The Hidden Foundations of Western Wealth
The Hidden Foundations of Western Wealth: How Global Drug Cartels Built Modern Capitalism
An Investigation into the Colonial Opium Trade and Its American Legacy
In the towering skyscrapers of Manhattan and the grand estates of New England lies a shameful secret that shaped the modern world: some of history's most prestigious fortunes were built on what was essentially the world's first industrial-scale drug trafficking operation. Recent scholarship reveals how the Dutch and British East India Companies created a sophisticated global money laundering system that transformed opium into Western wealth, with American families like the Astors playing crucial supporting roles.
The Machine: How Colonial Companies Became Drug Cartels
The World's First Corporate Drug Empire
The world's first international drug cartels were run by the Dutch and British governments through their monopoly East India companies. The Dutch East India Company (VOC), established in 1602, and the British East India Company (EIC), founded in 1600, weren't merely trading companies—they were state-sponsored narcotics enterprises with unprecedented power.
The VOC had powers that a corporation today would (hopefully) never have: it could wage war, take and execute prisoners, coin money, negotiate treaties, and establish colonies. Originally chartered as the "Governor and Company of Merchants of London Trading into the East-Indies," the company rose to account for half of the world's trade during the mid-1700s and early 1800s.
The Money Laundering Mechanism
The opium trade operated as a sophisticated three-way money laundering system:
1. Forced Production in India: The British East India Company began to grow opium in Bengal and allowed private British merchants to sell opium to Chinese smugglers for illegal sale in China. There was a massive increase in acreage dedicated to poppy cultivation. Millions died in the Bengal famine of 1770, as once productive agricultural land was forcibly converted to poppy production.
2. Drug Distribution Network: The East India Company did not carry the opium itself. Because of the Chinese ban, the company farmed it out to "country traders"—i.e., private traders who were licensed by the company to take goods from India to China. The country traders sold the opium to smugglers along the Chinese coast.
3. Profit Conversion: The British used the profits from the sale of opium to purchase such Chinese luxury goods as porcelain, silk, and tea, which were in great demand in the West. To rectify this trade imbalance, the East India Company and other British merchants began to import Indian opium into China illegally, demanding payment in silver. This was then used to buy tea and other goods.
The Human Cost: Engineered Starvation for Drug Profits
The Bengal Genocide
The true horror of this system becomes clear when examining its human cost. The company's harsh revenue policies are regarded as a direct cause of a famine that devastated Bengal in 1770. In 1770, Bengal suffered a catastrophic famine in which about 1.2 million people died; one fifth of the population. While famines are not uncommon in the Indian subcontinent, it was the policies of the EIC that led to suffering on that incredible scale.
The East India Company's relentless pursuit of profit had devastating consequences, most tragically illustrated by the Bengal famine of 1770. Driven by policies that prioritized revenue extraction over humanitarian concern, the company's aggressive taxation and grain hoarding severely exacerbated food shortages during drought conditions.
The Company maintained the same levels of taxation and in some cases even raised them by 10%. No comprehensive famine relief programmes, like the ones previously implemented by the Mughal rulers were put in place. Rice was only stockpiled for company soldiers.
The Industrial Scale of Forced Cultivation
The East India Company commissioned and managed hundreds of thousands of poppy plantations. It took care of the painstaking lancing of individual pods to obtain the raw gum, drying and forming it into cakes, before coating and packaging them for auction in Calcutta (present-day Kolkata).
No poppies could be cultivated without the Company's permission, and the Company banned private businesses from refining opium. Ghosh patiently catalogues the miseries heaped on the opium producers: the small farmers of India's Bihar province, who were compelled to grow the profitless poppies under the draconian rule of company and government inspectors.
The Dutch Connection: VOC's Global Trafficking Network
The Original Global Monopoly
Silver and copper from Japan were used to trade with the world's wealthiest empires, Mughal India and Qing China, for silk, cotton, porcelain, and textiles. For example, they would trade opium from Surat, India for peppers in Malabar, India. They would trade sugar from Bengal to Persia for gold and silver, then buy horses from Persia and sell them down in India.
Within the first two decades of the 17th century, the Dutch East India Company or Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie, (VOC) was the wealthiest commercial operation in the world with 50,000 employees worldwide and a private fleet of 200 ships.
The VOC and EIC worked together when convenient: The East India Company also launched a joint attack with the Dutch United East India Company (VOC) on Portuguese and Spanish ships off the coast of China that helped secure EIC ports in China.
Modern Corporate Legacy
The opium profits of the Royal Dutch Trading Company in the Dutch East Indies financed several enterprises, such as Royal Dutch Shell. This connection reveals how modern multinational corporations can trace their roots directly to drug trafficking profits.
When Drug Trafficking Became Foreign Policy: The Opium Wars
State-Sponsored Violence for Drug Trade
When China attempted to stop the drug trade, both companies lobbied their governments for military intervention. The company started selling opium to Chinese merchants in the 1770s in exchange for goods like porcelain and tea, causing a series of opioid addiction outbreaks across China in 1820.
By 1839, opium sales to China paid for the entire British tea trade. When Chinese officials destroyed stockpiled opium, Britain responded with overwhelming military force.
The Wars and Their Consequences
The First Opium War (1839-1842) and Second Opium War (1856-1860) were fought explicitly to force China to accept British drug trafficking. Despite some dogged defence, and the odd success on the battlefield, the Chinese were comprehensively defeated in the Opium Wars of 1838-1842 and 1856-1860. Canton (Guangzhou), Nanking (Nanjing) and Peking (Beijing), among other of its major cities, were bombarded, captured and sacked.
The East India Company and the American Revolution
The British East India Company's role in the opium trade was just one aspect of its global reach. The company's tea monopoly would prove instrumental in sparking the American Revolution, demonstrating how corporate power and colonial exploitation created revolutionary resistance.
Corporate Bailout Triggers Revolution
By 1773, the East India Company was in serious financial trouble. The British East India Company was suffering from massive amounts of debts incurred primarily from annual contractual payments due to the British government totaling £400,000 per year. Additionally, the British East India Company was suffering financially as a result of unstable political and economic issues in India, and European markets were weak due to debts from the French and Indian War.
To save this crucial corporate entity, Parliament passed the Tea Act of 1773, which granted the British East India Company Tea a monopoly on tea sales in the American colonies. The act's main purpose was not to raise revenue from the colonies but to bail out the floundering East India Company, a key actor in the British economy.
The Tea Act: Corporate Monopoly as Colonial Control
The Tea Act was revolutionary in its scope. It allowed the company to sell its goods to the colonies without paying taxes, meaning the East India Company could sell their tea cheaper than the American merchants. By allowing the East India Company to sell tea directly in the American colonies, the Tea Act cut out colonial merchants, and the prominent and influential colonial merchants reacted with anger.
Besides the tax on tea which had been in place since 1767, what fundamentally angered the American colonists about the Tea Act was the British East India Company's government sanctioned monopoly on tea. This was perceived as both economic warfare against colonial merchants and a tool of political control.
The Boston Tea Party: Corporate Resistance
The corporate monopoly triggered the most famous act of resistance in American history. This was what ultimately compelled a group of Sons of Liberty members on the night of December 16, 1773 to disguise themselves as Mohawk Indians, board three ships moored in Boston Harbor, and destroy over 92,000 pounds of tea.
The target of the Boston Tea Party was the British implementation of the Tea Act of May 10, 1773, which allowed the East India Company to sell tea from China in the colonies without paying taxes apart from those imposed by the Townshend Acts. On the night of December 16, 1773, a group of about 60 men, encouraged by a large crowd of Bostonians, donned blankets and Indian headdresses, marched to Griffin's wharf, boarded the ships, and dumped the tea chests, valued at £18,000, into the water.
From Tea to Revolution
The destruction of East India Company property had immediate consequences. In retaliation, Parliament passed the series of punitive measures known in the colonies as the Intolerable Acts, including the Boston Port Bill, which shut off the city's sea trade pending payment for the destroyed tea.
Parliament responded in 1774 with the Intolerable Acts, or Coercive Acts, which, among other provisions, ended local self-government in Massachusetts and closed Boston's commerce. Colonists throughout the Thirteen Colonies responded to the Intolerable Acts with additional acts of protest, and by convening the First Continental Congress.
Corporate Power and Revolutionary Ideology
The Tea Act crystallized colonial opposition to both taxation without representation and corporate monopoly power. Other colonists viewed the act as a Trojan horse designed to seduce them into accepting Parliament's right to impose taxes on them. The fact that the agents commissioned by the company to sell its tea included a number of pro-Parliament men only added fuel to the fire.
As John Adams wrote in his diary on December 17, 1773: "This is the most magnificent Movement of all. There is a Dignity, a Majesty, a Sublimity, in this last Effort of the Patriots, that I greatly admire... This Destruction of the Tea is so bold, so daring, so firm, intrepid and inflexible, and it must have so important Consequences, and so lasting, that I cant but consider it as an Epocha in History."
The East India Company's tea monopoly thus became the catalyst that transformed colonial resistance into revolution. The struggle over taxes in the British colonies of North America had been ongoing for years. The tax on tea, however, had a second purpose besides enriching King George III: the British Parliament wanted to help the East India Company claw its way out of debt.
This episode demonstrates how the same corporate entity that was trafficking opium in China and exploiting India was simultaneously creating the conditions for American independence. The East India Company's global reach and government backing made it a symbol of imperial oppression that colonial Americans could no longer tolerate.
American Partners: The Junior Drug Dealers
While the British and Dutch dominated the global trade, American merchants quickly joined as significant players. John Jacob Astor did participate in the opium trade from 1816-1825, purchasing 10 tons of Turkish opium and shipping it to China via his American Fur Company.
Astor's enormous fortune was made in part by sneaking opium into China against imperial orders. The resulting riches made him one of the world's most powerful merchants—and also helped create the world's first widespread opioid epidemic.
The Laundering Process: From Drugs to Real Estate
After the start of the 19th century, flush with China trade profits, he became more systematic, ambitious, and calculating by investing in New York real estate. The video transcript's claims about Manhattan being "built on opium money" are exaggerated—Astor began buying real estate in 1799, before his documented opium trade began in 1816.
However, opium profits significantly expanded his holdings: In the coming decades he would carve up hundreds of parcels of land from the former Burr estate, negotiating ever higher rental agreements with tenants.
The Boston Brahmins' Drug Fortunes
"Almost without exception," writes Downs, "Americans involved in opium during the last quarter century of the old China trade went home with fortunes after only a few years in the trade".
The Cabots, Cushings, Welds, Delanos (the grandfather of Franklin Delano Roosevelt) and Forbes all built fortunes on opium. "That money changes the face of Boston and makes it possible for Boston to develop a reputation as one of the world's true civic cities," said Salem State University historian Dane Morrison.
Jardine Matheson: The "Princely Hong"
Jardine Matheson has been called the "most successful opium smuggling company in the world". By 1830, Jardine Matheson was controlling around half of China's foreign trade.
In the first half of the 1860s, the firm was doing nearly £300,000 of commissioned business in opium annually, and simultaneously investing heavily on its own account.
The Scale and Impact
Revenue and Government Dependence
The astronomical rise in the weight of opium exports generated East India Company profits, and the commensurate taxes paid to the Crown comprised an ever larger percentage of British government revenue. The Indian government's revenue from the opium trade rose from less than five percent of its total in the early 1800s to nearly 17 percent in 1890.
The Addiction Crisis
By selling opium, Astor was satisfying an international craving that would reach epidemic proportions during the 19th century. Opium use became rampant in China, where 3 million people smoked opium in the 1830s. By 1890, a full 10 percent of China's population smoked opium.
Modern Legacy and Recognition
Contemporary Acknowledgment
A historic and grand mansion built in Boston in 1833 by a prominent local family has revealed its hidden history: It was built with profits from the China opium trade. The Forbes House Museum is explored in an exhibition called Opium: The Business of Addiction.
"The history of the opioid trade is part of the story of America's development, but in many cases, it is a little-known and poorly understood part of our past. Its legacy continues to impact our lives today," said Vaughan.
Continuing Corporate Power
Many companies built on opium profits remain global powers today:
- Jardine Matheson: Jardine Matheson is a Fortune Global 500 company, controlled by the Keswick family, who are descendants of co-founder William Jardine's older sister
- Royal Dutch Shell: The Royal Dutch Trading Company's opium monopoly in the Dutch East Indies – modern day Indonesia – returned astronomical profits that financed a range of national enterprises. Among them is one of the world's largest fossil fuel producers, Royal Dutch Shell
Fact-Checking the Video Claims
ACCURATE CLAIMS:
- Astor's documented opium involvement (1816-1825)
- Use of profits for Manhattan real estate investment
- Connection to Chinese addiction epidemic
- Scale of profits from the trade
EXAGGERATED CLAIMS:
- "Manhattan built on opium money" - Astor's real estate empire predated his opium involvement
- Specific property attributions lacking documentation
- Overstated direct causal relationship between opium and Manhattan's development
MISSING CONTEXT:
- The video understates the global, state-sponsored nature of the trade
- British and Dutch companies were the primary operators
- American merchants were significant but secondary players
SIDEBAR: Historical Karma - China and the Modern "Reverse Opium War"
How the tables have turned in the global drug trade
In a twist that some observers call historical karma, China—once the victim of Western opium trafficking—now finds itself accused of fueling America's deadliest drug crisis through fentanyl precursor chemicals. The parallels are striking, yet the modern situation reveals how dramatically global power dynamics have shifted.
The Historical Echo
Then: Britain Forces Drugs on China (1840s-1860s) In 1839, in response to the addiction crisis, the Chinese emperor sent an official, Lin Tse-hsu, to Canton (modern-day Guangzhou), the home base for British opium merchants, to stem the flow of opium and destroy the stockpiles of the drug. The British merchants were outraged by his actions, claimed that the Chinese crackdown contravened the principles of free trade and demanded compensation for the destroyed opium.
China's history of being blighted by drugs provides context: For nearly a century, widespread Chinese addiction to opium destroyed millions of lives and ravaged a great nation. China's history of being state-sponsored drug trafficking is that it was imposed by foreign powers. The Chinese government today considers this the beginning of the "Century of Humiliation," in which foreign powers swarmed over a weak, drug-addled China.
Now: China's Role in America's Crisis (2020s) China is currently the primary source of the precursor chemicals needed to manufacture fentanyl. According to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), China provides the majority of all the illegal fentanyl that is shipped to the United States. So, today, China is still the principal supplier of these precursors for fentanyl.
The "Reverse Opium War" Comparison
Scale of Devastation:
- Historical: By 1890, a full 10 percent of China's population smoked opium
- Modern: Fentanyl is now "the leading cause of overdose death in the U.S.," accounting for more than 19,000 of the 63,600 fatalities in 2016, with numbers continuing to rise
State Involvement:
- Then: The British government used military force to protect drug trafficking, fighting the Opium Wars to force China to accept British drug imports
- Now: While China has taken steps to regulate fentanyl and its precursors, including agreements with the United States to crack down on illegal production, enforcement remains inconsistent
China's Official Position
Chinese officials strongly reject claims of deliberate involvement. Ambassador Qin Gang explained China's perspective: "With such searing pains in our national memory, China holds an understandably stronger antipathy for narcotics than any other country, as displayed in its zero-tolerance attitude towards all narcotic drugs, as well as stringent control and tough punishment measures."
Liu Pengyu, a spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, said that claims of deliberate fentanyl trafficking amount to "groundless suspicions and smears." He added: "China-U.S. counternarcotics cooperation has achieved remarkable results, which is obvious to all."
The Modern Supply Chain
How It Works Today: Chinese traffickers, Chinese trafficking networks, switched to supplying not that finished product, not finished fentanyl, but instead what is known as precursor chemicals, which are the more elemental chemicals from which fentanyl is manufactured. Those precursors go, in the case of fentanyl, to Mexican cartels.
Once Chinese precursors leave their origin, they often transit to Mexico, where powerful drug cartels synthesize them into fentanyl. The Sinaloa Cartel and the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG) dominate this trade, leveraging Mexico's weak regulatory systems, corruption, and strategic geography.
The Geopolitical Dimension
Historical Pattern Repeating: U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently suggested Beijing may be "deliberately" flooding America with the synthetic opioid fentanyl, in a "reverse" form of the mid-1800s Opium Wars that enfeebled China's international standing.
But With Key Differences: Unlike the historical opium trade where Britain used military force to protect drug trafficking, today's situation involves:
- China officially opposes drug trafficking and has scheduling laws
- The flow occurs through complex international supply chains involving Mexico
- There's no state military protection for drug traffickers
Historical Irony and Modern Reality
The comparison reveals both historical irony and fundamental differences. As one analyst noted: "This epidemic has led some to describe the fentanyl trade as a quiet, insidious 'reverse Opium War,' more deadly than its historical counterpart."
However, there are crucial distinctions:
- Historical: Britain's opium trade was state-sponsored with military backing
- Modern: China officially cooperates on anti-drug efforts, though enforcement gaps remain
- Scale: While both crises devastated their target populations, fentanyl is far more lethal per dose than opium
The Broader Lesson
Whether intentional or not, the modern fentanyl crisis demonstrates how global power shifts can reverse historical patterns of exploitation. China's transformation from victim of Western drug trafficking to accused source of American drug problems reflects broader changes in global economic and political relationships.
As one expert observed: "The fentanyl crisis exemplifies how economic competition, resource exploitation, and geopolitical tensions can destabilize societies, highlighting the need for international cooperation and stricter oversight."
The historical parallel serves as a reminder that drug trafficking—whether 19th-century opium or 21st-century fentanyl—remains a weapon of economic and social destruction, regardless of which nation holds the upper hand.
SIDEBAR: Then vs. Now - How Do Modern Drug Cartels Compare to the Colonial Giants?
A comparison of power, wealth, and influence across centuries
When we condemn today's drug cartels, it's worth remembering that the world's first international drug cartels were run by the Dutch and British governments through their monopoly East India companies. How do modern criminal organizations stack up against these historical state-sponsored drug empires?
The Numbers: Trillions vs. Billions
Historical Powerhouses:
- At its speculative height, the Dutch East India Company was worth $7.9 trillion in today's terms - more than 20 of the world's biggest companies combined
- At its peak, the company was the largest corporation in the world by various measures and had its own armed forces in the form of the company's three presidency armies, totalling about 260,000 soldiers, twice the size of the British Army
- Originally chartered as the "Governor and Company of Merchants of London Trading into the East-Indies," the company rose to account for half of the world's trade during the mid-1700s and early 1800s
Modern Cartels:
- The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service in a 2018 report noted that the Sinaloa cartel "by some estimates ... had grown to control 40%-60% of Mexico's drug trade by 2012 and had annual earnings calculated to be as high as $3 billion"
- A 2010 study by Rand found estimated $6 billion to $8 billion in Mexican drug-trafficking organizations' gross revenue from export and distribution of marijuana, cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine to wholesale markets near the American Southwest
Authority: Sovereigns vs. Criminals
Then: State-Backed Power The VOC had powers that a corporation today would (hopefully) never have: it could wage war, take and execute prisoners, coin money, negotiate treaties, and establish colonies. The East India Company didn't just control trade—it also printed its own money.
When China tried to stop the opium trade, the British government sent warships, triggering the Opium War of 1840. These companies operated under legal government charters and received military support.
Now: Criminal Organizations On February 20, 2025, the Department of State designated CJNG as an FTO [Foreign Terrorist Organization] and SDGT. Modern cartels must hide their operations and face active military opposition from multiple governments.
Money Laundering: Integration vs. Concealment
Then: Direct Government Revenue The astronomical rise in the weight of opium exports generated East India Company profits, and the commensurate taxes paid to the Crown comprised an ever larger percentage of British government revenue. Opium profits flowed directly into national treasuries and legitimate banking systems.
Now: Complex Concealment Illicit earnings are funnelled through front businesses, such as restaurants, real estate ventures, casinos, and shell companies, to legitimise dirty money. Cartels also use cryptocurrency and international banking loopholes to avoid detection.
Global Reach: Then and Now
Historical Scope: Silver and copper from Japan were used to trade with the world's wealthiest empires, Mughal India and Qing China, for silk, cotton, porcelain, and textiles. The VOC sent over one million voyagers across Asia, which is more than the rest of Europe combined.
Modern Networks: Sinaloa has operations in at least forty-seven countries and has a larger international footprint than any of its Mexican rivals. For a rising number of Latin American drug cartels, being global is nowadays a "do-or-die" proposition.
The Key Difference: Legitimacy
The colonial drug companies were exponentially more powerful because they operated with, not against, state authority. As one blogger noted in 2013: "When HSBC executives were caught late last year financing the Mexican and other drug cartels, they were returning to the company's historic roots"—roots that included HSBC's first wealth came from opium from India.
The comparison reveals that modern cartels, despite their billions in revenue and global reach, remain shadows of their historical predecessors. The real lesson isn't about the power of criminal organizations, but about what happens when drug trafficking has state backing rather than state opposition.
Conclusion: The Foundation of Modern Capitalism
Through opium, writes Ghosh, "America was able to transfer China's economic power to America's industrial revolution". The opium trade represents more than individual family fortunes—it reveals how modern capitalism was built on systematic state violence, forced production, and global money laundering.
"These American fortunes, and all their good works…must be weighed against the damage that was done in acquiring them," writes historian Eric Jay Dolin.
The Astor family's involvement, while real and significant, was part of a much larger system where European colonial powers used state violence to force agricultural production, created global addiction epidemics, and then laundered the profits through legitimate investments that still generate wealth today.
Understanding this history isn't about assigning modern guilt, but recognizing how foundational violence shaped current global wealth distribution—and how corporate power, when unchecked by ethical constraints, can transform entire societies through systematic exploitation.
Sources and Citations
- History.com - "America's First Multimillionaire Got Rich Smuggling Opium" (May 27, 2025)
- Cambridge University Press - "American Merchants and the China Opium Trade, 1800–1840"
- Wikipedia - "John Jacob Astor" (Updated July 2025)
- The Nation - "The Blue-Blood Families That Made Fortunes in the Opium Trade" (January 23, 2024)
- History.com - "America's First Multi-Millionaire" (May 27, 2025)
- Wikipedia - "East India Company" (Updated July 2025)
- Wikipedia - "First Opium War" (Updated July 2025)
- The Conversation - "Exploitation, brutality and misery: how the opium trade shaped the modern world" (March 3, 2025)
- Britannica Encyclopedia - "Opium trade" (July 20, 1998)
- Britannica Encyclopedia - "East India Company" (July 20, 1998)
- Wikipedia - "Dutch East India Company" (Updated July 2025)
- National Army Museum - "First China War 1839-1842"
- History Hit - "20 Facts About The East India Company"
- History Collection - "15 Wild Facts About the East India Company"
- Wikipedia - "Jardines (company)" (Updated July 2025)
- Wikipedia - "William Jardine (merchant)" (May 2, 2025)
- Wikipedia - "History of Jardine Matheson & Co." (June 5, 2025)
- World History Encyclopedia - "Trade Goods of the East India Company" (September 27, 2022)
- WBUR News - "How Profits From Opium Shaped 19th-Century Boston" (July 31, 2017)
- China Daily - "Historic Boston mansion was built on China opium trade" (February 23, 2023)
- Dutch Review - "What was the VOC? The Dutch East India Company explained" (November 27, 2024)
- The Washington Post - "Do Mexican drug cartels make $500 billion a year?" (June 27, 2019)
- Wikipedia - "Sinaloa Cartel" (Updated July 2025)
- Council on Foreign Relations - "Mexico's Long War: Drugs, Crime, and the Cartels" (February 22, 2025)
- U.S. Department of Treasury - "Treasury Targets Major Mexican Cartel Involved in Fentanyl Trafficking and Fuel Theft" (May 1, 2025)
- Visual Capitalist - "Visualizing the Most Valuable Companies of All-Time" (March 9, 2019)
- Dutch Review - "The Dutch East India Company was richer than Apple, Google, and Facebook combined" (September 26, 2024)
- Tax Justice Network - "HSBC and the world's oldest drug cartel" (September 7, 2020)
- PMC (PubMed Central) - "A New Trade War with an Opium Component: Can the U.S. Opioids Crisis Be Solved by Banning Fentanyl in China?"
- Brookings Institution - "The fentanyl pipeline and China's role in the US opioid crisis" (November 16, 2024)
- The Conversation - "What the Opium Wars can tell us about China, the U.S. and fentanyl" (6 days ago)
- Brookings Institution - "China's role in the fentanyl crisis" (March 31, 2023)
- Radio Free Asia - "Rubio accuses China of 'reverse' Opium War via fentanyl" (February 27, 2025)
- Chinese Embassy in the United States - "Ambassador Qin Gang Takes an Interview with Newsweek on the Fentanyl Issue"
- European Times - "Fentanyl: China's modern opium war with the US" (December 28, 2024)
- RAND Corporation - "Countering Fentanyl with Diplomacy" (August 7, 2024)
- Council on Foreign Relations - "Fentanyl and the U.S. Opioid Epidemic" (March 28, 2025)
- Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum - "The Tea Act" (January 16, 2025)
- The National Archives (UK) - "Boston Tea Party" (December 16, 2024)
- Britannica Encyclopedia - "Boston Tea Party" (July 20, 1998)
- History.com - "Boston Tea Party - Definition, Dates & Facts" (May 28, 2025)
- History.com - "Tea Act - Definition, Timeline & Facts" (May 28, 2025)
- Wikipedia - "Boston Tea Party" (Updated January 2025)
- Massachusetts Historical Society - "Coming of the American Revolution: Boston Tea Party"
- Jamestown-Yorktown Foundation - "The Tea Act and the Boston Tea Party"
Comments
Post a Comment