Prohibition

[timmyc]

First off great series if you enjoy history. I think some of what happened back then, can be looked at now. Through out the show, I got a little chuckle when the prohibitionists are called drys and the anti prohibitionists are called wets, kind of reminds me of our community and our relationship with the outside world.

[diaperpt]

I watched the series as well, not intently, but I did think it was very interesting. Ken Burns does a pretty good job with all the documentaries he does.

Maybe, in keeping with your other comment, he'll do his next one on the history of ab/dl!

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

Hey!! Are you saying we are all wet and that we should dry up? I resemble that remark!

Rewind: spring 1962. I am a 16 yr old Junior at De La Salle Academy, Newport RI

Class: American History. Secific Timeframe of Study, the 1930's

The Volsted Act/ 18th Amendment has recently been repealed. Stated reason "prohibition does not work"

Now in c1937 they are starting to raise the tax on pot specifically to make it too expensive to use, Also other means to outlaw drugs are in the works. What runs through my mind is: Thi ink is not even dry on the repeal of prohibition and they are trying to do the same with drugs. How do they expect to make that work? I had inadvertently discovered the definition of insanity some 40 years before it became common knowledge. At the time, '62 there was no "drug war" because drugs were very in the shadow known mostly as part of the artist/entertainers' demi-mond and nobody wanted to fool with them. 6 years later would be the start of the eminently predictable but nobody would have believed me if I had told them

[timmyc]

Hey!! Are you saying we are all wet and that we should dry up? I resemble that remark!

I never said we have to dry up. I am an unapologetic wet

[Darkfinn]

Hey!! Are you saying we are all wet and that we should dry up? I resemble that remark!

Rewind: spring 1962. I am a 16 yr old Junior at De La Salle Academy, Newport RI

Class: American History. Secific Timeframe of Study, the 1930's

The Volsted Act/ 18th Amendment has recently been repealed. Stated reason "prohibition does not work"

Now in c1937 they are starting to raise the tax on pot specifically to make it too expensive to use, Also other means to outlaw drugs are in the works. What runs through my mind is: The ink is not even dry on the repeal of prohibition and they are trying to do the same with drugs. How do they expect to make that work? I had inadvertently discovered the definition of insanity some 40 years before it became common knowledge. At the time, '62 there was no "drug war" because drugs were very in the shadow known mostly as part of the artist/entertainers' demi-mond and nobody wanted to fool with them. 6 years later would be the start of the eminently predictable but nobody would have believed me if I had told them

America has never been a nation to learn from its mistakes.

See Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, illegal immigration and the national debt among the top of the list.

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

You are wrong about the root of Afghanistan. Something had to be done there. The Taliban were shielding Bin Laden hance were accessories to 9/11 Now we can agree that it has gotten out of hand

WYour use of "America" in invalid since it includes persons who are against the things you cite as wrong and is an examploe of Collective guilt which is a form of bigotry at worst and mental sloppiness at best. Most of what you cite belongs at the doorstep of the politicians who either apporved such or did not do anything to stop it, and their intellectual supporters who were either dumb or misguided and especially in the case of Iraq did not think things through, such as "What would replace Hussein" the answer would have been obvious: A Shi'ite regime that would have religious and therefore strong ties to the other Shi'ite regime, which is in. I will let you fill in the blanks. Now if you have ever been face to face with Communism, and I have spoken with those who have, you would understand the reasons for Korea and Vietnam. If you know any of the children or grandchildren of "boat people" ask them about Vietnam and Cambodia. Communist dogma called for expansion and form the actions of the late 1940's and even into the 1960's has been willing to use force to do so. Look up Hungary 1956 and Czeckoslovakia 1968 as well as Eastern Europe 1946-51 So those fears were founded in real actions

Now in Vietnam Johnson was trying to bring the Cong and their N Vietnam supporters to the bargaining table but they were not cfoming. As early as 1948 the scientist Von Nuyman said that we should use what nuclear weapons we had on the Soviet Union so that, even if we could not defeat them with those, we could keep them from becoming a threat

But to make a blanket statement like "America does not learn" is invalid and leaves you open to charges of being dumb. What Americal needs to learn is to keep the politicians on a very short leash

[sarah_ab]

usually dogs are kept on leashes, and i feel my dogs resent being associated with politicians! hehehehe... god i'm clever!

[Bettypooh]

Back when I drank- usually to excess- I wet my bed frequently, and that was the main reason I got into diapering again. It was a solution to the problem of being "wet". Now there's a physical need for diapers so even without alcohol I am "wet", and that suits me just fine!

AS to prohibition, it just proved a few things to be true:

1- You cannot legislate morality

2- If there is any way possible, people who want something badly enough will find a way to get it

3- Inre #2, if it can't be done legally then it will be done illegally creating or increasing crime levels

4- If it isn't legal the government can't tax it, and that means only crooks will profit from that business as the rest lose

5- Perhaps the most important part is that when too many people don't vote, the few who do will rule over them.

Bettypooh

[wetatnight]

I agree with Betty poo's comements..

I don't advocate using drugs, but if prohibition of alcohol failed why would anybody think prohibiting drugs would work?

[redneck diaper boy]

My parents lived during the prohibition of alcohol. Prohibition brought out organized crime. Al Capone and people like him flourished. We see the same thing today with marijuana. People are getting killed on the Mexican border. If they would legalize marijuana, a lot of crime sprees would end.

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

My parents lived during the prohibition of alcohol. Prohibition brought out organized crime. Al Capone and people like him flourished. We see the same thing today with marijuana. People are getting killed on the Mexican border. If they would legalize marijuana, a lot of crime sprees would end.

I thought of that question 39-1/2 years ago. 39-1/2? There is something vaguely Grinchian about that. I guess it is the "Bullwinkle Syndrom": "This time for sure!"

[Yvhuce]

Step 1: Reinstate Prohibition.

Step 2: Extend it to drugs.

Step 3: Kill all who go against it.

Step 4: Kill the rest of the criminals.

Step 5: Kill the politicians.

Step 6: Tax the rich until there is no rich/poor money gap.

Step 7: Institute a "hard work = more pay/cushy jobs = less pay" law.

Step 8: Live in a better world. Not perfect. But better.

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

That was tried, it ws called the Soviet Union, Maoist China Pol Pot's Cambodia and Castro's Cuba Some "better world" Besides, if you kill all the politicians who will create this workers' paradise? Also how could you enjoy target shooting in such a place since they would ban guns as part of enforcing prohibition?

What is that definition of insanity?

[Bettypooh]

You are wrong about the root of Afghanistan. Something had to be done there. The Taliban were shielding Bin Laden hance were accessories to 9/11 Now we can agree that it has gotten out of hand

Nothing ever "has to be done", though if that route is chosen one "has to" put up with the consequences the choice brings and they should do that without crying or moaning about it. At the height of it's power, Britain took on the hills of Afghanistan- and lost. At the height of it's power, the Soviet Union took on the hills of Afghanistan- and lost. When you study the history of that region and the ways of it's people you learn that they cannot be overcome by conventional means, nor by some unconventional ones which the Soviets tried. About the best that has ever been achieved there is to slow their efforts down and to partially contain them. Their belief in Allah, clan, and family runs to their core and all of them are happy to die for those beliefs. They are not highly educated but do not need to be to live in their traditional methods and means. They do not trust outsiders; even Bin Laden had to have highly respected local allies to operate there. We went about it all wrong, and the result is that they will continue as they always have, and somewhere in the future they will be a problem again.

But to make a blanket statement like "America does not learn" is invalid and leaves you open to charges of being dumb. What America needs to learn is to keep the politicians on a very short leash

and they should be trained to behave properly, not left to run lose doing as they please like they are now. But I have to agree with Darkfinn here- we do not learn from out mistakes nearly as well as we should. As long as they have a fair amount of prosperity, most Americans are content to not bother with things which should concern them, and they don't want to pay attention to anything that they do not see having a direct impact on their short-term happiness. That attitude doesn't work. It leads us to where we are now wih a general lack of prosperity and only more gloom in the financial forecast. Had we chosen to cull out the individuals who were the problem-causers by action against them as individuals we wouldn't have spent billions on wars we couldn't win from the start, and that money would have helped us weather this financial crisis better.

You further mention some of the failures of communism, but in those you include Cuba. In that case I have to differ, for as it almost is here in the US now, before Castro's rule Cuba was a nation of a few extremely wealthy people living a glorious life with the rest living in abject poverty. Like in apartheid S. Africa, a few of the poor were privileged to serve the wealthy and be less poor, but they weren't empowered to become wealthy themselves. All those classes are gone now, but it has at least given the average Cuban a much better life than they had before. Most are somewhat poor, but far less poor than before. And you have to give Castro credit for being smart enough to get someone else- the USSR- to pay for most of that progress! Now that their 'cash cow' is gone, Cuba is moving toward a freer society on it's own, the people tired of the stagnation which came with that loss. They too will change with the times, as we all will- except for those in the hills of Afghanistan who will never change and will never be ruled by anyone from the outside.

Back to the OP's topic, this was one heck of a documentary, something Ken Burns does like no one else. He has raised the bar for that kind of Cinema so high that few can achieve it no matter how well funded they are. He has found his niche of expertise and we all have gained from that. He did gloss over one aspect of Prohibition which I would like to have seen more of- that of the Moonshiners in the Appalachian hills who were never dry and never will be. To this very day, even with all the satellites and technology available to them, the government cannot catch the people here from making their whiskey the way they want to here. The 'good stuff' actually costs more than one would spend for something similar in an approved liquor store, but it is the way my people live, it is what we want, and like those in the hills of Afghanistan we will not be changed by outsiders.

Bettypooh

[Diapered Jason]

I also agree with Bettypooh that the war in Afghanistan did not have to be done. I will further state that the war was like chasing a white rabbit, and I think it is no longer possible to justify our decade of conflict with 9/11. I hope we never do this again. I do not care if there is another terrorist attack on American soil, there are better alternatives now. I think we have finally learned the futility involved in fighting guerilla warfare trained enemies with a large army. It may have taken us a few wars and extreme loss of life, but I think we have finally learned that. The days of sending armies to countries like Iraq and Afghanistan are I hope almost over. Robotic warfare is slowly taking over and you will hear more about how efficiently drones have killed enemy leaders and combatants.

Now, to return to the topic, prohibition is one big hypocrisy that allows Blood to reign (hey, that is a double entendre). So much violence is created by these laws and hopefully the government will soon agree that pot is not a schedule I drug. The rules regarding marijuana as a schedule I drug have already been broken, since prescriptions can now be made for the drug. I also find it oddly suspicious that tobacco and alcohol are not even defined in the Controlled Substance Act when they are both clearly drugs that can be abused. I would conclude with saying the system surrounding these drugs should be revised. I think it is important to not get carried away and legalize deadly drugs such as heroin, meth, etc. for general consumption as I have heard some people say. These things must be carefully considered when creating such laws and the impact on life must be thoroughly thought of. Realize that prohibiting a drug could cost just as much lives as not prohibiting it. As we prohibit a drug, violence is created and lives are lost in such pursuits. On the other hand, we must also remember the lethality of some drugs and allowing the public to freely use these drugs would also cost many lives.

[timmyc]

Step 1: Reinstate Prohibition.

Step 2: Extend it to drugs.

Step 3: Kill all who go against it.

Step 4: Kill the rest of the criminals.

Step 5: Kill the politicians.

Step 6: Tax the rich until there is no rich/poor money gap.

Step 7: Institute a "hard work = more pay/cushy jobs = less pay" law.

Step 8: Live in a better world. Not perfect. But better.

So you must have been pretty broken up when Saddam Hussein and Moammar Gadhafi were killed.

[wetatnight]

place like Amsterdam in the Netherlands have legalized drugs and prostitution, but it's strictly regulated by the government there.

America should relize that that the war on drugs hasn't worked just like prohibition of alcohol failed in the 1930's

[Yvhuce]

That was tried, it ws called the Soviet Union, Maoist China Pol Pot's Cambodia and Castro's Cuba Some "better world" Besides, if you kill all the politicians who will create this workers' paradise? Also how could you enjoy target shooting in such a place since they would ban guns as part of enforcing prohibition?

What is that definition of insanity?

There's no step in my plan that involves getting rid of guns. Just getting rid of those who should never be allowed to have guns in the first place...

So you must have been pretty broken up when Saddam Hussein and Moammar Gadhafi were killed.

Actually, I was quite happy that they died. Shows how flawed your logic is...

[BriGuy]

The death of bin laden was only a ploy to take our attention away from the real news... The re-signing of the patriot act. Our government is corrupt and only interested in lining their pockets. Fortunately for us the American public is a bunch of over fed cows waiting for their next free meal so no real change will happen. We are too lazy as a country and almost over run by welfare receiving sheep.

Prohibition was an interesting time period, sure wish we could learn from our mistakes.

[jeremy12312]

Actually, I was quite happy that they died. Shows how flawed your logic is...

You're missing his point. Those two people instituted your dream world, and see how well that worked out.

[Yvhuce]

You're missing his point. Those two people instituted your dream world, and see how well that worked out.

No. You're missing the point. My dream world is different from theirs.

[nitrous]

I hate to ask this question but I'll ask it anyways. We know that there is no way to stop illegal contriban such as cokane from entering the country. So how do we make it legal and not have it destroy people's lives? My uncle is an addict cand his life is fucked. But when I watched the History Chanel's documentary on drugs, it showed that cokane was handled in a some what controlled measure during the 19th century. It pointed to cocane being cocacola and Sherlock Holms injecting it into his vains as a normal part of his life (the character eventually kicked the habit) . So can we do the same here in these modern times, tame addictive drugs such as cocane and heroin? Should we reap tax benefits from those suffering from addiction or should be bankrupt ourselves in trying to win an un winable war on drugs? And if you do see a pathway to victory without burning the constitution, what do we do? The best case scenereo is turning the addicted population into slaves (that being paying them in drugs) for those who're complete junkies until they're ready to quit the habit. Do I think this is a good idea, fuck no. Do I think rehab helps? well I've had friend who's been in and out of rehab through most of his life because of oxycotton a drug that is just as addicting as heroin but yet still perscribed. How do we fix this world? I know imprisonment for posesion is bullshit (people get drugs inside prison too). So how do we fix it? I don't know.

[jeremy12312]

No. You're missing the point. My dream world is different from theirs.

Since both dream worlds involve executing citizens for petty crimes, I guess yeah, I do miss your subtle differences.

[Darkfinn]

You are wrong about the root of Afghanistan. Something had to be done there.

Just like the Russians tried to do something about Afghanistan in the 80's... and lost.

Just like the British tried to do something about Afghanistan in the mid 1800's - early 1900's... and lost.

Military force can't win against those people and their tactics on that kind of terrain... and if America hadn't meddled in other nations' affairs in the first place there wouldn't be so much global hatred towards us. But no, we have to go in and try to subjugate other nations to our will when all anyone really wants for the most part is to be left alone.

America is NOT the world's police force. The British tried that with their empire before us. It worked out for a little while, but look what it cost them in the end. Not only is America unable (unwilling?) to learn from its own history, we can't learn from the history of other nations either.

As another perfect example, the situation we're in right now is quite similar to the one France found itself in during the years leading up to the French Revolution.

-- A financial crisis caused in part by involvement in extensive overseas wars, out of control national debt and an inadequate system of taxation.

-- A small group of sociopolitical elite controlling everything.

-- Mass poverty, rapidly rising prices of necessities, inadequate infrastructure.

-- A government out of touch with its people.

It spells trouble trouble trouble... and unless some things change soon in a major way these protests we're seeing around the nation may very well turn into revolts.

[BriGuy]

I hate to ask this question but I'll ask it anyways. We know that there is no way to stop illegal contriban such as cokane from entering the country. So how do we make it legal and not have it destroy people's lives? My uncle is an addict cand his life is fucked. But when I watched the History Chanel's documentary on drugs, it showed that cokane was handled in a some what controlled measure during the 19th century. It pointed to cocane being cocacola and Sherlock Holms injecting it into his vains as a normal part of his life (the character eventually kicked the habit) . So can we do the same here in these modern times, tame addictive drugs such as cocane and heroin? Should we reap tax benefits from those suffering from addiction or should be bankrupt ourselves in trying to win an un winable war on drugs? And if you do see a pathway to victory without burning the constitution, what do we do? The best case scenereo is turning the addicted population into slaves (that being paying them in drugs) for those who're complete junkies until they're ready to quit the habit. Do I think this is a good idea, fuck no. Do I think rehab helps? well I've had friend who's been in and out of rehab through most of his life because of oxycotton a drug that is just as addicting as heroin but yet still perscribed. How do we fix this world? I know imprisonment for posesion is bullshit (people get drugs inside prison too). So how do we fix it? I don't know.

It's spelled cocain and there is too much money being made off the war on drugs. Too many peoples lives depend on it. It's sad too because they see how fleeting the war on drugs is. It's just pop culture at this point.