> Prohibition What went wrong? Seems like it always fails.

>>1774864
>> Prohibition
>What went wrong? Seems like it always fails.

Men love booze.

>>1774864

>What went wrong?

First Wave Feminism

All you need to make booze is some sugar and yeast

>>1774864
>what went wrong?

Supply and demand.

>>1774864
>What went wrong?
OOGA BOOGA ME NEED MY BOOZE EEK EEK EEK.

*Alcohol has been deeply ingrained in western civilization for thousands of years and can't simply be wiped out completely overnight.
*Many people are literally addicted (i.e., have a disease) and will not be dissuaded by law.
*There are many ways to make alcoholic drinks yourself, as people have done in their own homes for millennia.
*For these reasons, demand was high enough and supply straightforward enough that trade remained highly profitable despite the added risks of illegality, thus creating a massive industry of organized crime with side effects worse than legal booze.

Would we be better off without alcohol? I dunno, probably. But outlawing is a spectacular failure. (See also: "war on drugs").

>>1774864
Civilization was founded on alcohol. Without alcohol, man returns to beasthood.

>>1774864
People like alcohol more than they like the government.

>>1774929
honestly, this

>>1774923
Only hedonist fucktards would argue for keeping booze in civilization.

File: 606.jpg (140KB, 1279x960px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 1279x960px

>>1774932

Yeah, but I don't want to give up my post-lawn-mowing beer though. Or hot buttered rum in the colder months.

>>1774864
The prohibition of any (initially) victimless act will always fail because they are enacted not for the good of the people bit to curry favor with whatever influential party has the most campaign cash or to bleed money from the people while keeping them polarized with false fears.

>>1774932
The very thought that a person would believe it possible to remove booze from civilization....

It hurts.

>>1774932
See, this is a great example of why 4chan is shit in general. Someone has a well thought out post with multiple points supporting their position, and then someone else replies with some shitty one liner, completely ignoring the content of what they're replying to.

I'm probably just taking bait, but I see this shit all the time. The amount of bullshit on this site far outweighs anything that could be considered quality, and that bullshit seems to be informing the mainstream opinion of every board.

I wish it were different, but I guess I'll always keep coming here for the dank memes.

>>1775163
It's why I stopped doing long posts on here trying to discuss a topic. It's usually ignored or someone just replies with edgy one liners.

>>1775163
>>1775207
t. redditors

>>1775212
Thank you for proving my point.

>>1774932

>only hedonist fucktards would argue for keeping strong spices like tumeric and garlic or bright primary colors in civilization!

>>1775163

File: Capture.png (57KB, 720x382px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 720x382px

>>1775229
The negatives of alcohol (domestic abuse, car crash victims, property damage, FAS babies, generally becoming a loose-minded asshole) far outweigh the positives (gettin' a buzz), though. The world would be better off if it replaced alcohol with caffeine or even sugar to achieve similar dopamine highs.

>>1775229
To be fair, garlic is terrible

>>1775163
While you are right, Anon, there is nothing to be felt but pity for someone who approaches a board dealing with sensitive topics such as /his/ with the presumption that every thread will be primarily populated with thoughtful discussion. And to give attention to low-quality posting does little but engender even more low quality posting.

>>1775316
You can't really replace depressant like alcohol with stimulators like sugar and caffeine.

>>1775329
The Mormons did it. Say what you will about their weird faith practices, but their families are highly stable and they're basically a model for Western civilization.

>>1775393

>but their families are highly stable and they're basically a model for Western civilization.

Then why didn't they win the election in 2012?

>>1775316
Genetically modify humans to find the taste of beer beyond revolting if you want to end alchohol consumption as long as we can enjoy something our hedonistic instincts will never make us quit them.

>>1775393
t. mormon

>>1775393
>but their families are highly stable and they're basically a model for Western civilization.
Haha look at the rate at which young adult mormons leave the church.
The missionaries are necessary to keep the church alive with new converts like blood transfusions to an anemic and lacerated man.

>>1775399
Because Mitt didn't have the same charm as our boy Barry. And now see what's happened: Mitt looks like a cherub compared to what the GOP fished out from the Hudson River this year.

>>1775403
t. liberal secularism is the answer, I know because I'm a liberal secularist

>>1775415
http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/2500019-155/christianity-shrinking-in-us-mormon-numbers

Mormonism is in the same situation as other religions in the US (total freefall) because of materialist secular values being prioritized over religious values. Mormonism, however, like all successful religions, evangelizes in a way that allows it to be sensitive to social and political change. This is not the case (ironically) for most mainstream "Evangelical" denominations. And of course, this is not to say that one religion is more "virtuous" than another, but it does highlight the fact that Mormonism is more enduring and sustainable.

Enabling it with women suffrage while all the men that would have voted against their landslide were off dying in WWI

>>1774864
>banny thing make people wanty thing more

>>1775402
Beer already tastes awful though. People just get used to it.

>>1774932
t. abduhl

>>1775477
>Mitt looks like a cherub compared to what the GOP fished out from the Hudson River this year.

That happens every election though. Dems spend the entire election claiming that the current candidate is some combination of a theocrat, a fascist, and a robber baron - until the next election when they wistfully yearn for a "REAL, decent, human" Republican.

You might be too young to remember the MSM relentlessly mocking/criticising Romney for his Mormonism ("magic underwear! XD") and his time at Bain Capital

File: firefox_2016-10-04_04-46-16.png (15KB, 403x253px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 403x253px

>>1775477
That doesn't counter anything I said about them not being stable families and the guy quoted with the article agrees that they rely on their high rates of converts.

>>1775324
Ya, your right. I'll hold my tounge

Alcohol is a fundamental part of Western culture. You can't suppress a fundamental of culture through force unless you're willing to be extremely brutal, or you have a completely different and competing culture that people have powerful incentive to defect to.

>>1775495
Mitt may be a theocrat and a robber baron (fascist is excessive), but at least he's not a fucking asshole. Same thing with Dubya; he may have been a retard and chronic bad decision-maker, but I'd vote for Dubya in a heartbeat over Donald "if I restrain myself that means my enemies win" Trump. Why is the GOP so willing to allow its own party to be hijacked by its worst elements?

>>1775690
It was only a matter of time until they lost control of the hype machine.

If you spend decades indoctrinating your followers to believe that the mainstream media is nothing but godless liberals, they're eventually going to start to view you as part of the same establishment, when the next opportunist comes along.

>>1775690
>Same thing with Dubya; he may have been a retard and chronic bad decision-maker, but I'd vote for Dubya in a heartbeat over Donald "if I restrain myself that means my enemies win" Trump

Yes, and in 2020 you'll be telling yourself that you'd vote for Dubya, McCain or Romney "in a heartbeat" over Marco "[insert-gaffe-blown-out-of-all-proportion]" Rubio, and you'll do the same again in 2024, except this time Marco Rubio (or whoever the 2020 nominee is) will be the saint to which the current nominee is held towards an impossibly high standard

>>1774864
Never could have gone right. Nobody likes restrictions like that, and nobody was willing to change, either.

>>1774864
Arbitrarily denying liberty based on the whims of bitter disgruntled women is indeed a terridle idea

Let's make sure that we never repeat those mistakes

*looks at the left*

The primary beneficiary of America's experiment in Prohibition was organized crime, it can be argued that the Mafia would've never reached as far as it did without the massive influx of capital from bootlegging operations.

>>1777986
Mm. Apart from the tetotalling aspect of suffragettes, a big part of Prohibition in the United States was a consolidated attempt to push rural, conservative culture onto large metropolitan areas, mostly on the coasts. In this sense, support for Prohibition acted like something of a perfect storm in the scope of the history of bi-partisan politics.

>>1775051
>that pic
I never thought I would feel an attachment to a bottle until now.

>>1774932
I'm drunk right now, do something about it

>>1774864
Religious rightists got all triggered about alcohol and got it outlawed. Next, multiple criminal factions became a lot more rich and powerful from bootlegging. Alcohol should just be legal and anybody who disagrees likely disagrees because they're too religious to consider anything from a secular viewpoint.

File: Hellboys_Drunk_Voyage_On_Rum.jpg (710KB, 1280x1973px) Image search: [Google]

710KB, 1280x1973px

1. Its easy to make.
Its literally sugar and yeast. Both was over counter ingredients back then.
The same is true of fruits.

2. Prohibition starts with show casing all the flaws in the Legal system, and enforcement. You then have a decade long mafia war because of said cracks

3. Prohibition was in a drunker area. Which means the "average" drinker was drenched, the alcoholic was insane, and the entry level too
Prohibition started out because of how extreme some of the drinking cultures were, and it spread because the cultures was extreme in other places

4. In some ways Prohibition was a huge success, because the reduced access to Alcohol meant an entire generation got less peer pressure to drink, and their elders got to experience drought

5. The same period got people like Algoth Niska. Said person died a tragic death to cancer in 1954

6. Also a period where the Ku Klux Klan did the right thing, somehow.

And when all of these combined, it got not fun. But you need to remember that the urban areas of countries used to be degenerate as fuck back then.
There was a reason women wanted Alcohol to be limited or gone. Mostly for the same reason Women in lower classes ended up going to their husbands work, to acquire his paycheck, so he could not spend it to get really really drunk.

In some ways, it could have succeeded if the Law Enforcement was up to snuff.
Most of the high leveler organized crime did center around previous grey holes left by poor police work, which ended up stacking to a level where crime ran rampant.
But there is a contrast:
Moderation was shown elsewhere. There is a reason Sweden with its Bratt System went on far longer than what US managed to do for Prohibition. Or that the Faroe Isles did not need to repel their laws until 1907 due tight import from Denmark.
Or why Iceland did did allow beer before 1989.