AHC: How to Prevent Prohibition
- Thread starter TripleCitizen
- Start date
-
- Tags
- prohibition
I dunno. I think that's probably just something that WASP America needed to do, like a teenager needs to guzzle a mug of whiskey straight, just to show his friends what a man he is, before he spends the night puking his guts up and says "Oh God, never gonna do that again!!"
Prohibition was sort of a moral chug-a-lug for the USA, showing the world how upright and pure they were.
Prohibition was sort of a moral chug-a-lug for the USA, showing the world how upright and pure they were.
GeographyDude
Gone Fishin'
Since Prohibition is in part an indirect way to address the issue of abusive husbands, have the dynamics of abuse understood earlier. Aspects such as:
And no reason these and other dynamics could not have been understood decades earlier.
Physical violence tends to recur.
The violent person has an anger problem, but perhaps more importantly, lacks learnable skills for dealing with experiences of high anger.
Weirdly, people tend to blame the person who receives the abuse. They say, Oh, he's such a great guy, or . . But what did you do to set him off, etc. . . . This can even be a person's sister or mother. Yes, really
And, whether a person leaves an abusive relationship or not often has a heck of a lot to do with whether they have a job which kind of pays enough.
The violent person has an anger problem, but perhaps more importantly, lacks learnable skills for dealing with experiences of high anger.
Weirdly, people tend to blame the person who receives the abuse. They say, Oh, he's such a great guy, or . . But what did you do to set him off, etc. . . . This can even be a person's sister or mother. Yes, really
And, whether a person leaves an abusive relationship or not often has a heck of a lot to do with whether they have a job which kind of pays enough.
And no reason these and other dynamics could not have been understood decades earlier.
Last edited:
The big question in preventing Prohibition is whether there still would have been (national) Prohibition if the US hadn't entered the First World War. (Obviously, the US not entering the War would have many other effects but we'll ignore them here.) For an argument that the effects of the war on the adoption of Prohibition have been exaggerated, see Jack S. Blocker, Jr., "Did Prohibition Really Work? Alcohol Prohibition as a Public Health Innovation" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470475/
"The wartime atmosphere during the relatively brief period of American participation in World War I played a minor role in bringing on National Prohibition. Anti-German sentiment, shamelessly whipped up and exploited by the federal government to rally support for the war effort, discredited a key antiprohibitionist organization, the German-American Alliance. A federal ban on distilling, adopted to conserve grain, sapped the strength of another major wet player, the spirits industry.25 But most prohibition victories at the state level and in congressional elections were won before the United States entered the war, and the crucial ratification votes occurred after the war's end.26"
It seems to me that this is far from being proof that there would still be national Prohibition in the US even if there were no World War (or if the US managed to stay out of it). There is a big difference between winning victories at a state level and even in some congressional elections and having enough votes to amend the Constitution. As for the crucial ratification votes occurring after the war's end, Blocker does not seem to pay sufficient attention to the factor of momentum here--a ban on distilling, originally enacted as a war measure, could help create a momentum for Prohibition that would survive the war--and in any event, anti-German sentiment hardly ended with the Armistice.
"The wartime atmosphere during the relatively brief period of American participation in World War I played a minor role in bringing on National Prohibition. Anti-German sentiment, shamelessly whipped up and exploited by the federal government to rally support for the war effort, discredited a key antiprohibitionist organization, the German-American Alliance. A federal ban on distilling, adopted to conserve grain, sapped the strength of another major wet player, the spirits industry.25 But most prohibition victories at the state level and in congressional elections were won before the United States entered the war, and the crucial ratification votes occurred after the war's end.26"
It seems to me that this is far from being proof that there would still be national Prohibition in the US even if there were no World War (or if the US managed to stay out of it). There is a big difference between winning victories at a state level and even in some congressional elections and having enough votes to amend the Constitution. As for the crucial ratification votes occurring after the war's end, Blocker does not seem to pay sufficient attention to the factor of momentum here--a ban on distilling, originally enacted as a war measure, could help create a momentum for Prohibition that would survive the war--and in any event, anti-German sentiment hardly ended with the Armistice.
RamscoopRaider
Donor
Avoid US Entry into WWI could well do it. It marginalized many of the groups most opposed to prohibition so that they could not effectively stop it and it effectively put the country on prohibition early thanks to War Prohibition
That or have the intent of the Volstead Act spelled out beforehand. A lot of pro-Prohibition people thought it went way too far and were surprised at hell at the banning of everything over .5% ABV, War Prohibition had only gone to 2% ABV, and that it included beer and wine rather than just spirits. If the public realizes the truth it likely won't pass
One could also avoid the 16th Amendment, as without that the response is "we can't afford that" as without an income tax something like 30-40% of US Government revenue came from taxing liquor
That or have the intent of the Volstead Act spelled out beforehand. A lot of pro-Prohibition people thought it went way too far and were surprised at hell at the banning of everything over .5% ABV, War Prohibition had only gone to 2% ABV, and that it included beer and wine rather than just spirits. If the public realizes the truth it likely won't pass
One could also avoid the 16th Amendment, as without that the response is "we can't afford that" as without an income tax something like 30-40% of US Government revenue came from taxing liquor
No entry into WW1 plus congress outlawing whiskey during the period might do the trick. Some states and towns would be dry, but not the whole country. Laws would gradually change.
Distilled spirits might still be made for export. Eventually, packaged "mixed" drinks would come along, limited to wine-strength. Later, licensed bartenders might be allowed to handle full-strength whiskey, delivering cocktails diluted to legal strength. Since marijuana laws in the US became the basis for control elsewhere, I could see the American example for liquor spreading to other countries.
Distilled spirits might still be made for export. Eventually, packaged "mixed" drinks would come along, limited to wine-strength. Later, licensed bartenders might be allowed to handle full-strength whiskey, delivering cocktails diluted to legal strength. Since marijuana laws in the US became the basis for control elsewhere, I could see the American example for liquor spreading to other countries.
"War is the health of the State."
That is, war expands the extent of state activity. It also justifies the expansion of the scope of state activity. It militarizes the nation, which means much more coercion.
Prohibition was a massive expansion of state authority and activity: something that fits with wartime attitudes.
Furthermore: the 18th Amendment was passed through Congress during the war, was ratified by 14 states during the war, and by 27 states in the first three weeks of January 1919, by legislatures elected in wartime. (Some states may have ratified by other means; if there were referendum votes, I think they would have been held on Election Day (5 November)).
The temperance movement was very strong, and had won several state-level victories before the war. But ISTM that without the war, social and political conditions would be radically different, and enacting Prohibition would be impossible.
The movement kept rolling sixes otl imo so pretty easy to prevent national prohibition. This doesn't change the midwest and south's ah temperance movement successes so you'd still have dry areas.
Interesting that Woodrow Wilson vetoed the Volstead Act, yet the Volstead Act wouldn’t have passed if he didn’t repress German immigrants.
The POD has to be pre-1900 and you need two things to happen:
1- culturally, have the US become a wine and beer drinking nation, not a distilled spirit drinking nation;
2- have phylloxera die out before the Europeans show up.
3 (maybe)-invent pasteurization earlier
Before pasteurization was invented you couldn’t transport or store beer for any lengthy time or distance; it would just spoil. Spirits don’t spoil so they can be shipped and stored for very long times.
Phylloxera, which is native to the US, will kill off any European vines within 5 years of planting. This leaves you with importing wine from Europe, which is expensive (at the time) or using Native American grapes (which are basically crap).
IMHO, the drinking of spirits gets people drunker faster than with beer and/or wine.
If you have beer and wine readily available then you don’t have to depend on spirits for something safe to drink (non-alcoholic beverages weren’t that safe). Then people won’t get as drunk as quickly or as badly.
1- culturally, have the US become a wine and beer drinking nation, not a distilled spirit drinking nation;
2- have phylloxera die out before the Europeans show up.
3 (maybe)-invent pasteurization earlier
Before pasteurization was invented you couldn’t transport or store beer for any lengthy time or distance; it would just spoil. Spirits don’t spoil so they can be shipped and stored for very long times.
Phylloxera, which is native to the US, will kill off any European vines within 5 years of planting. This leaves you with importing wine from Europe, which is expensive (at the time) or using Native American grapes (which are basically crap).
IMHO, the drinking of spirits gets people drunker faster than with beer and/or wine.
If you have beer and wine readily available then you don’t have to depend on spirits for something safe to drink (non-alcoholic beverages weren’t that safe). Then people won’t get as drunk as quickly or as badly.
It's kind of a "brute-force-aproach": Given how deeply the Temperance movement and Womens Suffrage movements were intertwined, perhaps in combination of a neutral US in WW1 a Britain style terror campaign by elements of Womens Suffrage movement could have caused a backlash in which Temperance becomes "Collateral Damage". Eventually Womens Groups might then decide to shelf the idea of Prohibition entirely in order to focus on winning to vote first instead of dividing their efforts.
Wrong. Hops is a natural preservative because it kills bacteria, particularly the acetobacter, that can turn beer into vinegar. In 1958, Coors patented a cold filtering process that totally eliminated the need for pasteurization. I make home brew. I have had bottles remain clean for years.
Wayne Wheeler, the brains behind Prohibition, attributed his hatred of alcohol to being accidentally stabbed with a pitchfork by a drunk farmhand as a child. Butterfly away the farmhand, and Prohibition loses its most effective advocate.
Keep woman from getting the right to vote when they did... they were vocal temperance supporters.
The 18th Amendment (Prohibition) came before the 19th Amendment (women's suffrage).
However - there was a considerable overlap between the temperance movement and the suffragettes.
If women's suffrage was enacted earlier - say in 1910 - then the suffrage movement would end, and the activist women in it would retire to other activities or disperse their efforts. While some might become full-time temperance crusaders, others would drop the cause entirely. This could diminish the temperance movement, so that Prohibition is not enacted.
Noted.
It still baffles me that Prohibition passed at all, especially after WWI. There's a reason VFW posts are built around bars.
More adds like this. I can't think of anything that would make me want a drink more.
