Abstract
Prohibition is a phenomenon that took place between 1920 and 1933 which was regarded as a noble experiment. It was passed as a law to stop people from consuming alcohol and had a lot of repercussions, some of which are felt even today. Most of the people who suffered in the process of enforcing the new amendment were innocent, and the whole process resulted in organized crime, which developed into an empire. The crime involved the police and high people in the government, while courts, as well as politicians, engaged more in corruption. People disrespected the law, and ironically the consumption of alcohol increased. After 13 years of the noble experiment, the law was repealed when prohibition proved to be a failure.
Introduction
Prohibition in the legal sense refers to the law which prevents the consumption of alcohol. It prohibits or restricts the manufacturing and transportation as well as import and export of beverages containing alcohol. The term prohibition of alcohol is also applied to refer to the time in history when some countries enacted and enforced laws against the consumption of alcohol among the European culture. In the Muslim world, alcoholic beverages are strongly prohibited in line with Muslim law, although the degree of strictness varies from one country to another. In the U.S, prohibition was the period between 1920 and 1933 when all business activities regarding the use of alcohol were banned according to the 18th amendment in the constitution of the United States.
Before 1917 there was a lot of pressure on the lawmakers exerted by the temperance movement. As a result, there was a proposal by the senate to create the 18th amendment in 1917, which was certified in early 1919 after receiving approval by 36 states. The new amendment was effected on January 1920 though some legislators had by then already put in place nationwide prohibition. The national prohibition act received its popular name-the Volstead act and provided the legally accepted definition of liquor that is intoxicating and provided enforcement on alcohol’s prohibition. Prohibition became more and more unpopular at the time of the great depression, and citizens eagerly anticipated repeal. In1933, Franklin Roosevelt signed as law the amendment to the Volstead act and consequently allowed the manufacture as well as the sale of some alcoholic beverages. (Gerstein, 2000 pp 23-26).
History of prohibition
In1657 the general court of Massachusetts declared that it was illegal to sell any form of liquor irrespective of the trade name it carried. Generally, there were informal control methods that instilled belief in homes and communities at large that excessive consumption of alcohol was not accepted. Society generally accepted that although alcohol was a Godly gift, abusing its use was not of God but rather demonic, and therefore anyone who engaged in drunkenness was condemned and deserved punishment. If these informal control measures on abuse of alcohol failed, then the legal measures were put in place. (Gerstein, 2000 pp 27-30).
Explanation on why excessive drinking was discouraged
Some medical men argued that excessive drinking of alcohol was detrimental to one’s health, but they were not opposed to controlled drinking. According to Dr. Benjamin (1784), uncontrolled consumption of alcohol was harmful to the physical as well as psychological health of an individual and therefore encouraged people to use alcohol in moderation. In 1789 in Russia, there was a belief that was widely discussed that influenced about 250 farmers in forming temperance associations. This was followed by several other such associations in many other parts, including Virginia as well as New York in 1800 and1808, respectively. This became so popular, and within about ten years, temperance organizations had spread to eight states and some serving as statewide organizations. (Gerstein, 2000 pp 30-36).
How prohibition developed
Prohibition, which was also known as the dry movement, was started in the 1840s, lead by a pietistic religious organization such as the Methodists. This was the product of several temperance movements that had been witnessed in the late 1800s that campaigned against all forms of behavior as well as institutions that were in any way related to the drinking of alcohol. A preacher by the name of Reverend mark associated prostitution with those saloons that were dispensing alcohol. This campaign gained some success in the 1850s, and Maine had a total ban on manufacturing as well as the sale of alcohol by 1851. After the movement is successful for about 10 years, it started losing strength and was later marginalized between 1861and1865 when the American civil war took place. The issue of prohibition started gaining strength through revival by Prohibition Party, which was formed in1869 together with the woman’s Christian temperance union in 1873. Although the latter group had a name that suggested moderation, it did not call for moderation or even temperance but promoted for total prohibition of alcohol, and one of the several methods it used was through education. This was aimed at sending the message to the children because it was believed that if this was instilled in the mind of the children, then the solution could be long-term. It could bring what they termed as dry sentiment, which could successfully lead to achieving prohibition. (Aaron, 1999 pp 19-23).
Kansas, in 1881 was the first state to pass a law in its constitution against the consumption of alcoholic drinks. Carrie nation became so popular because of its notorious stand in enforcing the law where it walked into saloons and scolded customers as well as destroying the liquor bottles with a hatchet. Nation employed ladies as the prohibition group and led them in the exercise. Several other activists joined efforts to support implement the law by visiting saloons where they could sing songs and pray to urge those who operated the saloons not to be selling alcohol. This was followed by similar support in several other states in the south as well as individual countries. Between 1890 and1920, which was the progressive era in the fight against alcohol, there was marked hostility to saloons, and the political impact became so popular. The Prohibition Party, together with the woman’s Christian temperance union, gained effectiveness in advocating prohibition. (Aaron, 1999 pp 24-26).
State, as well as local politics, considered prohibition with a lot of concern for almost up to the 1930s. Several historical studies have shown that the political forces fighting against the use of alcohol were characterized by being ethnoreligious. Prohibition was called for by several religious denominations such as the Methodists, Southern Baptists, Quakers, and Presbyterians. They viewed saloons as corrupt politically and considered the consumption of alcohol as a sin. The liturgical Protestants, who were regarded as the wets, opposed prohibition and claimed that the government should not engage itself in matters of defining morality. However, even where there was a stronghold for the wets like in New York City, the prohibition movement still existed, such as the Norwegian church as well as African –American activists who viewed prohibition as a benefit to the workers. Those who were working in the tea farms, as well as those in the soda fountain manufacturing companies, were for the prohibition because they thought that if the campaign on prohibition went through successfully, then their products would sell in large quantities as an alternative to the alcohol consumers. (Aaron, 1999 pp 27-28).
Natural prohibition
The issue of prohibition was ignored by both Charles Evans and Woodrow Wilson, who were candidates of the Republican and Democratic Party, respectively, during the 1916 presidential election. The two parties had similar platforms in that they both had strong wet as well as dry factions, and the results of the elections were promising to be close. None of the two candidates wished to alienate anything to do with their political history. When the congress convened in1917, the dry was more than the wets by 76 in the Democratic Party and by 76 in the republicans. In the same year, America declared to fight Germany, and therefore the German-American who was strongly opposed to prohibition received major discredit as well as their protests being ignored. Congress introduced a resolution for an amendment in order to effect nationwide prohibition. This was passed in 1917, and in 1919 the amendment received ratification from 36 out of the 48 states, and towards the end of the same year, the amendment received a supplement from the Volstead act. Actual prohibition started in 1920 when the 18th amendment was put into effect. This was followed by use of not less than 1520 prohibition agent who was assigned to enforce the law. Study shows that prohibition was controversial, but it received support from various groups where progressives viewed it as a way of improving the society. (Behr, 1996 pp 41-45).
The great social-economic experiment, as it was referred came to be history by 1931 when a presidential committee made a report that prohibition was not being effective. In1932, the presidential candidates, Herbert Hoover and Franklin D. Roosevelt were also for the repeal, and so when Roosevelt won the election, he had Congress pass an amendment on the Volstead act. It permitted beer but with a limit of 3.2%content of alcohol. In 1933, the 18th amendment was repealed by the 21st amendment and was part of the constitution. This was the first time in the United States of America that an amendment was repealed and the prohibition since then became history. (Behr, 1996 pp 46-50).
The 21st amendment gave leeway for the states to decide for themselves whether to remain dry or not. For example, Kansas remained dry till 1940, while Oklahoma made it remain dry until 1957. Mississippi chose to stay dry till 1966. Although prohibition had now become a history in the United States, its effects were much felt even long after, and study shows some are still felt even today. The great countries’ experiments had several consequences, some of which have been discussed in this paper. (Behr, 1996 pp 51-57).
Effects of prohibition
Prohibition caused people to disrespect the law because, in the history of the United States, people had not been witnessed breaking the laws to such a high degree where they even appeared to enjoy doing that. People were of the opinion that other laws could still be broken out of the fun they had in breaking the one on prohibition. Some argued that laws to do with alcohol were worthless. Prohibition also caused erosion for respect of religion because the justification of prohibition was by God and the holy bible. When the prohibition was over, it was interpreted to be God’s failure and a sign of how Satan is always at work and ready to win. This was fueled by the fact that none of the evangelicals behind many sufferings admitted his mistake. (Michael, 2007 pp 34-38).
Prohibitions lead to organized crime, which was not spoken of before. The gangsters were paid more and were more linked. The public did not view them as real bandits but as individuals who neglected the law with a valid reason to bring them what they wanted. This also affected politicians and police commissioners as it was seen as a lucrative business and also as a form of security against threats from the gangsters with the crime emerging from alcohol into gambling as well as prostitution. Prohibition corrupted the enforcement of the law permanently as well as enforcement in the courts and general politics. During the time of prohibition, the organized crime comprised police, prosecutors, and judges, as well as politicians who were either threatened by the mobsters or even bought. If this was not possible, they could either be wiped out or removed from their position using a more democratic system. They could be challenged with other candidates who received a lot of support from the gangsters during the following election. Prohibition, therefore, indirectly or directly forced the law enforcers to give support to the gangsters. (Michael, 2007 pp 39-41).
Police and the courts, as well as the penal system, became overburdened by the prohibition because the courts became clogged, and jails could not hold the capacity brought in. Police, as well as judges, found it difficult to perform their duties due to a shortage of time, where 44% of the court cases comprised of prohibition cases. Prohibition also caused a lot of harm in terms of finance and emotions as well as moral standards. This mostly affected those in the direct production of the alcohol as well as its distribution and sales. The majority of these workers lost their jobs, and others opted to be criminals by virtue of continuing to do what the law had prohibited. It also leads to physical harm because people no longer access the safe lab-tested alcohol either for personal consumption or for sale and thus resorted to unsafe brew and any available concoctions. Some consumed wood alcohol which is unsafe in spite of the fact that it gets one high, and therefore some consumers died of it.
The drinking habits of the countries were greatly changed by the prohibition because the drinking was shifted to homes after the public places were closed down. People were making sure that they always had the drink at home and drunk all the time than ever before. Cigarette smoking became a common habit nationally even though it was the second substance under the list to be prohibited. As a result of the failure of the prohibition on alcohol, when the same evangelicals attempted to prohibit cigarettes, they faced a lot of resistance, and the habit became almost irresistible. For example, Hollywood smoked as a sign of independence and sophistication as well as glamour. (Michael, 2007 pp 42-45).
Conclusion
The phenomenon of prohibition resulted in being very expensive, and studies show that it is very difficult to estimate the cost of the great experiment, which took 13 years. A lot of money was used in courts and also in operating the jails, and just estimates were topping to billion dollars while, on the other hand, the unskilled laborers earned $5 a day. The government also lost a lot of revenue income in the form of tax collection on the sale of alcohol, with the artificial increase of the alcohol’s price being much felt by the poor and the working classes. The consequences of prohibition were mostly negative, and nearly all the Americans who lived during the 13 years of prohibition and are still alive today were affected by the experiment. It would be a condemnation for somebody who cannot remember the past regarding prohibition to try to repeat it, but surprisingly it appears some people have forgotten the recent past and are attempting to repeat it today.
References
Gerstein m. (2000): beyond the shadow of prohibition: National academy press pp 23-36.
Alcohol prohibition and drug prohibition: lessons from alcohol. Web.
Aaron p. (1999): temperance and prohibition in America: national academy press pp 19-28.
History of alcohol prohibition. Web.
Behr E. (1996): prohibition: thirteen years that changed America: arcade publishing pp 41-57.
Prohibition. Web.
Michael M. (2007): Dry Manhattan: prohibition in New York City: Harvard University press pp 34-45.