. When even this show of goodwill did not suffice to sway
the government into granting an import exemption, the company turned to a frantic
pulling of strings behind the scenes, which seems to have included a bribe for
Goering. Coca-Cola gained the needed import license and saved itself from
impending doom.Coke's readiness to strike deals points to the second pillar
of Coke's survival strategy which had a lot to do with the leadership of Max Keith,
"the quintessential Coca-Cola man and Nazi-collaborator." Simply put, his strategy
was to please the Nazis whenever possible and through whatever means
necessary.An abundance of examples shows how Coke's advertising supported
the Third Reich. Hans Dieter Schaefer reports, for instance, that after the
aggressive news broadcast by the Reichsrundfunk, silly advertising jingles
propagating the evangelium of refreshment were next. Coke ads deliberately sought
the close contact to the men in power. This meant that when the cover of a
magazine sported a picture of the Fuehrer, chances were good that a Coke
advertisement would grace the back of that cover. Even when visitors streamed into
the Sportpalast to listen to one of Dr. Goebbels' infamous speeches, they had to
pass by a large billboard urging them to drink "Coca-Cola eiskalt."Max Keith
left out no opportunity to ingratiate himself with Germany's leaders. Coca-Cola
was one of the three official beverage sponsors with a Getraenkedienst (beverage
service) at the 1936 Olympics in Berlin, and thus participated in an event the
Nazis deliberately exploited to celebrate Germany's return to power and status.
Moreover, to quote Ralph Willett, "By servicing the Olympices, Coca-Cola associated
itself with the modernity of media technology, in the form of microphones,
transmitter vans, and cameras for (respectively) radio broadcasts [. . .]. It was
true that "the emphasis on sport [. . .] was in line with curent cultural ideology
epitomized by the Berlin Olympics." Athletic competition was a Nazi ideal and the
Coca-Cola GmbH cashed in heavily on this infatuation by becoming one of the biggest
sponsors of sports events, most notably the annual Deutschlandrundfahrt (National
Bycicle Championships) and the Soccer Cup.In 1937, Keith succeeded in taking
Coca-Cola literally into the heart of nazism. The occasion was the
Reichsausstellung Schaffendes Volk, or Reich "A Working People" Exhibit. In this
industrial exhibition reserved to the companies most loyal to the new order, the
Coca-Cola GmbH, according to Mark Pendergrast, set up a functioning bottling plant,
with a "miniature train carting Kinder beneath it, [. . .] at the very center of
the fair, adjacent to the Propaganda Office."The strategy of direct
association with Nazi-leaders or of lending support to events propagandized by
nazi-ideology sent a powerful subliminal message to both consumers and government
by signaling that Coca-Cola was on Germany's side. Sometimes, however, it took a
little more than that and it is interesting to note the circumstances under which
Coca- Cola transgressed the boundaries of political neutrality in a more open show
of support of the Nazis.A flagrant example for such a transgression can be
found in the October 1938 issue of the army-magazine Die Wehrmacht printed up to
celebrate the annexation of the Sudetenland. In this (unfortunately unavailable)
ad, Hans- Dieter Schaefer reports that a hand holds out a Coke bottle in front of a
world map underlined by the caption Ja, Coca-Cola hat Weltruf (Yes, Coca-Cola
enjoys international reputation) that goes on stating that `of the forty million
automobilists from all over the world increasing attention is demanded,' which is
the reason why they 'like to take advantage of the "pause that refreshes."'
Schaefer quite correctly remarks that "this ad aimed at German soldiers and mixed a
global point of view with a technologic-athletic perspective", but fails to point
out the cynical effect of such a global point of view in a magazine dedicated to
the glorification of Germany's recent annexations.That such aggressive
advertisements had become necessary was in part the result of the slanderous
activities of Karl Flach, the boss of Afri-Cola. Intent on driving out the foreign
competitor, Flach in 1936 began circulating flyers depicting Coca-Cola bottle caps
from the U.S. with Hebrew inscriptions. Although the inscriptions were nothing but
an indication that Coke was kosher, the flyers claimed to prove that Coca-Cola was
a Jewish company. The damage was terrific and never quite contained as both the
flyers and the rumor of Coke's Jewish owners continued to circulate over the years.
However, sales figures prove that most of the impact was only temporary and due to
the bad publicity generated when, as Mark Pendergrast rightly asserts, "Nazi Party
Headquarters hastily canceled their orders."Pendergrast seems to be wrong,
however, when he claims that "the entire business was in jeopardy" because the
Atlanta headquarters had forbidden Keith "to print defensive literature." If Keith
had been given such an order, he disregarded it, for he knew just like Coke's
company lawyer Walter Oppenhof that nobody outside Germany "could have any
conception" of the scope of the problem. Coca-Cola thus did attempt to regain
status in the eyes of Germany's rulers by placing several ads denouncing the anti-
semitic accusations in the Stuermer, the official Nazi publication renowned for its
vicious attacks against Jews. These ads did not go unnoticed in the United States
and produced angry headlines claiming that "Coca-Cola Finances Hitler."It
seems as if the only principle that the Coca-Cola GmbH never betrayed in its
history of wheeling and dealing under the Nazis was the product itself. The
company fought the Nazi-bureaucracy tooth and nail to keep Coca-Cola unchanged
after the Ministry of Economics in 1939 passed out rules demanding that bottles
conform to a metric standard based on decimals. Since the Coke bottle contained
180 cubic centimeters instead of 200, the Nazis promptly halted the production of
new bottles, showing little understanding for the argument that the production of
different-sized bottles would constitute an unacceptable drain on Germany's scarce
glas resources.Not surprisingly, the company found an ingenious and
unscrupulous solution. With the help of Reinhard Spitzy, a well-connected former
high official in the German Foreign Office, Coca-Cola manouvred to take advantage
of the situation in the recently annexed Sudetenland, where German laws, including
the packaging regulations, did not fully apply yet. Spitzy recounts that when he
asked the Gauleiter (District Leader) how the local glas industry was coping with
the international embargo imposed on all German products after the annexation of
Czechoslovakia, he received the answer: "My dear Party Comrade Spitzy, the
situation of the glas industry is absolutely shitty, the machines run only a few
hours a day." When Spitzy told him how unfortunate this was given that "the
international company Coca-Cola urgently needs millions and millions of new
bottles," the Gauleiter reacted predictably by engineering an import exemption for
Coca-Cola bottles manufactured in the Sudetenland.While this exemption could
be regarded as the result of a successful act of opposition against the Nazi
bureaucracy, one should not exaggerate the heroism in Coke's stand: by helping the
Sudetendeutsche industries back on its feet, the Coca-Cola GmbH supported the Nazi-
government in circumventing an international embargo designed to cripple its
rule.Stories like these illustrate how Coca-Cola achieved its success under
the Nazis. Simply put, the Coca-Cola GmbH and the Nazis needed one another. The
former took advantage of the latter's economic and territorial expansionism, while
the latter needed modern companies like Coca-Cola as role-models for mass-
production. Underlying these overlapping interests was an undeniable ideological
affinity that kept the relationship strong. The tale of the March 1938
concessionaire convention sums up best what is meant here. While Max Keith
presided over the 1,500 people in attendance, German soldiers stormed across the
Austrian border to execute the Anschluss. Mark Pendergrast's description of the
event leaves no doubt that the swastika and the Coca-Cola logo rested next to each
other comfortably.Behind the main table, a huge banner proclaimed, in
German, `Coca-Cola is the world-famous trademark for the unique product of
the Coca-Cola GmbH.' Directly below, three gigantic swastikas stood out, black on
red. At the main table, Max Keith sat surrounded by his deputies, another swastika
draped in front of him.Although acknowledging glorious past efforts, Keith
urged his workers to forge onward into the future, never to be content until
every citizen was a Coke consumer. "We know we will reach our goal only if we
muster all our power in a total effort," he said. "Our marvelous drink has
the power of endurance to continue this march to success." [. . .] The meeting
closed with a "ceremonial pledge" to Coca-Cola and a ringing, three-fold "Sieg-
Heil" to Hitler. Coca-Cola ber alles.Given this overtly enthusiastic
embrace of the Nazis, the fact that the Coca-Cola GmbH survived the oncoming war
seems more a logical conclusion to this paper than a surprise in need of an
explanation. Despite all the difficulties inherent in Coke's rise, by
the time war broke out, Coke's situation was so secure that Max Keith could get
himself "appointed to the Office of Enemy Property to supervise all soft drink
plants, both in Germany and the captured teritory. As German troops overran
Europe, Keith and Oppenhof followed, assisting and taking over the Coca-Cola
businesses in Italy, France, Holland, Luxembourg, Belgium and Norway."
Even that the war had cut off the supply of 7X and Merchandise #5 proved
unimportant. Keith and his men countered by inventing Fanta to see them through
the war, and thus created a success that still reverberates throughout the corners
of the world where local bottling companies fill Fanta bottles.Although it
must be noted in all fairness that the Coca- Cola GmbH only in rare instances
directly endorsed the Nazis, it is still a fact that the Coca-Cola GmbH went beyond
mere opportunism to stay alive. Coca-Cola was part of the Nazi state. Should this
paper have proven inadequate in pointing this out, plenty of other sources can.
The survivors of the forced labourers kidnapped from the conquered territories will
testify to that. Some of them were sent to work for Max Keith's Coca-Cola
GmbH.

Causes and Impact of the Great Depression Globally

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Causes and Impact of the Great Depression Globally

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

<p><strong><b><br></b></strong></p><p><strong><b>1902</b>

Caffeine replaces cocaine

You might also like