"Yes, rabbis by the hundreds worked overtime to procure alcohol for people illegally. They were backed by the most powerful Jewish groups, such as the intimidating Masonic sect B’nai B’rith. Jewish mobsters – among which ranked the top mobsters of the era – also helped drive this largely Jewish bootlegging enterprise. The fact is that it was Jewish immigrants, by and large, who backed and ran the underground alcohol industry during Prohibition, thus undermining the will of the American People and the health and well-being of the United States."
-
“Bottom line, notwithstanding the mismanagement and politicization, Prohibition was a success, despite the many efforts to sabotage it. And it was repealed BECAUSE it was succeeding, thus resented by moneyed “special interests.”
[ - ] Name 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 13:56:42 ago (+0/-0)
Alcohol and drug laws are enforced in many countries successfully. Half-Assed attempts at enforcement don't make something unenforceable. {kill your local drug dealer, fren}
[ - ] Name 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 16:03:20 ago (+0/-0)
We can do a comparative analysis of which countries methods have been proven to be more effective. That would use logic and statistics. "Appropriate enforcement" in the US is a much muddier conversation. I think we have reached a point where simply killing your local drug dealer is a morally justifiable response. Sound appropriate to you?
Murder is illegal because one specific individual harms another specific individual and government exists to protect the rights of the harmed individual.
Murder laws exist to prescribe specific definitions that constitute a very specific crime, Murder, and to prescribe specific punishments for that specific crime. These are "Mal in se" laws, laws that exist because these acts by an individual cause a direct harm to another individual(s).
It is not the intent of law to prevent people from committing crimes, nor should the passage of law suggest that certain acts will stop. Yes. People will commit murder whether it's legal or not.
Alcohol laws are illegitimate and not a function or responsibility of legitimate government. No sprcific individual is harmed by taking a drink. It is a "Mal prohibitum" law. A "it is illegal because we say so" law. And just like the laws for drug use, they are worthless, do not work, stop nothing, are enforced selectively, create black markets making products more dangerous for lack of oversight, create revenue for organized crime and create victims by giving selected offenders criminal records.
I said the alcohol laws were unenforceable because you could get alcohol any damn time you wanted it. 24/7 in every city, in every town, in every state, anywhere in the country. Just like you can get drugs today. The cops pick and choose who to bust, who to prosecute, and who to punish and how severely for their crimes. It leads to corruption within the government, and law enforcement. There are literally dozens of "speakeasys" all over Austin that sold alcohol during prohibition, and where government turned a blind eye to those they deemed allowed to break prohibition laws. Prohibition, drug laws, and every other Mal prohibitum law should be abolished. Its not the role of government to be your mommy, daddy, or big brother/sister.
The point is that prohibition worked as intended. And making drugs legal will just further accelerate our downhill course.
It is false that you could get alcohol easily during prohibition.
Courtwright’s The Age of Addiction has the statistics: “Per capita consumption initially fell to 30 percent of pre-Prohibition levels, before gradually increasing to 60 or 70 percent by 1933.” That suggests a 30 percent reduction, at a minimum, in consumption. . . .
No. People tend to obey the law. That's why you had the initial drop in usage. After a short time, organized crime was set up, the black market emerged, corruption set in, and the average Joe, seeing that you weren't going to get in trouble started drinking. Deaths from illegal alcohol consumption increased. Prohibition gave rise to the largest organized crime epidemic this country had faced to date. The city of Chicago is still suffering from the grip of organized crime that was created by prohibition.
Despite all this, you call it a success because there were 1/3 fewer drinkers. You're fucking retarded.
If we shot drug users dead in the streets, drug use would plummet. Would summarily killing millions of drug users on the sight be called a success?
And it is not false that you could easily get booze. Again, there are dozens of speakeasys in Austin that served booze during prohibition. Dozens
Dozens for a big city? Damn, where I live there are dozens per street. I'd call only a few dozen per city a success. Also, again, most of the illegal booze was pushed by Jewish interests which is also why prohibition was ultimately abolished.
Chicago is the most obvious. But virtually every major city with organized crime issues became foothold for organized crime because of the black market created by prohibition.
As for fewer versus more bars. Who gives a shit? The corruption, black market, and organized crime prohibition caused a far, far more dangerous than the issues caused by drinking.
And Americans being free to do with their bodies as they see fit isn't a jewish interest but a far better reason to end prohibition. Squahing the jew isn't a good enough reason to subject citizens to big brother tyranny.
There is nothing that indicates more crime during prohibition than before prohibition. Organized crime was already a thing. Even countries where prohibition never existed had organized crime of the same or even larger magnitude at the time.
The goal of prohibition was to shut down Alcohol fuel stations, so everyone would have to buy Rockefeller's gasoline.
Henry Ford's original machinery ran on Alcohol, because most farms made some for lighting, cleaning & emotional support.
Rockefeller's scientists tinkered with the internal combustion engine until they were able to run it on gas. Before this, gasoline was a waste product dumped into the rivers (why the Hudson would catch fire).
Rockefeller asked Ford to make his engines run on gas, Ford replied "The farmers are my best customers, I'll remain theirs."
The cities ended up with gas stations, while the countryside still had alcohol stations. You would adjust the choke to allow for different oxygenation based on the fuel you were running.
Rockefeller donated $1M to the Christian Women's Temperance Movement to close down his competitors.
It was also disliked by the general population. When prohibition was repealed, the entire city of St. Louis rejoiced and celebrated with Anheiser-Busch all night when prohibition was officially ended at midnight. This was echoed in many cities with large breweries.
By the end of prohibition, no large breweries should have been left. How did they survive?
Creating media circus and even instigating riots isn't difficult, as everyone here should be aware of. If nobody liked prohibition, why was it voted in?
By the end of prohibition, no large breweries should have been left. How did they survive?
And yet they survived. Apparently they weren't too keen on folding up and losing their livelihood, so they found other products and other markets they could sell in. It's all in the book "Bitter Brew: The Rise and Fall of Anheuser-Busch and America's Kings of Beer". How they survived prohibition is more complex than I care to explain right now.
Creating media circus and even instigating riots isn't difficult, as everyone here should be aware of.
There were no riots. It was all celebration.
If nobody liked prohibition, why was it voted in?
Suffragettes, who were early militant feminists, except they claimed they had morality on their side. You might want to look that one up also.
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 4 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 06:45:58 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] Name
[ - ] Name 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 13:56:42 ago (+0/-0)
{kill your local drug dealer, fren}
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 14:11:39 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Name
[ - ] Name 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 16:03:20 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 1 point 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 16:25:50 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Wahaha
[ - ] Wahaha [op] -2 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 07:39:40 ago (+1/-3)
Despite murder being illegal, people are still murdered. But saying that it is not enforceable for people to not murder each other is just silly.
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 3 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 08:27:09 ago (+3/-0)
Murder laws exist to prescribe specific definitions that constitute a very specific crime, Murder, and to prescribe specific punishments for that specific crime. These are "Mal in se" laws, laws that exist because these acts by an individual cause a direct harm to another individual(s).
It is not the intent of law to prevent people from committing crimes, nor should the passage of law suggest that certain acts will stop. Yes. People will commit murder whether it's legal or not.
Alcohol laws are illegitimate and not a function or responsibility of legitimate government. No sprcific individual is harmed by taking a drink. It is a "Mal prohibitum" law. A "it is illegal because we say so" law. And just like the laws for drug use, they are worthless, do not work, stop nothing, are enforced selectively, create black markets making products more dangerous for lack of oversight, create revenue for organized crime and create victims by giving selected offenders criminal records.
I said the alcohol laws were unenforceable because you could get alcohol any damn time you wanted it. 24/7 in every city, in every town, in every state, anywhere in the country. Just like you can get drugs today. The cops pick and choose who to bust, who to prosecute, and who to punish and how severely for their crimes. It leads to corruption within the government, and law enforcement. There are literally dozens of "speakeasys" all over Austin that sold alcohol during prohibition, and where government turned a blind eye to those they deemed allowed to break prohibition laws.
Prohibition, drug laws, and every other Mal prohibitum law should be abolished. Its not the role of government to be your mommy, daddy, or big brother/sister.
[ + ] Wahaha
[ - ] Wahaha [op] -3 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 08:46:42 ago (+0/-3)
It is false that you could get alcohol easily during prohibition.
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 3 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 09:18:21 ago (+3/-0)
Despite all this, you call it a success because there were 1/3 fewer drinkers. You're fucking retarded.
If we shot drug users dead in the streets, drug use would plummet. Would summarily killing millions of drug users on the sight be called a success?
And it is not false that you could easily get booze. Again, there are dozens of speakeasys in Austin that served booze during prohibition. Dozens
[ + ] Wahaha
[ - ] Wahaha [op] -1 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 10:07:14 ago (+0/-1)
Dozens for a big city? Damn, where I live there are dozens per street. I'd call only a few dozen per city a success. Also, again, most of the illegal booze was pushed by Jewish interests which is also why prohibition was ultimately abolished.
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 10:48:37 ago (+0/-0)
Chicago is the most obvious. But virtually every major city with organized crime issues became foothold for organized crime because of the black market created by prohibition.
As for fewer versus more bars. Who gives a shit? The corruption, black market, and organized crime prohibition caused a far, far more dangerous than the issues caused by drinking.
And Americans being free to do with their bodies as they see fit isn't a jewish interest but a far better reason to end prohibition. Squahing the jew isn't a good enough reason to subject citizens to big brother tyranny.
[ + ] Wahaha
[ - ] Wahaha [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 12:34:42 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 4 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 06:05:51 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] Rockwellian
[ - ] Rockwellian 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 13:16:39 ago (+0/-0)
Henry Ford's original machinery ran on Alcohol, because most farms made some for lighting, cleaning & emotional support.
Rockefeller's scientists tinkered with the internal combustion engine until they were able to run it on gas. Before this, gasoline was a waste product dumped into the rivers (why the Hudson would catch fire).
Rockefeller asked Ford to make his engines run on gas, Ford replied "The farmers are my best customers, I'll remain theirs."
The cities ended up with gas stations, while the countryside still had alcohol stations. You would adjust the choke to allow for different oxygenation based on the fuel you were running.
Rockefeller donated $1M to the Christian Women's Temperance Movement to close down his competitors.
[ + ] Bonlio1
[ - ] Bonlio1 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 12:56:08 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Name
[ - ] Name 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 13:57:54 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 12:07:19 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Wahaha
[ - ] Wahaha [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 12:48:41 ago (+0/-0)
Creating media circus and even instigating riots isn't difficult, as everyone here should be aware of. If nobody liked prohibition, why was it voted in?
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 14:43:29 ago (+0/-0)
And yet they survived. Apparently they weren't too keen on folding up and losing their livelihood, so they found other products and other markets they could sell in. It's all in the book "Bitter Brew: The Rise and Fall of Anheuser-Busch and America's Kings of Beer". How they survived prohibition is more complex than I care to explain right now.
There were no riots. It was all celebration.
Suffragettes, who were early militant feminists, except they claimed they had morality on their side. You might want to look that one up also.
[ + ] DukeofRaul
[ - ] DukeofRaul -2 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 06:48:19 ago (+1/-3)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 1 point 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 09:21:20 ago (+1/-0)