The 18th Amendment to the United States Constitution, ratified in 1919, is synonymous with one of the most controversial and transformative periods in American history: Prohibition. This amendment ushered in a nationwide ban on the production, importation, transportation, and sale of alcoholic beverages. Understanding what the 18th Amendment is requires delving into the complex web of social, political, and cultural forces that led to its passage, and the profound consequences that followed.
At its core, the 18th Amendment, along with the Volstead Act which provided its enforcement, was intended to curb alcohol consumption across the nation. However, as historian Daniel Okrent meticulously details in his study of the amendment’s passage and repeal, the motivations behind Prohibition were far from straightforward. The movement was propelled by a powerful, albeit disparate, coalition of groups, each with their own agendas that extended beyond mere temperance.
Okrent identifies five key components of this coalition: racists, progressives, suffragists, populists, and nativists. While seemingly unrelated on the surface, these groups found common ground in the Prohibition movement, often using it as a vehicle to advance their distinct ideologies.
Racism played a disturbingly significant role. Prohibition rhetoric frequently tapped into racist sentiments, particularly against African Americans. As Okrent notes, even prominent temperance advocates like Frances Willard employed racist imagery, associating alcohol with Black communities. This rhetoric extended beyond the Confederacy, permeating the national discourse. The linking of Prohibition with suffrage, championed by figures like William Jennings Bryan, further intertwined moral virtue with racially charged agendas, creating a politically expedient alliance.
Nativism, fueled by anti-immigrant sentiments, was another potent force. With the backdrop of World War I and animosity towards Imperial Germany, German-Americans, known for their beer-drinking culture, became targets. Populists and nativists joined the temperance cause, condemning alcohol consumption as un-American and morally reprehensible. This anti-German sentiment, coupled with broader anxieties about new immigrant groups, particularly Catholic Italian-Americans and Jewish communities, further solidified support for the 18th Amendment. These groups, often viewed as outsiders by the dominant Protestant majority, faced intolerance, and their drinking habits became a symbolic battleground in a larger cultural conflict.
The underlying currents of racism and religious intolerance are starkly evident in the coalition that supported the 18th Amendment. The cultural anxieties of the dominant American Protestant majority, feeling threatened by changing demographics and new immigrant cultures, found expression in the Prohibition movement. This dynamic echoes later instances of politically motivated social control. The parallel drawn to Nixon’s War on Crime by his advisor John Ehrlichman, who admitted to targeting black and hippie communities by criminalizing marijuana and heroin, highlights a recurring pattern of using social issues to marginalize and control specific groups.
The passage of the 18th Amendment, therefore, was not solely a result of a rational, secular assessment of alcohol abuse and its societal harms. Instead, it was significantly shaped by sectarian Protestant ideals and deep-seated societal prejudices. It reflected a vulnerable America grappling with its identity as a nation of immigrants, yet succumbing to irrational fears of those deemed different.
This period coincided with a shift in American culture, moving away from the anti-racist principles of Reconstruction towards a more overtly racist society. This cultural shift, supported by political figures and cemented by legal decisions like Plessy v. Ferguson, aligned with European models of racist imperialism. The desire to project power and unity on the global stage, particularly after the Civil War, further contributed to this climate. As suggested by the ancient Athenian context cited, external conflict can sometimes be used to mask internal divisions, and in the early 20th century, a form of cultural war was waged against minority groups within the US under the banner of Prohibition.
The irrational and fear-driven nature of the movement, prioritizing moralistic agendas over practical solutions to alcohol-related problems, ultimately undermined the legitimacy and effectiveness of the 18th Amendment. Instead of curbing alcohol abuse, Prohibition led to unintended consequences, including the rise of organized crime, widespread disregard for the law, and the creation of a lucrative black market for alcohol. These negative outcomes ultimately contributed to the amendment’s repeal in 1933 with the 21st Amendment, marking the end of the “noble experiment” of Prohibition.
The legacy of the 18th Amendment serves as a cautionary tale about the complexities of social reform and the dangers of allowing prejudice and fear to drive policy. Understanding “What Is The 18th Amendment” is not just about recognizing a failed attempt to legislate morality, but also about acknowledging the darker undercurrents of racism, nativism, and sectarianism that played a crucial role in its creation and ultimate downfall.
Further Reading:
- Daniel Okrent, Last Call: The Rise and Fall of Prohibition (New York: Scribner, 2010).
- Richard F. Hamm, Shaping the Eighteenth Amendment (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995).
- Edward J. Renehan Jr., The Lion’s Pride: Theodore Roosevelt and His Family in Peace and War (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998).
- Stephen Kinzer, The True Flag: Theodore Roosevelt, Mark Twain, and the Birth of American Empire (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2017).
- Kristin L. Hoganson, Fighting for American Manhood: How Gender Politics Provoked the Spanish-American and Philippine-American Wars (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998).
- David W. Blight, Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American History (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2001).
