This week PBS will air the premier of Ken Burns’ new documentary, Prohibition, which looks at the history of the rise and fall of the 18th Amendment. NRO readers might therefore be interested in a new article on prohibition by my colleague Michelle Minton. Not the 1920s variety, but its modern-day successor. We still have moralizing leaders, bootleggers, and political corruption in the business of booze — and we still criminalize ordinary citizens for enjoying alcohol.
Michelle writes:
While Burns’ documentary may accomplish the important goal of examining the political and social elements that led to the 18th Amendment, it’s important we understand those elements were not erased with the passage of the 21st Amendment. Neo-prohibitionists and the modern temperance movement have simply learned to be less overt in their attempts to restrict access to alcohol. The good news is that there are many local and state-based groups working hard to truly bring Prohibition to an end.
Readers might also enjoy Bruce Yandle’s classic insights on bootleggers and baptists. In the way it worked, prohibition was the granddaddy of all modern regulatory offensives. Until we learn how to break that unholy alliance, we will continue to have stifling regulations imposed on us by a combination of insufferable know-it-alls, tin-pot busybodies, and profiteering rent-seekers. I write more about the way this works in Stealing You Blind: How Government Fatcats Are Getting Rich Off of You (now available at some incredibly reasonable prices!).
The current laws on strong substances seem to me be a mess of inconsistencies: alcohol is legal, cocaine is not, tobacco is legal, marijuana is not, etc. It is harder for an adult to obtain extra-strength heart-burn medicine which has no side effects than to obtain a drink that turns many people into abusive monsters. Personally, I say bring prohibition back.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhy don't we just go ahead and ban everything that someone doesn't like.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWe should also ban football, Thanksgiving and Christmas then. (Texas) CPS's busiest days are, IIRC, the holidays and the Superbowl. So clearly the problem must be the holidays and/or football and both must be banned.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseKen Burns - the Donald Trump of PBS strikes again!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe original feminist movement was anti-abortion. What undermined the feminist movement was its decision to form an alliance with the anti-alcohol people. The feminist movement of the last half of the 20th century undermined itself by being pro-abortion. Note that the pro-abortion position of so many of those feminists was a key factor in preventing the passage of an Equal Rights Amendment.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI wonder if the lessons of alcohol prohibition's failure could be extended to attempts to ban other drugs. Nah.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOne of the greatest failures of prohibition is the violence and corruption it introduces. Black markets created by prohibition are inherently violent. It's not hard to see why. After all, what is the "WAR" on drugs? It's the policy of sending men with guns to confiscate sellers' profits, destroy their inventories, and lock them (and their customers) in government cages. (Hint: those are acts of violence.) All of the other violence that surrounds the (non-alcohol, non-tobacco) drug trade is simply a reaction to the state-sponsored violence of prohibition. Prohibition also renders contracts unenforceable and makes it impossible for competitors to use the courts or the police to challenge intimidation, conditions that further promote violence. Today, you don't read stories about employees of rival wineries engaging in deadly shoot-outs over turf. And unless I missed it, Robert Mondavi has never hung mutilated corpses from a bridge as a warning to his critics. And yet, the alcohol trade used to be extremely violent - during prohibition. Anyone seeing a pattern?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse