Tuesday, November 23, 2010

The Problem With Prohibition!!!

In a recent episode of the hit CBS television show “How I Met Your Mother”, the group of friends visits the Museum of Natural History. As we all know there is a strict “do not touch” policy at the museum to keep the artifacts preserved and unspoiled by constant human contact. In this episode Barney Stinson, played by Neil Patrick Harris, takes it upon himself, with a simple “challenge accepted”, to touch as many artifacts in the museum as he can, despite the prohibition against it.

Prohibition, as defined by dictionary.com, is a law or decree that forbids. The problem with something being forbidden is that it becomes that much more appealing. Not only do we crave the thing we can’t have, but we’ll do almost anything to get it. For example, on a fast day, when eating food is literally a sin, it seems that the only thing we can think of is what we’re going to break the fast on.

Along with the simple definition of this common word, dictionary.com also associates prohibition as the period (1920-33) when the Eighteenth Amendment was put in place. It was during this time that alcoholic beverages could not legally be manufactured, transported or sold in the U.S. The problem with this prohibition was that it did not take into consideration the increased demand for these now banned products. When The Volstead Act, the act that started prohibition in the U.S., was passed it prohibited Americans from producing, selling and moving what was called, “intoxicating liquors”.

The Volstead Act, along with the Eighteenth Amendment, was presented to congress outlining the prohibited items and, despite Woodrow Wilson’s efforts to veto it, was passed. According to Only Yesterday, prohibition slipped under the radar as people wanted to move on from the war and not be involved in the politics of things. It might have seemed beneficial at the time to forbid the consumption of alcohol, along with other fun products, but in reality the prohibition made it that much more exciting to find a way to drink. Now that alcohol and liquors were banned they became that much more appealing to the younger generation, in addition to the recent rampant smoking and fornicating taking place.

In banning goods that were in high demand, the US opened the door to gangsters and racketeers to provide the desired products. Underground, organized crime became widespread as the people’s demand for alcohol, drugs and the like increased. Despite the country’s best efforts to maintain their “dry” status, Americans, especially those of the Lost Generation, were not having it. In 1933, the Eighteenth Amendment was repealed by the Twenty First Amendment once again allowing the sale of “intoxicating liquors” and other banned products.

What I find most interesting about this Act and Amendment is that they contradict the American approach to life which is based on the notion of freedom to do anything. In a country that prides itself on freedom and opportunity, it seems that during this time Americans were not free to drink what they wanted, nor did they have the legal opportunity to do so. Instead of being free to drink wherever they wanted, young people, and alcoholics, were reduced to hiding in corners or underground establishments in order to enjoy their alcohol. “Speakeasies”, which were popular secret drinking establishments that cropped up during the Prohibition Era, were used as places to drink in secret. While those in power were obviously trying to do what was best for the country, they seem to be overstepping their bounds in an effort to maintain the ways of the past, or is it just me?

19 comments:

  1. Tami- (first of all I love your reference to HIMYM) I think you really hit the nail on the head by saying that the main problem with Prohibition was that it prohibited something. People always want what they can not have. That is why in so many movies and t.v. shows the guy wants the girl out of his league who ignores him, while he ignores the girl who loves him. I mean after all who wants what they can have easily? Like you said with Barney, people want a challenge and want to prove that they can break the rules, or in the guys case land the girl who no one thought he could. I do, however, slightly disagree that Prohibition contradicts our country's " approach to life". The American system is democracy, listening to the people, and for several years people wanted Prohibition. Although their desire may have been fueled by the war or other factors which disappeared in the 20's it is important to acknowledge that the government did not just randomly impose this amendment. That being said, I think what was wrong was that Prohibition was not repealed once the government saw how opposed America was to it, and its inability to function in society.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kudos on the HIMYM reference, first of all. This post was highly thought-provoking. It reminded me a little of one of Mencken's arguments as to why democracy is faulty in the USA.

    We discussed in class that Mencken thinks that a major flaw in the democratic system is that it gives equal representation to sparsely-populated regions as it does densely-populated ones. Prohibition is a fine example of this flaw, as many of the states in favor of Prohibition were smaller and/or sparsely populated; in addition, there was a lack of proper organization by the "wets" to oppose its passing. Its passing was clearly lopsided, to put it mildly.

    @Jenny: I hear what you're saying, and Prohibition is certainly an example of democratic government at work.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jenny: while I agree that Prohibition was not randomly imposed on the American people, I also whole heartedly believe in freedom of choice. With that in mind it seems that prohibition was less of a challenge and more of a stifling restriction. I don’t disagree with you that Prohibition was important to the people when it was enforced, but if I had lived during the 20’s I would have been miserable with the restrictions.
    And Helen… I love how Menken’s political views that so many of us truly disliked kind of proves true. But, I wonder if in other situations, that greatly favored larger states, if his opinion would make him seem like even more of a bigot. I also agree with you that the “wets” were absolutely not organized enough to avoid Prohibition being passed, which might say something about the character of “wets” in general.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I must start by saying how much I love your connection between prohibition and HIMYM lol amazing! Only you Tami!
    I can't help but think about how this perhaps relates to us today. I think it's interesting to think about the laws against the use of marijuana/weed. Being a Canadian, where marijuana use is legalized, I don't see what the big deal is. I agree with what you're saying; once something is prohibited against, it makes people want to do it more, and I think we can apply the same thought to smoking weed. If it becomes legalized in the US (where SO many people use it anyway) it might completely kill the hype. The debate was alcohol in twenties, and today the conversation has moved to weed.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Aliyah - I absolutely agree with you that marijuana is today's prohibited item (the same way that alcohol was in the 20's). While I was writing my original blog I was thinking about the obvious connections between the two and wondered whether or not marijuana would be abused if it was legal. Alcohol is definitely abused (usually by those in their 20's and possibly 30's), so if marijuana was legal in the U.S. would it be as abused as alcohol is or would Americans be able to show restraint? If we use alcohol as an example then I am inclined to say no, we would not show restraint. It is not uncommon to hear about someone getting alcohol poisoning or having their stomach pumped because they drank too much. If marijuana was legal would that mean that we would have to deal with perhaps even more dangerous consequences from drug abuse?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Also is response to Aliyah- I have a feeling legalizing weed might kill the "hype" but that does not mean people would use it less. It just would not be as big a deal because anyone could get it, but I think the amount of people on drugs would dramatically escalate! And your right so many people use it already when it is hard to get and illegal so I feel like how much more so if it was easily attainable and legal. Having it be illegal stops some people from using it because they would get arrested or face some other punishment. Also, I think it is important that there are guidelines in society. While it is not good to be too strict, being too lax leads to anarchy. It is like a parent never giving rules because they figure their kids won't do anything "bad" if they are allowed to do it- People need rules and guidelines, our society is already degenerate- if the government begins to legalize drugs... who knows what is next?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'd like to make a speculation about the use of Marijuana for a second, and challenge the parallel to alcohol that has been running here: Is it not true that smoking weed, even in moderation, is much more harmful and dangerous than drinking in moderation? I can't put my finger on what it is, but something about the "prohibition" of weed makes more sense to me than the prohibition of alcohol. I just don't see drinking being as physically harmful as smoking up. But that could just be me.

    Also, when we were reading about Prohibition in class, I was similarly confused as to why the country decided to take this sort of legal action. Not only did the move seem arbitrary to me, but, after reading Mencken and thinking about the amendment, it looks to me like the move to prohibit alcohol in American was bordering on a breach of the separation of church and state. In my opinion, drinking is not an act that is illegal in itself, like one might say is true in regard to murder or theft. Drinking seems to me to be more similar to sex, where the sensitivities of "right" and "wrong" vary by each person and each social group. When a body of government attempts to make a definitive legal ruling on an act to which the morality of it is so subjective and varied, it looks to me like this government is siding with a certain faith. What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Racheli- I think that the only reason that you believe Marijuana is worse is due to the fact that now it is illegal whereas alcohol is not. I would never condone drugs and I think the same way as you, however if Marijuana was legal and alcohol was not I don't think that I would think Marijuana is worse. They both have damaging effects to the human body.
    Tami, I like most others, loved your reference to HIMYM and agree with you that if you told someone to not drink it will just cause them to desire to drink more. Prohibition did go against "being American", however you can say that killing does as well. As Jenny said people need rules and boundaries despite the American attitude of being free.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I have to agree with Racheli about weed prohibition making more sense than alcohol prohibition. Along those lines, what Jenny said about weed losing its “hype” if it were to be legalized made a lot of sense to me. Would we not be more prone to use and abuse weed if it were more readily available? Yael is right about both alcohol and weed being harmful but depending on who you are one might be more appealing than the other. One is known to cause brain damage, the other liver damage, so I doubt we can say that marijuana or alcohol are good and productive parts of our lives (fun as they might be).

    And Racheli, thank you for bringing Mencken into the discussion - wouldn’t have been the same without our old friend! I also agree with you that prohibition seemed to cross the boundary of separation of church and state, but this would not be the last time that boundary was crossed. What you put in your body, in my most humble opinion, should not be determined by the state (much like what is taken out of your body - that’s the choice of the person adding or subtracting things). Murder or theft, on the other hand, seem to be more legal issues as they pertain to the way we interact as human beings (I would add to Yael that laws against murder do not pertain only to Americans, so not killing people would seem more universal than prohibition).

    So, my answer to Racheli would be that I agree…specifically that one, drinking is more like sex…the opinion on whether or not it’s acceptable varies based on social group. For example…Jews could have beer or a shot of whiskey at nine o’clock on a Saturday morning after early prayers and it is perfectly acceptable (and we know it!). On the other hand Mormons who (as far as my understanding goes) do not generally drink, would look at us and say that we are sacrilegious as we’re drinking not only in our houses of prayer but directly after prayers. My second agreement is that it would definitely seem that the government is siding with a certain faith, perhaps not one that allows early morning drinking.

    My last comment is a quote from our most recent reading assignment - "Bid Blonde". On page 197 Hazel's opinion about prohibition comes out. And I quote "Prohibition she regarded only as a basis for jokes."

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  12. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This post and all of its responses were so thought provoking!

    We all know that Prohibition was a complete and utter disaster. But what I really wonder though is what the thought processes were of the officials who were developing Prohibition. Were they really just a bunch of Puritans who wanted to keep America from having a good time? Or were they thinking: "Hey let's deprive Americans of this one freedom, to become intoxicated, and therefore enable them to be more clear-headed to take advantage of their other rights and freedoms." I dunno..just makes me wonder what was going through their minds..

    ReplyDelete
  14. Reading everyones' comments inspired me to do a little research of my own. I looked up the effects of both alcohol and marijuana and compared the two. Basically, I found that:
    1) The long-term use of marijuana is much less harmful than the long-term consumption of alcohol.
    2) Consumption of alcohol leads to aggressive and sometimes violent behavior (which highly associates it with violent crimes!) and the use of marijuana actually reduces the chances of acting aggressively.
    3) Consumption of alcohol contributes to domestic violence and sexual assault, while the use of marijuana usually does not.
    4) The consumption of alcohol is prevalent in cases of sexual assault and date rape on college campuses, whereas marijuana use is not considered a contributing factor in cases of sexual assault and date rape.
    5) The consumption of alcohol contributes to reckless behavior and serious injuries and is highly associated with emergency room visits, whereas marijuana use does not contribute to such behavior and injuries, and is rarely associated with emergency room visits.

    With the research I have provided, I believe that it is safe for me to conclude that the risks of smoking marijuana are far less dangerous than the risks of consuming alcohol. With that I pose a question: If the risks of smoking marijuana are less than those of consuming alcohol, would it not be wiser for alcohol to be made illegal and marijuana legal?

    Also, I agree with Tami when she says that the government has no right in telling a person what they should or should not do to their bodies. I believe that when the government starts controlling what it's citizens can or can not drink, they are limiting every citizen's freedom. However, I believe that the government has every right to interfere in how each individual citizen effects other citizens (i.e. the prohibitions of murder, theft, and rape.) because these laws effect the dynamics of society and without them, there would be chaos.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Kim - You bring up an excellent question about the officials and politicians behind Prohibition laws being passed. Taking into consideration the context of the times, I think it’s safe to assume that said officials had the intention of keeping Americans living the “old way” rather than changing with the times. I don’t know if it was about being clear headed in order to take advantage of other rights, but it definitely seemed to be an effort to stop change.
    Elizabeth - Love the research! With that said I think your research speaks for itself and my only comment is that making alcohol illegal would make some avid drinkers very upset and set us back about a hundred years. Perhaps if we were all more educated about the effects of both alcohol and marijuana a conclusion could be made. The only problem I can think of is that no matter what the decision there will always be opposition and a difference of opinion- which is what makes America great!

    ReplyDelete
  16. I think that as with everything in life, there has to be a balance regarding restrictions. Although making alcohol illegal has proven to be a bad idea, instituting restrictions regarding it's consumption such as legal drinking age, not being allowed to purchase alcohol at certain times etc.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I just want to respond to all the comments on Marijuana (so glad that got so much attention!) It's so funny because I was reading all the comment and thinking what is worse? Weed or Alcohol? I think Weed has some medical benefit for people like cancer patients, where it helps with nausea and pain, whereas I've never heard of any medical advantage for alcohol. They both are terrible for you, no doubt, but I'm just weighing out their pros and cons. What was funniest to my thought was: what's more addictive? While I think the answer is alcohol (I've heard weed its difficult to get addicted to like heroine and meth, again I'm not researching my fact so I could be wrong) but I thought "isn't smoking much worse than either of these substances??" And that really bothered me! I've heard that a cigarette can be worse than weed because of the lung damage and the addiction to nicotine. Just an interesting thought, not sure what is medically proven. But smoking is legal, maybe that should be prohibited since it's not only harmful to the person smoking but to everyone around them as well, whereas drinking and weed is only harmful to one's self. (I do see an argument that weed and alcohol can lead to harming others if, for instance, one chooses to drive under the influence, whereas smoking has no such affect of one's judgement). Interesting to think about though.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I loved your reference to How I Met Your Mother as well. I feel that it pin points the downside of prohibition. When people are told not to touch or eat or do something they want it that much more. By banning alcohol, there will now be a lot more peoplem trying to get alcohol and a lot more illiegal activities. This need to have something that is forbidden and we will do anything to get it starts from a very young age.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "What I find most interesting about this Act and Amendment is that they contradict the American approach to life which is based on the notion of freedom to do anything."
    I disagree with the premise that the basis of american life is the freedom to do anything. America has an entire constitution of laws pertaining to things we are not allowed to do. the prohibition was not the first time the government took away one of americans rights and it certainly wont be the last.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.