At Americas Summit, Allies Nudge U.S. To Change

We are repeating the mistakes of Prohibition fighting drugs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States

Effects of the Prohibition

Organized crime

Organized crime received a major boost from Prohibition. Mafia groups limited their activities to prostitution, gambling, and theft until 1920, when organized bootlegging manifested in response to the effect of Prohibition. A profitable, often violent, black market for alcohol flourished. Powerful gangs corrupted law enforcement agencies, leading to racketeering. In essence prohibition provided a financial basis for organized crime to flourish. Rather than reducing crime it seemed prohibition had transformed the cities into battlegrounds between opposing bootlegging gangs. In a study of over 30 major U.S cities during the prohibition years of 1920 and 1921, the number of crimes increased by 24%. Additionally, theft and burglaries increased by 9%, homicide by 12.7%, assaults and battery rose by 13%, drug addiction by 44.6% and police department costs rose by 11.4%. It has been speculated that this was largely the result of “black-market violence” as well as law enforcing resources having been diverted elsewhere. Despite the beliefs of the prohibitionist movement that by outlawing alcohol crime would surely be reduced, the reality was that the Volstead Act led to worse social conditions than were experienced prior to prohibition as demonstrated by more lethal forms of alcohol, increased crime rates, and the establishment of a black market dominated by criminal organizations.

Furthermore, stronger liquor surged in popularity because its potency made it more profitable to smuggle. To prevent bootleggers from using industrial ethyl alcohol to produce illegal beverages, the government ordered the poisoning of industrial alcohols. In response, bootleggers hired chemists who successfully renatured the alcohol to make it drinkable. As a response, the Treasury Department required manufacturers to add more deadly poisons, including the particularly deadly methyl alcohol. New York City medical examiners prominently opposed these policies because of the danger to human life. As many as 10,000 people died from drinking denatured alcohol before Prohibition ended. In the "Chemist's War" it does not appear that the government intended to kill Americans with these poisons. They wrongly assumed that people out of fear would stop drinking alcohol. New York City medical examiner Charles Norris believed the government took responsibility for murder when they knew the poison was not detering people and they continued to poison industrial alcohol (which would be used in drinking alcohol) anyway. Charles Norris said, "The government knows it is not stopping drinking by putting poison in alcohol..."[Y]et it continues its poisoning processes, heedless of the fact that people determined to drink are daily absorbing that poison. Knowing this to be true, the United States government must be charged with the moral responsibility for the deaths that poisoned liquor causes, although it cannot be held legally responsible."

Another lethal substance that was often substituted for alcohol was "canned heat," also commonly known as Sterno. By forcing the substance through a makeshift filter, such as a handkerchief, to create a rough liquor substitute. However, the result was poisonous, though not often lethal. Many of those who were poisoned as a result united to sue the government for reparations after the end of Prohibition.

Making alcohol at home was very common during Prohibition. Stores sold grape concentrate with warning labels that listed the steps that should be avoided to prevent the juice from fermenting into wine. As well, some drug stores would sell a "medical wine" with around a 22% alcohol content; in order to justify the sale, the wine was given a medical taste. Home-distilled hard liquor was referred to as “bathtub gin” in northern cities, and moonshine in the rural areas of North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Tennessee. Home-brewing good hard liquor was easier than brewing good beer. Since selling privately distilled alcohol was illegal and bypassed taxation by the government, the law relentlessly pursued manufacturers. In response, the bootleggers in southern states started creating their own souped-up, stock-looking cars by enhancing their cars’ engines and suspensions to create a faster vehicle. Having a faster vehicle during Prohibition, they presumed, would improve their chances of outrunning and escaping agents of the Bureau of Prohibition, commonly called "revenue agents" or "revenuers." These cars became known as “moonshine runners” or "'shine runners". Ships were also known to collaborate with the underground liquor market, by loading their stocks with ingredients for liquors, which anyone could legally purchase (these include: benedictine, vermouth, scotch mash, and even ethyl alcohol).

Prohibition also had a large effect on the music industry in the United States, specifically with jazz. Speakeasies became far more popular during that time and the effects of the Great Depression caused a migration that led to a greater dispersal of jazz music. Movement began from New Orleans and went north through Chicago and to New York. This also meant developing different styles in the different cities. Because of its popularity in speakeasies and the development of more advanced recording devices, jazz became very popular very fast. It was also at the forefront of the minimal integration efforts going on at the time, as it united mostly black musicians with mostly white crowds.

Along with other economic effects, the enactment of prohibition and the resulting enforcement and the resources dedicated to that enforcement increased. During the 1920s, the annual budget of the Bureau of Prohibition went from $4.4 million to $13.4 million. Additionally, the Coast Guard spent an average of $13 million annually on prohibition. These numbers do not take into account the costs to local and state governments.

When repeal of Prohibition occurred in 1933, organized crime lost nearly all of its black market alcohol profits in most states (states still had the right to enforce their own laws concerning alcohol consumption) because of competition with low-priced alcohol sales at legal liquor stores.

Unintended consequences

As a result of prohibition, the advancements of industrialization within the alcohol industry were essentially reversed. This was achieved by large scale alcohol producers being shut down for the most part and individual citizens taking it upon themselves to produce alcohol illegally. This process reversed the efficiency of mass producing and retailing alcoholic beverages. Closing manufacturing plants and taverns resulted in economic reversal. The Eighteenth Amendment originally did not have this effect on the industry due to its failure to define what an “intoxicating” beverage was. The Volstead Act’s definition of 0.5% or more alcohol by volume constituting “intoxicating” shut down the brewers who had expected to still be able to produce beer of moderate strength.

As the saloon began to die out, public drinking lost much of its macho connotation, resulting in increased social acceptance of women drinking in the semi-public environment of the speakeasies. This new norm established women as a notable new target demographic for alcohol marketeers, who sought to expand their clientele.

And in the year before the Volstead Act became law, it was estimated by the 1930 Prohibition Commissioner, that the average drinking American spent $17 per year on alcoholic beverages. By 1930, because enforcement diminished the supply, this had increased to $35 per year (there was no inflation in this period), resulting in an illegal alcohol beverage industry that made an average of $3 billion per year in illegal untaxed income.

Heavy drinkers and alcoholics were among the most affected parties during prohibition. Those who were determined to find liquor could still do so, but those who saw their drinking habits as destructive typically had difficulty in finding the help they sought. The self-help societies had withered away along with the alcohol industry and in 1935 a new self-help group was founded: Alcoholics Anonymous (AA).

Prohibition had a notable effect on the alcohol brewing industry in the United States. When Prohibition ended, only half the breweries that previously existed reopened. Wine historians also note Prohibition destroyed what was a fledgling wine industry in the United States. Productive wine quality grape vines were replaced by lower quality vines growing thicker skinned grapes that could be more easily transported. Much of the institutional knowledge was also lost as winemakers either emigrated to other wine producing countries or left the business altogether.

Hard-liquor was popularized during the interim, as good beer became more difficult to find. Because this form of liquor was much harder than the popular drinks had before 18th amendment, other forms of the drinks were developed; mixing and watering down the hard alcohol became popular, especially rum and gin.

DOES THIS SOUND FAMILIAR? BBB

I suppose, as usual, that the United States won't change it's position until it is suffering from killing the same way the South American states are suffering. How many Americans have to die before we wise up? BBB

Some Latin Leaders Want New Approach To Drug War
by Juan Forero - npr All Things Considered
April 12, 2012

When President Obama travels to Colombia this weekend for the Summit of the Americas, he'll be stepping into a vigorous debate about the drug war that could be awkward for the United States.

Some Latin American leaders, who also happen to be strong U.S. allies, say the American-sponsored war on drugs is failing and that new options need to be considered.

One proposal they want to discuss is legalizing some drugs — a move the U.S. strongly opposes.

Over the past four decades, the drug war has become increasingly bloody, and violence is now numbingly common across much of Central America and northern Mexico.

That's prompting widespread disenchantment with the current approach –- which involves widespread prosecution of drug users and military-style tactics against drug gangs.

It's been the same approach and the same policies. And where are we? This is what we have to ask ourselves. Are we in the ideal place? Or should we at least contemplate alternatives?

- Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos, calling for a discussion on new ways to deal with drugs

The campaign started with former President Richard Nixon, who said: "We must wage what I have called total war against Public Enemy No. 1 in the United States: the problem of dangerous drugs."

Since then, that war has been taken to the drug cartels across the Americas, with heavy U.S. funding.

Looking For New Options

But now, some presidents, including Colombia's Juan Manuel Santos, are asking if there isn't another way.

Santos told NPR he's putting the issue up for debate at the Summit of the Americas in the Colombian coastal city of Cartagena. Obama will be one of more than 30 leaders at the summit.

"It's been the same approach and the same policies," Santos said. "And where are we? This is what we have to ask ourselves. Are we in the ideal place? Or should we at least contemplate alternatives?"

Santos is no critic of the United States. He's one of Washington's closest allies and a former defense minister known for his hawkish reputation on security issues.

And he's not the only one proposing a new approach.

The most forceful proponent of that line has been Guatemalan President Otto Perez, a former military man who has fought traffickers for years.

After taking over the presidency earlier this year, Perez told NPR that he came to the conclusion that the drug war is failing. Drug trafficking has expanded and corruption has tainted government institutions, including the judicial system.

A man makes a joint during a march last month in Guatemala City, Guatemala, calling for the decriminalization of marijuana.

He says as long as such big demand for cocaine exists in the U.S., drug trafficking will continue.

U.S. Officials Oppose Legalization

American officials declined to comment on the record. Privately, they said that U.S. efforts in Colombia over the past decade have reduced cocaine production, and that cocaine consumption in the U.S. has fallen.

Vice President Joe Biden has said publicly that while the U.S. will debate with Latin American presidents at the summit, there is no possibility that the administration will shift gears on drug legalization.

Ethan Nadelmann, who directs the New York-based Drug Policy Alliance and has advised some Latin American leaders, says what those leaders want to debate is more nuanced.

"They're not saying legalize everything today, like alcohol and tobacco," he said. "They know that's not possible. What they are saying is we need to give the same consideration to alternative, regulatory and nonprohibitionist and public health policies in the future as we've given to the failed drug war strategies of the last 40 years."

Indeed, Latin American leaders, including the former presidents of Colombia, Mexico and Brazil, are talking about decriminalizing drug possession and providing more intensive treatment to wean heavy drug users off drugs. There's also talk about legalizing marijuana.

"If we find that there is a better alternative that will take away the profits from the criminal organizations, and that maybe you can address the problem of consumption in a more effective way, then everybody will win," said Santos, the Colombian president. "And this is what I want, a discussion without a specific proposal."

At this point, aside from everything else, we'd have to get rid of the prison/industrial complex i.e. a lot of people with no real skills would have to find honest jobs for the first time in their lives all of a sudden...

http://informationliberation.com/?id=39199

Far as I'm concerned however, the drug war and the Prison/industrial complex are two things our country would be better off without.

For a rare time, I agree with you. How many times have I said on A2K that these private prisons money seekers are a deadly mistake?

BBB

That article I linked to is really sickening, apparently we've got judges being paid off for sending kids to these places for really minor ****.