Prohibition: Our Voice is the Deciding Factor


The Prohibition was the governments attempt to outlaw production, sale, and shipment of alcohol and any intoxicating beverages across the country. Enforcing a liquor ban was in hope of reducing the number of crimes associated with immigrants in America. As I will later discuss that it did not reduce crime rate, but the Prohibition did cause workers to become more efficient by not spending all their money at saloons. People were able to actually start saving for their future.

The Anti-Saloon league was a key group during this time that fought for the government to place a ban on liquor. They had support from many women’s groups and progressives (ministers, congregations, ect). These groups were fearful of our nation turning into addicts who could barely function without the high buzz they received from alcohol. Progressives went as far as saying that alcohol was unmoral and would condemn their souls.

The 18th amendment established a liquor ban in 1917, but wasn’t really enforced until in 1919 through the Volstead Act that defined the types of alcoholic beverages that people were prohibited from manufacturing and selling. It never explicitly said that people weren’t allowed to drink alcohol though. Many American’s during this era had actually kept a huge supply of alcohol for their own personal use. Speakeasys (hidden bar) also became very popular as they provided illegal alcoholic beverages and entertainment to patrons. Now that alcohol was being distributed illegally, it was not being regulated and checked for purity. As a result, over 10,000 people died from wood alcohol poisoning while those who did survive were left either blind or with debilitating conditions.

In the process of trying to limit crime by banning liquor, one of the more major negative effects was that it actually caused more crime to happen as seen by the St. Valentine’s day massacre. Bootlegging became very popular during the 20’s as a way for the mob to make money by illegally transporting alcohol from other countries to America.

Another negative effect of the prohibition was the mistrust that the government caused it’s citizens. Many felt prohibition infringed on their rights. Why should the government be allowed to tell them what they can and cannot consume? By 1933, the 21st amendment was ratified causing a repeal to the original 18th amendment that establish a liquor ban. I believe this is as it should be. The United States is a democratic republic, meaning it is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Our voice is the deciding factor, not those whom reside in the government. We must find a balance between securing our nations morality and our civil liberties.

S2137-lg

Florien, Daniel. “12 Bad Effects of Prohibition You Should Know.” Patheos, Patheos, 11 Mar. 2009, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unreasonablefaith/2009/03/12-bad-effects-of-prohibition-you-should-know/.

Keene, Jennifer D., et al. Visions of America: a History of the United States. Pearson, 2017

4 thoughts on “Prohibition: Our Voice is the Deciding Factor

  1. How do you think this movement would affect the churches in our nation? Do you think it increased attendance and members, or do you believe it affected it negatively, because people were angry with the Christians for fighting against their alcohol privelages?

  2. I thought you made a lot of great points in this post and really covered all the important topics, with the main two being why prohibition was a thing in the first place and why it didn’t work in the long run. I agree that it mostly came down to crime rates actually rising and Americans thinking that the government was infringing on their rights. I thought “We must find a balance between securing our nations morality and our civil liberties” was a great line you used and really summed the whole topic up well. Good work!

  3. I do agree a bit with the Anti-Saloon group because I think that many people are able to abuse substances to an extreme. I think that some people still become those shells of humans without the addictive buzz of alcohol. I still think that Congress should not have punished all of its citizens though. I’m not sure how, but there could’ve been a system put into place with everyone getting one chance not to abuse a substance and if they do, they are not able to come in contact with it again. I also think that the negative effects of the people dying over could’ve been avoided by the restrictions on alcohol not being so severe.

  4. Your blog made some very good points. Some of the crime now a days is still from cause of alcohol. Some people still make alcohol stronger then they should. People are still rebelling against the government to this day about alcohol restrictions.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s