The war on alcohol and on drugs such as cocaine, marijuana, and opium were efforts to restore social control. In the face of changing demographics and rising social insecurity, prohibitionists campaigned for federal laws to fight against the liquor trade and narcotics and eradicate the social ills they believed the substances caused. Social class, ethnicity, race, and religious struggles shaped the passage of laws prohibiting alcohol, cocaine, marijuana, and opium use. For alcohol, a variety of factors such widespread disrespect for the law and vigilante enforcers combined to weaken support for prohibition in a way that has not yet happened for cocaine, marijuana, and opium. Many forces, such as racial tensions and desire to remedy social ills,
…show more content…
Although the culture of drinking existed long before the 19th century, attitudes towards drinking shifted during the preindustrial era. With the escalation of “ethnic, religious, and class tensions,” white and middle-class citizens, who became insecure in their social place, found meaning in the evangelical Protestant church and in reform movements. As a means to fix “societal ills,” Protestants and reformers demonized alcohol, “favor[ing] total abstinence, not just moderation” (7). They targeted saloons not just because they were the sites of drinking and sex trafficking, but also because they were a “dangerous” hub of working class minorities and urban politics (15). As a means to establish social control, they turned to the radical solution of using federal power (25). In the increasingly market-based world, these antiliquor movements gained popularity because of their “link to anti-immigrant sentiment” (15) and the capitalistic association of sobriety with productivity and upward mobility (6). The arrival of World War I was the tipping point for the prohibition movement because the wartime emphasis on efficiency and reducing waste fueled the argument for sobriety (23). Though a culmination of the factors including evangelical Protestant influence and opening provided by the war, …show more content…
The two wars share many common characteristics: they targeted social problems using federal laws, used selective enforcement, spiked incarceration rates and gang violence, and incorporated the idea of racial control (251-252). However, unlike alcohol prohibition, which was more controversial from the beginning, the general public hardly discussed cocaine, marijuana, and opium prohibition when it was implemented. Because of placed bans on the substances relatively soon after their introduction to American society, these drugs lacked the opportunity to become normalized or for their effects to be fully understood. While people used alcohol recreationally, society perceives cocaine, marijuana, and opium use as concentrated in minority populations, which allows the substances to be stigmatized. Because of these characteristics, a “broad consensus for their criminalization and eradication are easier to maintain” for these substances that did not exist for alcohol (253). Additionally, a dramatic shift in public opinion around alcohol occurred due to the harmful effects of Prohibition that manifested in everyday life and the rise of vocal dissenters of prohibition. Since the war on drugs disproportionately affects minorities, its harmful effects
Although the culture of drinking existed long before the 19th century, attitudes towards drinking shifted during the preindustrial era. With the escalation of “ethnic, religious, and class tensions,” white and middle-class citizens, who became insecure in their social place, found meaning in the evangelical Protestant church and in reform movements. As a means to fix “societal ills,” Protestants and reformers demonized alcohol, “favor[ing] total abstinence, not just moderation” (7). They targeted saloons not just because they were the sites of drinking and sex trafficking, but also because they were a “dangerous” hub of working class minorities and urban politics (15). As a means to establish social control, they turned to the radical solution of using federal power (25). In the increasingly market-based world, these antiliquor movements gained popularity because of their “link to anti-immigrant sentiment” (15) and the capitalistic association of sobriety with productivity and upward mobility (6). The arrival of World War I was the tipping point for the prohibition movement because the wartime emphasis on efficiency and reducing waste fueled the argument for sobriety (23). Though a culmination of the factors including evangelical Protestant influence and opening provided by the war, …show more content…
The two wars share many common characteristics: they targeted social problems using federal laws, used selective enforcement, spiked incarceration rates and gang violence, and incorporated the idea of racial control (251-252). However, unlike alcohol prohibition, which was more controversial from the beginning, the general public hardly discussed cocaine, marijuana, and opium prohibition when it was implemented. Because of placed bans on the substances relatively soon after their introduction to American society, these drugs lacked the opportunity to become normalized or for their effects to be fully understood. While people used alcohol recreationally, society perceives cocaine, marijuana, and opium use as concentrated in minority populations, which allows the substances to be stigmatized. Because of these characteristics, a “broad consensus for their criminalization and eradication are easier to maintain” for these substances that did not exist for alcohol (253). Additionally, a dramatic shift in public opinion around alcohol occurred due to the harmful effects of Prohibition that manifested in everyday life and the rise of vocal dissenters of prohibition. Since the war on drugs disproportionately affects minorities, its harmful effects