Reason.tv: Prohibition Vogue-Why We're Still Talking About "The Noble Experiment"
Alcohol prohibition may have been repealed in 1933, but Americans have rarely been more intoxicated with the "noble experiment" than they are today.
Between Last Call, Daniel Okrent's best-selling 2010 book, leading clothing designers taking inspiration from jazz age fashion, a new prime-time documentary by Ken Burns, and the new, second season of HBOs critically acclaimed Boardwalk Empire, it's impossible to ignore the new interest in Prohibition. With a fixation on "classic cocktails" and faux-speakeasies, even drinking culture itself seems to be bellying up to the bar.
What's fueling this fascination and where will it end? Reason.tv talks with filmmaker Burns, author Okrent, and drug policy activist Aaron Houston of Students for Sensible Policy, who argues that "Culture and art right now are reflective of a general sentiment in this society that the war on drugs has not worked."
And that change is in air. Marijuana legalization initiatives will be on the ballot in at least two states in 2012, Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Barney Frank (D-Mass.) have introduced legislation to let states decide pot's legal status, and record high levels of Americans are in favor of legalization. As Okrent tells Reason.tv, the need for excise tax revenue during the Great Depression helped make repeal of alcohol prohibition not just possible but desirable. Coupled with a sense of exhaustion at a drug war that has done little to prevent drug use, the dire financial straits of government at all levels may just spell the demise of contemporary prohibition.
Approx. 5 minutes. Written and produced by Meredith Bragg and Nick Gillespie, who also narrates. Additional camera work by Jim Epstein and Anthony Fisher.
Go to reason.tv for downloadable versions, and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive notifications when new material goes live.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
...the dire financial straits of government at all levels may just spell the demise of contemporary prohibition.
If there wasn't a huge industry dependent on drug and alcohol prohibition, this might actually have been the thing to kill it.
You don't say?
+1
If drugs are legalized will the AK-47 go the way of the Tommy gun?
By using that photo is the Reason Foundation endorsing suicide? You should mention that a crap gun like that is only likely to lobotomize you.
Jimmy: "Dear God! What have I done?"
(Jimmy pulls out a gun and points it to his head and fires)
Jimmy's Dad: "Think again Jimmy. You see the firing pin in your gun was made out of?yep?zinc."
Jimmy: "Come back zinc, come back!!"
You crazier than me, LOL.
Hi, I'm Troy McClure. You may remember me from such educational films as 2 minus 3 equals negative fun! And firecrackers, the silent killer
crap gun like that
Looks like a British Bull Dog. I have a copy in .32 S&W Long. Not the greatest gun in the world, but I wouldn't want to be shot by it. I know James Garfield didn't want to be.
Forgot the link.
OH SNAP, PREZ GARFIELD! YOU GOT BURNED!
I'M IN YOUR GUITEAU, SHOOTIN' UR PREZ
Show some respect young hooligan!
Chester A. Arthur fall down.
Tom-m-m-m- y Gun! You ain't happy 'til you've got one...
If you don't like alcohol, then don't use it. If you don't like marijuana, then don't use it.
But..but...you can't just let people enjoy themselves.
that's not the way this workz
Well, it's nice to see that Reason is having a reasonable moment.
However, I do think this magazine/blog is moving towards the left.
REASON MAGAZINE FLIRTS WITH THE LEFT.
http://libertarians4freedom.bl.....-left.html
DRINK!!
Make it a double shot since his comment implies that Reason was better off with Postrel.
Well...it was.
Who's Postrel?
Virginia "The Valiant Virgin" Postrel. Things were better, etc, etc.
SMOKE!!!
The former chief editor of Reason, and the author of The Future and Its Enemies (now available on Kindle!)
Well, yeah, if you want to be all "useful" and "accurate" and stuff. Why does the title of that book remind me of something by Popper?
Because Postrel may have "borrowed" part of it?
Obviously, it's been too long since I've read Popper. Cheers.
If it's in all caps it must be true!
GREGOOOOOOOOOO
DITTOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
HOORAY! HE'S BACK!!!!
And I have to alter my incif file.
Sorry all the BILL's of the world.
Aww man, did I miss Smacky?
"they attack cops and prisons all the time, they support illegal aliens, they attack the Tea Party, the ridicule Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter, they don't believe in American Exceptionalism, they laugh at me when I say our rights come from God (it's in the Declaration of Independence)... I don't get it, it's like they live in a different universe. "
Head aching? Ask your Doctor about fast acting Republican...
Fuck off, Grego.
Oh I will, Zeb, I will keep "fucking" with the LINO's whenever I have the time. You should see me on Facebook, why just today I encountered one LINO who supports affirmative action and another LINO who defends the EPA. I guess to them John Stossel is rightwing, LOL.
May I remind my dear LINO's that libertarianism is more than having a partial birth abortion while smoking a joint while filming a cop while protesting the war?
Yes my LINO's, there's no to life than that.
GRREEGGGOOOOOO
You like being banned, Grego? I will laugh when you get banned again. Shit, I'm laughing now.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
LINOOOOOOOOOOOO
BANNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOO
HODOOOOOOR!
YES!
LIONOOOOOOOOO! THUNDERCATS! HOOOOOOOOO!
WOOOOOOOOLVERIIIIIIINES!!!
Why sure, I love to see the "libertarians" show how much they love "liberty" by banning anyone with politically incorrect opinions.
And I will keep reinventing myself, unlike rawstory and The Huffington Post, your IT guy hasn't figure out how to ban me forever.
How's the cell phone data plan, Gregory?
Yes my LINO's, there's no to life than that.
Cool story BROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
I meant "more" to life than that. Alas, Reason does not allow editing after you hit submit.
You bet Grego. I just cashed my welfare check, and now I'm going to go get a hooker and illegal drugs and hang out with my "anarchist" buddies! WOOT!
Ok come on. The last part was funny. Have a sense of humor folks.
When you encountered these people who support affirmitve action and defend the EPA, the real question is how do YOU respond? Do you "fuck" with them, or do you use the opportunity to engage with them and attempt to persuade?
If they considered themselves as "libertarians" then there must be some agreement you had with them. Maybe next time instead of "fucking" with them or degrading them it would be more beneficial to yourself to them and to all "libertarians" if you use logic and reason to show them the error of their ways.
You can catch more flies with honey than you can with vinegar.
True, but what happens when vinegar gets thrown in my face? This is my typical experience.
ME: I oppose illegal immigration.
LINO: No human being is illegal, racist!
or
LINO: Go back to burning crosses, kluxer!
ME: Go back to Mexico, beaner!
See? It's not like I start as an a-hole, I simply adapt to the environment.
This coming from a man who started off one conversation explaining that Texas is awesome and that the North sucked.
Then followed up with a desire to shoot American liberals
But he's not an asshole. Only liberals say he's an asshole. Gregory knows, though, that it's really society's fault that he behaves the way he does.
Tarran, you're like MSNBC, you're only telling part of the story:
James Street wrote:
"A lot of liberals will become terrorists if Julian Assange is convicted of terrorism because they believe what he did is NOT terrorism. It's simple logic."
I replied: "Good! Then we'll get to practice our markmanship skills with liberals."
Really Tarran, you're like the guy that doesn't care when an anarchist destroys a Starbucks but if the cops hits him with a billy club, that's a crime against humanity, right?
"It's not like I start as an a-hole, I simply adapt to the environment."
So, you don't believe in personal responsibility and blame the world around you for making you into an asshole.
Sounds totally libertarian, dude.
If the world had only been good and pure enough for him, than all would rejoice.
You guys are responding to 3 year old comments.
too bad left vs. right is a false dichotomy these days. There are statists, there are libertarians and varying degrees of either. Unless you want to get real technical and speak of the roots of right wing vs left wing in the French National Assembly at the beginning of the French Revolution. All libertarians would be considered left-wing in those terms.
I don't know if I'd rather bang Jimmy's mom or his wife.
The confession that she would kiss Jimmy's "winkie" when changing his diaper was a bit of a turn-off...
Bit of....yeah it was revolting. Thanks for reminding me. 😉
That bit was awesomely uncomfortable. Good shit.
What are you referencing?
Boardwalk Empire
Wife, obviously. A playful threeway with two bi chicks...boom chicka wow wow. A freak who kissed her babie's winkie ? No. Thank. You.
I wonder which one mask face is thinking about.
That's pretty much my line of thought.
She did a bit more than kiss his winkie. So much more that Jimmy thought WWI was a better option.
It's interesting to note that the 18th amendment didn't actually outlaw the USE of alcohol, unlike today's drug laws.
Yeah, where would WINDEX be?
actually, to be hypertechnical , most drug laws don't outlaw the USE of drugs (california having some exceptions)
they outlaw the possession of it.
you can have all the drugs you want in your system and its not illegal, in most states.
True, but Prohibition didn't even outlaw possession. It was illegal to manufacture, sell, or transport alcohol, but just having it was never a crime. (Even producing it wasn't always strictly illegal, since making wine or hard cider at home was effectively legal.) You could have a house chock-full of liquor, but as long as it wasn't for commercial activity, you were fine. That alone made Prohibition way less invasive than the current War On Some Drugs.
So I take it Aaron Houston never actually saw the Untouchables.
Threadjack! For once in his life, O'Donnell has a moment of lucidity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....r_embedded
Sorry, for the extreme Sugarfreeing, no idea how to make the link. Maybe http://youtu.be/v5zmzV5IxpQ ?
Hah! They both worked! *victory chicken dance*
That was actually pretty good. My cynicism is telling me that it happened because the victims were part of MSNBC's key demographic, but he could have done another opinion piece on how the R's need to compromise because the next Obama stimulus will be the shit.
"That was actually pretty good"
For a moment I thought you were referring to my spectacular chicken dance. 🙁
But yes, it also occurred to me to be cynical about it, but I spend so much time responding cynically to politics, I think my jar was out at the moment.
I know how you feel. Sometimes it's just better to be grateful for small victories.
This. A million times.
"Lawrence O'Donnell on Polic..." The YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated due to multiple third-party notifications of copyright infringement.
I keep hearing Prohibition called "the Noble Experiment". What is so goddamn noble about it? How is telling everyone else what they can or cannot drink, and backing it up by force of law, "noble" in any way?
It's kind of like how temperance meant abstinence.
We got a lot of great TV shows and movies and Sean Connery saying ; " Just like a Wop bringing a knife to a gunfight". Noble stuff.
It's a Herbert Hoover quote. They are using it sarcastically.
HERBOOOOOOOOO
+3 Glib points
GLIBOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Swine.
Me or Hoover?
I was using it sarcastically.
Sounds like Mr. Crankypants needs a nap.
I'm tired and my feet hurt. This place is freezing. You kids and your rap music. Baaaaaaaaaaah!
Friday Funnies coming up in 14 hours. Now who's cranky?
Way to jinx it.
-
The final word on Friday Funnies.
Damn, someone nailed it 2 1/2 years ago? Not bad.
I haven't seen Art around in like 2 years, anybody know what happened to him?
I always took that quote as damning with faint praise.
It's noble in the way that saving somebody from a burning house is noble. Obviously the comparison falls apart when you realize that drinking is not like a burning house and banning it didn't rescue anybody.
It rescued mobsters and liquor cops from having to get real jobs.
J?gerbombs are like a burning house.
+1 for proper umlaut usage.
Because they did it for the children.
It's Nobel Experiment. The Temperance Movement won a Nobel Peace Prize for getting the amendment ratified.
Really? I guess they waste those things on a regular basis.
News to me. I didn't know that the Nobel committea had gone off the deep end before they gave a prize to Arafat.
-jcr
News to me too. I can't find anything that confirms this as true.
It wasn't actually illegal to drink alcohol during Prohibition. It was illegal to manufacture, sell, transport, import or export, but not to drink.
most states' war on drug laws don't make it illegal to use drugs either. they make it illegal to POSSESS them, though (or conspire to possess them).
iirc, prohibition did not make mere possession of liquor illegal.
Well, we know what the best way to destroy the evidence, then.
iirc, prohibition did not make mere possession of liquor illegal.
There was no federal law against simple possession (although if you possessed enough it was assumed you were selling it), however many local jurisdictions went further and made outright possessions a crime.
I was using it sarcastically.
"TELL ME WHERE THE BOMB IS!"
"It's in my popular designer handbag."
"YEAH, I'M SO SURE."
It's worth remembering that Prohibition occurred in the 1920s. before the era of big government, the pervasive regulation of everyday life, the expansion of the Commerce Clause, unlimited federal deficits, and the accepted notion among the intellectual elite that federal authority is unlimited.
The federal government today wields weapons in the War on Drugs that the Harding, Coolidge and even Hoover Administrations would not have even dreamed they had the power to use.
Imagine if alcohol Prohibition returned today.
I half-agree with you; remember that this was the "Progressive" era, and "Progressive" basically meant trying to improve things through regulation. (Remember that we also got the income tax and the NFA around the same general time.) It's true that no one back then seems to have imagined the kind of intensely intrusive, all-encompassing Federal government we have today, though.
Many of today's weapons have their origins in Prohibition, however.
The 1920s was at the beginning of the era of big government.
Though the parallel between alcohol prohibition and the ongoing war on drugs is obvious and important, I think if we (and Reason) focus exclusively on that, then
1) We risk having our whole point dismissed again as "the views of those pot-smoking libertarian hippies" and
2) We miss the opportunity to demonstrate the more general parallels to all sorts of statist policies made with foolish disregard to obvious "unintended" consequences.
Your essay is good, I like it very much. Here I would like to share with you some things :
Cheap UGG Boots http://www.classicuggs-uk.com ----- ercai
UGGS are the single worst thing to happen to women's feet since... I don't know what.
Toe Fungus
thanks
What's the fascination with Ken Burns documentaries? They remind me of a power point picture slide show combined with the picture quality of the mid 1990s.
Jesus, I just realized this article is from 2011. Explains the unknown trolls ans unfamiliar commenters, and shows how much I know about Boardwalk Empire. But why they hell did it show up on the front page in 2014?
Time traveling squirelzs?
I knew it was a slow weekend when they ran the McDonnell White Zin story, but I didn't know it was *this* slow.
HBO's Boardwalk Empire is airing its final season beginning tonight, but its prescense along with books and a well recieved PBS documentary on prohibition have signaled a moment where more people are talking about the freedom of the individual to consume whatever they want.
Just um, fyi, one of the guys behind the PBS documentary (not Ken Burns, another guy and I don't remember his name, interviewed on NPR) went on and on and fucking on about how the prohibitionists were essentially the Tea Party of their day, and the rhetoric of the Tea Party and prohibitionists were exactly the same.
I'd never heard one guy stuff so much confusion and fallacy into one single sentence.
the freedom of the individual to consume whatever they want.
So I suppose the smoking bans will be going away soon? And the anti-fat campaigns will be going away too?
Ed Zachary. All those things are pure right-wing tea party platforms.
By the way, I was going through the list of HBO documentaries available to me, and I counted no less than ELEVEN obesity documentaries on HBO, right now, several of them multi-parters.
Someone's going apeshit on obesity. It's like the homelessness issue in the late 80s before Clinton was in the WH.
You Know Who Else hysterically denounced the opposition and liked to compare to historical groups?
You Know Who Else hysterically denounced the opposition and liked to compare *them* to historical groups?
I've watched a couple of them, they are hilariously bad.
They either outright state or strongly imply that people are fat because of Republicans. In one they link the "power" of the "junk food industry" to the GOP and show how the nasty Republicans want children to all have diabetes.
Hooray, Prohibition 3.1, coming soon to a Republic near you. And good ol' craiginmass keeps telling us we're the authoritarians...
I don't know how any sane or honest person could possibly come to such an utterly preposterous conclusion.
You know, there are certainly some serious wingnuts on the not-progressive side of the political spectrum, but they don't get to make PBS docs and be interviewed on NPR.
If you see the Tea Party as a very zealous grass roots group disenchanted with compromise and good at pressure politics then the comparison makes some sense. It also helps if you see the Tea Party as religious conservatives (I think that while there is some overlap between the two that that is not correct as a general matter), because many major Prohibitionists were religious conservatives (Billy Sunday, Howard Hyde Russell, etc.).
So the "Tea Party", (whatever that is: you sure as fuck don't know) want to reinstate Prohibition? Fuck you're retarded.
It's SoCons all the way down to Bo.
And BTW you're one of 'em.
Sigh.
Sure Bo-Bo, whatever you say.
Except the Prohibitionist religious people were Progressives, not redneck conservative southerners.
Well, they were southerners, just progressive southerners. Kansas used to be a heartland of socialism, as was most of the south.
Incidentally, its period of socialism was also the most racist period of the south's history. It's weird how those things correlate.
"I don't know how any sane or honest person could possibly come to such an utterly preposterous conclusion."
Over in the 'Young, Bummed Out..." thread, the lefty idjit craig is claiming he doesn't like libertarianism since he doesn't like authoritarianism.
I presume he likes it just fine at the end of a gun, but there's no convincing lefty idjits.
For all youz guyz replying above this line...
You are replying to 3 year old comments.
Jesus. A white hole has opened in the galaxy, spitting time back into the universe!
Nick is into necromancy.
FRANCISCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
WARTYLINOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
I was maybe a quarter of the way into the thread when I encountered a dunphy post that wasn't dogpiled by regulars. It wass then that I noticed the dates.
I figure if a weekend (especially SUnday) thread has a suspiciously high number of replies in a short time, it has to have a bunch of old comments.
Well, that explains something.
Its worth noting...
...whoever this cat 'BILL' was above?
smells like the Smacky Mcdouchehat dude.
Well the Temperance movement attacked the Catholics, Men and businesses so will the Progs turn around and start loving them?
'Nother re-run? How about it looks like brain-dead Boxer *isn't* going to run (be elected) again:
"Barbara Boxer re-election run looking unlikely"
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/.....738787.php
But not to worry. CA's got two rock-'em, sock-'em bubble-heads on the bench: Hey, we got Kamala Harris who has proven you can ride the coat-tails of that crook Willie Brown all the way to Sacto! And who can forget that won't-shut-up ad for Brylcreem and screwing the staffs' wives, Mr. Gavin Newsom?
Remember, we thought no one could be worse than Bush Jr., and boy howdy, were we wrong! It is possible we could wish we had Boxer to kick around again.
Whatever happened to The Art P.O.G.? I always liked him.
Boardwalk Empire Blows.
The first season was good, but after that it stank up the TV.
Second season had that creepy incest shit going on with the redheaded prostitute and her son. What the fuck was that? Plus the ex-FBI guy whipping himself in the first season - which they never mentioned again. It's like someone has some fucked up sexual fetishes they feel the need to keep injecting into the story line, periodically creeping out the audience.
It's like someone has some fucked up sexual fetishes they feel the need to keep injecting into the story line, periodically creeping out the audience.
Well what do you expect from cable tv?
Also, Libertarian card revoked.
Dude, I'm totally down with some hot sex fetishes, but incest and religious self-flagellation are a little ... wierd.
I agree. Well made show, but a lot of the characters are truly revolting.
A violent drama about bad guys can be very good: Sopranos, Goodfellas, Godfather movies, but this show is really very strange.
Remember the ABC TV series The Roaring 20s? I was too young to understand much of it.
Mob of African-American teens show white Memphians how it feels to be lynched.
Footage.
Hit em up JD, I say hit em up.
http://www.Crypt-Tools.tk
my roomate's ex-wife makes $61 hourly on the laptop . She has been fired from work for 10 months but last month her check was $19279 just working on the laptop for a few hours. try here ........
================ http://www.netjob70.com
If you're gonna post a picture of Ernest Hare with a gun to his head, you could at least link to one of his tunes.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-wCze__MSZs