Prohibition never repealed

[robertp6165]

I would consider it likely that the 18th Amendment would remain in effect until after the Second World War. Its been mentioned above that US servicemen overseas would be exposed to alcohol, so I can see that the first Congress to be really made up of ex-GIs would move to overturn it. This is the generation that brought back pizza and italian food in a big way.

Also someone would notice that enforcement is just ridiculous and not very good. More importantly, that the government could get money from the controlled sales of alcohol. Someone will be realist.

Well, quite a lot of Vietnam vets were exposed to marijuana, heroin and other drugs while overseas, yet we don't see a large movement by Congressmen who were Vietnam vets to legalize these drugs.

And many people have noticed that enforcement efforts against the drugs we currently make illegal are not effective...they don't really reduce supply that much, and they create a huge criminal enterprise benefiting organized criminal gangs, just like Prohibition did in the 1920s. Yet, we haven't seen the "realists" come forward to legalize these drugs.

There's no particular reason...other than the fact that alcohol had an organized lobby funded by the beer and liquor industries, while marijuana and heroin didn't...why alcohol prohibition should have been any less long-lasting than the bans on these other drugs. If we assume a slightly more "puritannical" streak in the American population at large, the politicians might have decided to ignore this lobby and Prohibition might exist to this day.

 

[robertp6165]

Well, if prohibition isn't repealed, the big effect would be on FDR's presidency in 1936. He probably would still have been re-elected, but the mob would have been able to influence him a lot more. This keeps prohibition more firmly entrenched and an economy ruled by the mob makes the depression worse.

People spend their cash on black market gin, not investing in the economy. The beer sellers all run out of business, since the Canadian and European markets aren't viable customers. Coors and other brewers base themselves in Mexico. Further economic downturn.

Hitler invades Poland and an America, desperate for something to do with all of its out of work men joins the war in 1939. Backstreet booze becomes even more lucrative as people want to drink their troubles away. War widows go to speak easies.

In 1946, when the war is finally over, Americans return from Europe and the Pacific and push an amendment through so they can enjoy all the French wine and Japanese saki they brought home legally. It doesn't pass and America is held by a mob ruled economy for the next 20 years.

Hmm, I am not sure where to go from there.

Interesting analysis. Sounds similar to my own thoughts on the matter.

 

[A Random Person]

Alcohol would just become like marijauna today, a lot of people know it's illegal but say the government has no business in their personal life and use in spite of government order.

There will be a lot less moderate drinkers, but more heavy drinkers. Police would not see intoxication as often so they would not have how to handle it down to a science.

A person who would have died in a car accident survives, marries and has kids, the would be spouse of the wife finds some one else and so on. The kids marry and a generation of competly different people will arise.

 

[David S Poepoe]

Well, quite a lot of Vietnam vets were exposed to marijuana, heroin and other drugs while overseas, yet we don't see a large movement by Congressmen who were Vietnam vets to legalize these drugs.

And many people have noticed that enforcement efforts against the drugs we currently make illegal are not effective...they don't really reduce supply that much, and they create a huge criminal enterprise benefiting organized criminal gangs, just like Prohibition did in the 1920s. Yet, we haven't seen the "realists" come forward to legalize these drugs.

There's no particular reason...other than the fact that alcohol had an organized lobby funded by the beer and liquor industries, while marijuana and heroin didn't...why alcohol prohibition should have been any less long-lasting than the bans on these other drugs. If we assume a slightly more "puritannical" streak in the American population at large, the politicians might have decided to ignore this lobby and Prohibition might exist to this day.

There is a particular reason. There are vast differences between the legalization of alcohol and particular drugs. The main difference is acceptance by society. Alcohol has a history already of acceptance and being a part of society before Prohibition. More importantly, as opposed to various drugs, it is a part of societies other than the US. Anyone looking either at Canada or Mexico or even to Europe would see that alcohol acceptable and its impact minimal.

Marijuana, heroin, etc. are present in other countries, but they are also 'controlled' or prohibited. In most instances there is a logic behind why something is illegal in two or more countries.

However, there is no ban on the consumption of alcohol, it just makes obtaining it more difficult.

 

[robertp6165]

There is a particular reason. There are vast differences between the legalization of alcohol and particular drugs. The main difference is acceptance by society. Alcohol has a history already of acceptance and being a part of society before Prohibition. More importantly, as opposed to various drugs, it is a part of societies other than the US. Anyone looking either at Canada or Mexico or even to Europe would see that alcohol acceptable and its impact minimal.

Marijuana, heroin, etc. are present in other countries, but they are also 'controlled' or prohibited. In most instances there is a logic behind why something is illegal in two or more countries.

However, there is no ban on the consumption of alcohol, it just makes obtaining it more difficult.

History doesn't support your statements, at least with regard to Marijuana. Marijuana, for example, was not banned until 1937. Until that time, it had been an accepted substance in American society since before American independence. One of the primary reasons it was banned was because of lobbying by the Alcohol industry, which wanted to create another bogeyman so they could argue that alcohol was safe in comparison and thus promote the repeal of Prohibition.

Heroin was not banned completely until 1924...after Prohibition had begun. Up until 1914 it had been a widely accepted part of patent medicines sold over the counter, and up until 1924 was still available for recreational use by doctor's prescription.

And the banning of other drugs was also a very recent phenomenon at the time of alcohol prohibition. Most of these substances had been accepted and widely used in American society up until the 1920s.

If alcohol had been demonized a bit more, it's quite possible that the Prohibition on it may have been retained, just like those on the other drugs were. Indeed, it is possible that Marijuana might never have been banned, and it might have become the drug of choice over time.

 

[Berra]

A opposition would emerge soner or later, and it might become a early liberterian movement.

 

[KEVP]

The point is that alcohol is a central accepted part of our culture. It has long been accepted, even expected, for alcohol to be drunk at certain social and other events.

Marijuana has NEVER had that level of cultural acceptance. It was never "normal" or "typical" for an average American to smoke marijuana, marijuana has always been associated with subcultures.