TroubleshootingCreativity
TroubleshootingCreativity
Backin the year 1920 – 1933, an experiment that was deemed noble wascarried out to reduce corruption, crimes, and tax burden from thepoorhouses and prisons, solve social issues and enhance health withinAmerica. It was a National prohibition of alcohol. Nevertheless, theoutcomes of this test showed that it was a total failure. Conversely,since the mid-1980s, most of the Americans slowly comprehended thefact that drug prohibition is harsh, expensive, and ineffective. Theyare in need of a fresh mechanism that would reduce harm, druglegitimation, and decriminalization. Evidence drawn from this eventproves that it did not meet the anticipated targets. As such, thispaper will focus on creative approaches concentrated on thisexperiment and why it failed to produce the required results.
FromTemperance to Prohibition to Alcohol Control
Theanti-alcohol drive was developed during the 19th century. It emanatedfrom ministers, large employers, and physicians who were concerned bythe drunkenness of servants and workers. In the mid-1830s,anti-alcoholism had become a drive among the middle class. It was notconsidered to be a campaign of rural dwellers instead, it was a hitthat impacted on all the people across the social status. It wasmeant to bring about social reform and was closely related to women’srights and anti-slavery movements. Due to its popularity, the drivewas one of the largest persistent middle-class crusades of the 19thcentury (Reinarman, 2016).
Thetemperance drive was dedicated to encouraging individuals to avoidalcohol. It was meant to inform the public that any form of alcoholwas destructive. During the 19th century, anti-alcohol proposersmaintained that liquor gradually but unavoidably ruined the moralcharacter as well as the mental and physical health of the drinkers.The anti-alcoholic supporters viewed alcohol, in the same manner.Reasonable drinking of alcohol, they stated, certainly resulted incompulsive utilization of the same. In other words, it slowlyculminated to addiction (Reinarman, 2016).
Sincethe onset of the concept, the temperance philosophy included powerfulstrands of fantasy. It stated that alcohol was the main reason foralmost all the social issues like poverty, violence, crime, insanity,unemployment, business failure, and slums. Due to all these matters,the temperance drive provided universal abstinence as the onlyremedy. As such, many groups endorsed prohibition as the bestsolution to prevent alcoholism. The Republican Party propelled thenation, even further after the Civil War. The party believed thatwith sufficient representation, they would enforce prohibition acrossthe country. Contrary to some assumptions, the prohibition laws werenot instigated as a move to lessen mortality from liver cirrhosis oradmission in hospitals. Instead, they were utopian sentiments frommoralists. It was believed that eradicating the legal manufacture andselling of alcoholic products would unravel the main economic andsocial issues in the American society [ CITATION Ran12 l 1033 ].
TheIron Law of Prohibition
Asper the proponents of the law, the benefits mentioned previously wereall dependent on reducing the quantity of alcohol. At first sight,the proof appears to propose that the amount consumed decreased.Evidently, when a product is hard to access, or rather supply, theprice increases hence few people will purchase the same. In the end,the quantity purchased will decrease (Reinarman, 2016).
WorldWar I provided many important setting championing support forprohibition. On the other hand, the great depression offeredimportant context for repeal. As such, proponents of the law thoughtthat banning alcohol would enhance prosperity and heighten publicorder. During the late 1920s and early 1930s, the opponents ofprohibition also thought in the same manner. Repeal, as theysuggested would offer jobs, increase tax revenues, lessenlawlessness, and stimulate the economy (Reinarman, 2016).
TheDepression played a significant role in the destabilization ofexclusive provision for prohibition. To some degree, alcohol ban hadinitially grown the backing of big businesses since they assumed itwould heighten employee discipline as well as productivity whilereducing other social issues. The mass destructions of Countrywideproscription in the late 1920s, trailed by the financial depressionexperienced in the 1930s, propelled a fresh specter: proscriptionthat undermined the property of law. The laws frightened many people,particularly the rich and influential who found issues withefficiency among the workforce. Additionally, Revolution posedsignificant threats. During this period, regions were compounded byfood riots, militia groups among others. The unemployed personsconstituted the militant institutions. Other mobs stopped trainsforcefully and took charge of food warehouses. Communists andsocialists held conventions with thousands of angry soldiers whomarched and camped near the White House. Other wealthy individualspossessed machine guns that were mounted on the estate’s roofs. Assuch, instead of the laws offering creative approaches to curbing thesocial ills, they contributed to the propulsion of the same. It ledto major discomforts [ CITATION Ran12 l 1033 ].
CreativeSolutions in the Contemporary Globe
Insteadof prohibition, control would have been the best approach. The lawstried to ban the drinking of alcohol to lessen social problems.However, it resulted in the formation of groups that were involved inillegal acts. The state of corruption was also heightened as manypeople were involved in illegal undertakings. This would have beenmitigated if control was to be observed. As evidenced, repeal ofProhibition radically lessened misconduct such corruption andorganized crimes. Apparently, the unemployment levels reducedsignificantly as more jobs were created. New ventures arose likevoluntary groups, e.g., Alcoholics Anonymous to assist alcoholics.Such events can be borrowed in the modern globe in the means toreduce drug abuse issues.
Prohibitiontypically results in more corruption and crime. For example,prohibiting tobacco or alcohol heightens corruption and crimes, aswell as other dangerous products. Prohibition also intensifiesgovernment management over an average civilian`s life (Barnet, 2012).
Prohibitionwas prospected to be a moral and economic bonanza. Poorhouses, aswell as prisons, would be emptied as the taxes would also lessen.Social issues like crime and corruption would be eradicated. Themovement anticipated productivity to increase the rates ofabsenteeism reduced. That ideal viewpoint was crushed as the stockmarkets indicated otherwise. In that regard, the drive did notachieve its anticipated outcomes as absenteeism continued and theproductivity levels worsened. On the contrary, the private regulationof workers’ drinking enhanced productivity while reducingabsenteeism. Industrial accidents were also lessened (Reinarman,2016).
Inconclusion, the worldwide drug proscription is in danger. It isevident across the globe that the norm is consistently posing threatsas it becomes uncontrollable. It has led to the emergence of gangsand drug cartels who are involved in corrupt dealing with evengovernment officials. Controlling illegal drugs like cannabis hasbeen difficult. Perhaps, in the coming years, due to democracy inmany countries across the globe, drug prohibition will be dismantled.
References
Barnet, R. E. (2012). The Harmful Side Effects of Drug Prohibition. 11-34.
Reinarman, H. G. (2016). Alcohol Prohibition and Drug Prohibition.
By