As a curious exception to the revolution from below example, the Taliban completely eliminated heroin production in Afghanistan when they were in power. Production has skyrocketed since their overthrow. There's a reason why religious fanaticism, for better or worse, is popular among the destitute. It represents an alternative to criminal gangs for dealing with government failures.
They did that when they were trying to be recognized as a state, which they were earnestly trying to do all the way to September 10th, 2001.
Without that prospect, they stopped bothering. The Taliban's popularity came despite the opium ban, not because of it. The poppy growers did not get high on their own supply.
>As a curious exception to the revolution from below example, the Taliban completely eliminated heroin production in Afghanistan when they were in power.
not so much lately. the taliban are at their highest peak of territorial control since the invasion, but these days their territories export poppies.
Considering that religion from the relevant eras was largely a mechanism of control (or, less ominously, societal orchestration), this is not surprising.
I'd very much like to read an exploration of the relationship between the rise of irreligious social constructs and the decline of the importance of religion in modern states.
You don't need to go any further that "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's." to see the principle of separation of church and state laid in a religious text.
Not that it was ever followed in practice in the centuries that followed.
