40

I have a problem with too many men suffering from alcoholism in my country. I tried putting large taxes and limiting the stores that sell alcohol but that led to cottage industry of low quality moonshine sold on the black market. Quote often with even worse effects.

Could you recommend some ways to decrease alcohol consumption?

JDługosz
  • 69,440
  • 13
  • 130
  • 310
famaz
  • 1,081
  • 11
  • 13
  • 23
    Have you tried using religion? – Golden Cuy Jun 05 '17 at 01:17
  • 3
    How big is your countries demographic? Religion has worked in many places. – Kilisi Jun 05 '17 at 02:16
  • 28
    @Kilisi I think religion is better at hiding alcohol consumption than it is at reducing it. – Erik Jun 05 '17 at 07:55
  • 4
    Let the wives/girlfriends/misstresses raise heck until the men stop drinking. From the pre-Prohibition era here in the US there are photos fo groups of women wtih teh caption "lips that touch liquor will not touch ours", etc. – ivanivan Jun 05 '17 at 13:31
  • What is your country's tech level etc.? – Angew is no longer proud of SO Jun 05 '17 at 14:08
  • 1
    I had to check which SE I was on, because it seemed like we had the coolest president ever on our hands – Restioson Jun 05 '17 at 15:13
  • 4
    Is that you, Mr. Andropov? – user4239 Jun 05 '17 at 15:49
  • 1
    @ivanivan and how well did that work out? Other than Mormons, you don't really have teetotalers here in the US... – Isaac Kotlicky Jun 05 '17 at 19:20
  • What do you mean exactly when you say "I tried putting lagre taxes..."? Isn't this a fictional world? Didn't you decide the result? I am just curious. – tst Jun 06 '17 at 13:55
  • 1
    Try to introduce a culture of responsible drinking. Yes, alcohol is fun but you should enjoy it in moderation not drink to be completely drunk. Don't present it as evil - children will try it and discover it is not as bad as propaganda states and will have no limits on consumption. They will try to consume in hiding cheapest alcohol (vodka). On the other hand enjoying a small glass of wine to dinner will teach them moderation/knowing limits under parental supervision. Also as Isaac said - treat Alcoholism as illness and help people to recover. – Maja Piechotka Jun 07 '17 at 03:20
  • 1
    @IsaacKotlicky That's wrong. About a third of US adults don't drink at all: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/25/think-you-drink-a-lot-this-chart-will-tell-you/?utm_term=.e78ed939d9b0. Including Donald Trump and Warren Buffett. – nmit026 Jun 07 '17 at 03:26
  • Where is this, when is this, who is this? ANY details would help answers. – Mikey Jun 07 '17 at 07:33
  • 1
    Remove the need for using alcohol as a mechanism for coping. No-one becomes an alcoholic or drinks for the booze itself. It tastes awful, is usually expensive and just drinking for the sake of drinking is very rarely a pleasurable experience. Attack the causes of alcoholism and you attack alcoholism. Why — for instance — is youth alcohol consumption dropping like a rock? Because with computers, smartphones and the Internet, the need to use alcohol for socializing all but vanished. – MichaelK Jun 07 '17 at 10:59
  • @MichaelK [citation needed] – Mr Lister Jun 07 '17 at 11:52
  • 1
    @MrLister http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=6203782 – MichaelK Jun 07 '17 at 11:54
  • It's worth mentioning there are many countries in the Middle East and South Asia where alcohol is illegal or highly restricted today. Mind you, I don't know how effective that is, but it might be worth a google. I also once read an historian who argued that prohibition was initially much more popular then most moderns believe, and might have been longer lasting and more effective had alcohol only been regulated to death instead of universally and sweepingly banned. Can't remember to cite however, and don't know enough contemporary history to evaluate. – Random Jun 08 '17 at 06:00
  • Do you want to quasi-militarily fight alcohol or remove the need for it to be an outlet? General anxiety through high unemployment or war can drive people to find some sort of escape, so treating that would reduce the demand. – Nick T Jun 08 '17 at 17:37

12 Answers12

64

(I guess since I got the comment upvotes I'll post it as an answer...)

Look at studies of Portugal and its decriminalization of hard drugs. Far better than anything we've found so far is the institution of social programs that help rehabilitate those who are suffering for little to no cost. Prohibition NEVER works, but legalization coupled with a strong socially accepting message does. Alcoholism is a recognized disease and needs treatment, not punishment.

JDługosz
  • 69,440
  • 13
  • 130
  • 310
Isaac Kotlicky
  • 3,805
  • 16
  • 19
22

Engineer a medicine, drug, bacteria, virus, or gene therapy, introduced into the food/water/air supply, that results in an intolerance to alcohol, similar to lactose intolerance or ipecac syrup.

Alternatively, a bacteria that is highly effective in rapidly breaking down ethanol so that no one can get drunk off of it.

Both methods intend to make drinking alcohol much less enjoyable, by either increasing its negative consequences or negating the positive effects.

Either method is a logical public policy similar to introducing Fluoride into the water supply, or adding bitterants to anti-freeze to make it unlikely for kids and animals to drink. A significant epidemic of alcoholism can make such an effort supported by the public. Or do it covertly.

cde
  • 698
  • 4
  • 9
  • 4
    There are existing meds that will make you sick (on purpose) if you consume alcohol. They are given to people in alcoholism treatment. – Tomáš Zato Jun 05 '17 at 07:45
  • Do those methods work? – Daron Jun 05 '17 at 09:05
  • 4
    Same is done for meth addicts. Methadone blocks the receptors responsible for making meth highs pleasurable, meaning doing meth is pointless. – cde Jun 05 '17 at 17:58
  • 4
    @cde: I think you mean heroin rather than meth. – ruakh Jun 06 '17 at 03:47
  • 1
    @ru It's too late to edit but yes. – cde Jun 06 '17 at 04:09
  • And neither has terribly good long-term effects. Methadone produces its own class of abusers. The classic alcohol spoiler, Antabuse, does not reduce craving for alcohol, so most alcoholics wind up not taking it. I've seen it used very successfully in a military setting, where daily intake was supervised by a commanding officer. This is a much more coercive approach than is practical in civilian life, but it can work. – WhatRoughBeast Jun 07 '17 at 01:25
  • @what that's because there's a lot of politics revolving methadone and defacto bans of some of the alternatives. And I did say introduced through other products, possibly covertly, as to make it more effective. You can't stop using it if it's in everything or you don't know your taking it. – cde Jun 07 '17 at 04:31
  • @WhatRoughBeast if you wrap the symptoms of Antabuse (disulfiram) in a story, some people can be scared out of alcoholism. A strange therapeutic approach, but more accepted by some in some cultures (Russian manly-men). This relies on people wanting to quit in some sense, however. Or you could just really develop some sort of implant that doses it out over a long period of time...but then that could be carved out by a black-market surgeon... – Nick T Jun 07 '17 at 22:10
15

Give them another way to be happy

Whether or not they suffer from alcoholism, people drink because they are not happy. Drinking is a short term and potentially hazardous solution but it is a solution nonetheless. You cannot take it away and hope for improvement if you don't offer something to replace it. Get your populace "addicted" to any of the below.

Physical activity: Formal or informal sports, working with animals, wilderness survival (think scouting). All give an excuse for physical activity. This provides the same dopamine and seratonin high that alcohol provides with none of the drawbacks. Except maybe addiction. People can get addicted to competitive sports but that's not as big a problem as addiction to drinking.

Aside: Drinking is bad for your health and is not advised for serious sportspeople! Another reason not to drink.

Other drugs: There are other drugs that provide a similar high but are less addictive and have less side-effects. One answer suggests cannabis. I'm not here to debate the pros and cons of cannabis over alcohol, since you are free to make up your own smart-drug and decide the effects for yourself. But four things you must decide are strength, addictiveness, side-effects (effects besides the high), and strength of withdrawal. Can you die from alcohol withdrawal? Can you die from cannabis withdrawal?

Communal activity: Social interaction and working as any sort of team also gives a serotonin/dopamine high. One answer suggests religion, and I agree. However it cannot be the monastic type of religion. If must be load and evangelic and involve teamwork. The religion forces you to work with people you otherwise wouldn't and that is its advantage.

Daron
  • 66,136
  • 9
  • 129
  • 236
  • 15
    "People don't use drugs to feel better; they use drugs to feel less bad". – Erik Jun 05 '17 at 10:20
  • 1
    Yes, and this answer to a question about alcoholism says, "people drink because they are not happy." It doesn't say, "people become alcoholics because they are not happy," which would still be an over-simplification but is at least arguable. It also doesn't say, "drinking to excess makes people unhappy," which seems to be your argument. – Useless Jun 06 '17 at 13:49
  • @Useless fair enough; I don't know whether OP uses "drinking" to mean "drink in moderation" or "drink in excess". That should probably be clarified (as I assumed the latter and you seem to assume the former). – Erik Jun 06 '17 at 13:51
  • 2
    Forced activities seems possibly more likely to cause people to drink as opposed to reducing alcohol consumption [citation needed]. If it's optional, how is that different from the world as it currently is - we have plenty of opportunities for sport and other communal activities, yet there are plenty of all sorts of addicts. – NotThatGuy Jun 06 '17 at 19:55
  • 1
    Consider that we are all forced to sleep periodically by our nature, but this does not especially cause us to drink. – Daron Jun 07 '17 at 09:04
14

Make common ink cap a staple dish.

Common ink cap is a common and edible mushroom. It contains a toxin that is not dangerous in itself, but it prohibits proper break down of ethanol, resulting, in mild cases, in immediate and extremely severe hangover, and in bad cases cardiac arrhythmia.

It is extremely unpleasant to drink alcohol for several days after ingesting the mushroom.

Bex
  • 491
  • 2
  • 7
  • Could you explain why this would lower alcohol consumption? If there's any relevant info in the link, it's recommended that you include it in your answer as well. – F1Krazy Jun 05 '17 at 14:05
  • Are people being forced to eat it (i.e. being poisoned by their government) or is that meant to be an already defacto staple food (i.e. why would alcoholism ever become a thing?). – starlord7 Jun 05 '17 at 14:07
  • 6
    @starlord7 I imagine it would be more like a health campaign: "An ink cap a day keeps cancer at bay" or something. Also, thank you for including the explanation, @Bex! This is actually a pretty clever approach. – F1Krazy Jun 05 '17 at 14:22
  • 1
    But a wine a day also prevents disease. Why would people who don't actually want help eat a commonly known food that prevents them from drinking their problems away? An overt campaign like that doesn't prevent alcoholism in people not ready to admit they have a problem. Now, say you covertly take some ink cap genes and transplant them in a common staple like wheat or rice. – cde Jun 05 '17 at 17:48
  • I believe there is an episode of QI where they discussed a similar plan in the navy to prevent sailors drinking the ethanol that powered the torpedos, by cutting it with poison. And they drank it anyway! Mind you that's the same episode they cut off Daniel Radcliffe's head with a guillotine. So perhaps it cannot be trusted. – Daron Jun 06 '17 at 12:20
9

Disulfiram (tradenames: Antabuse, Antabus) in the water supply, or possibly in the air. It basically causes immediate hangovers by inhibiting an enzyme that finishes the degradation of ethanol.

It's discovery was something of an accident, if I recall correctly. Workers in rubber manufacturing plants where products were being vulcanized (disulfiram has a sulfur-sulfur bond that's presumably useful) began to notice intolerance to alcohol after work. I don't know if they were getting it on their skin and it was being absorbed, or if the high temperatures were aerosolizing some of it and they breathed it in

Disulfiram plus alcohol, even small amounts, produce flushing, throbbing in head and neck, throbbing headache, respiratory difficulty, nausea, copious vomiting, sweating, thirst, chest pain, palpitation, dyspnea, hyperventilation, tachycardia, hypotension, syncope, marked uneasiness, weakness, vertigo, blurred vision, and confusion. In severe reactions there may be respiratory depression, cardiovascular collapse, arrhythmias, myocardial infarction, acute congestive heart failure, unconsciousness, convulsions, and death.

It was featured in a story between Radiolab and Marketplace where some Russian clinics used it to scare people out of alcoholism. Maybe the view of alcohol in your society is more akin to the Russian sentiment than it is in North America.

Kai Ryssdal: Alcoholism and Russia have a long and destructive history together. Alcohol abuse costs that country half a million deaths a year, most of them men of working age. It also costs billions of dollars in lost productivity. Male life expectancy in Russia is just 60 years, and the Russian population is predicted to shrink nearly 20 percent by the middle of the century, in part because of the drinking. Every problem, though, creates a market for a cure.

Our health care correspondent Gregory Warner traveled to Moscow to track down one very popular cure -- and the doctors who sell it.

Gregory Warner: For me, this all started with a story I heard about a friend's ex-boyfriend. A Russian alcoholic who promised he'd never ever drink again. Story was he got a capsule surgically inserted under his skin. Some kind of chemical compound, such that if he drank that capsule would explode into his bloodstream, and kill him.

[...]

Eugene Raikhel [professor at the University of Chicago] says if it worked it's partly because Russians understand addiction differently.

Raikhel: Here's the distinction: in North America, the prevailing understanding of addiction is it's not about the substance as much it is about the face that you're out of touch with some truths about yourself and your condition.

<p>[Whereas in Russia,] Many of the patients I talked to say, "I don't have to change myself in any way, I don't have to become a different person."</p>

I just have to get rid of my addiction. Which is what Dr. Davidov offers. When he gives you that pill and he puts that drop of vodka on your tongue, he scares that part of you into submission.

The killer cure for alcoholism in Russia, APM Marketplace, 3 March 2011

Nick T
  • 1,167
  • 7
  • 13
7

Use tactics that have been successful in reducing smoking

In the United States, smoking tobacco has been on the decline. This New York Times article explored how the most effective methods involved decreasing access to cigarettes (especially due to finances) and limiting public exposure. Also, these were gradual changes over time, not an immediate ban as happened with the US alcohol prohibition.

Educate people about advertising tactics used by the industry, with the goal of giving them a negative perception of it

But educating people about the tobacco industry’s marketing efforts can have a big impact. “We now have empirical evidence that people who don’t like the tobacco industry are about five times as likely to quit, and a third to a fifth as likely to start,” [Dr. Stanton A. Glantz] says.

Anecdotally, I see this technique used heavily in my area, with an ad campaign of "big tobacco targets kids" to create a negative perception of the industry.

Ban the substance in public locations

[Dr. Glantz] also notes the importance of smoking bans. “When you create smoke-free workplaces, bars, casinos and restaurants, it sends a strong message that smoking is out,” he says. “It also creates environments that make it easier for people to quit smoking.”

Also, fine those who violate this

[Dr. Mary O’Sullivan] says that many of her patients who are trying to quit head to city parks, where it’s been illegal to smoke since 2011; people caught smoking in parks face a $50 fine.

Reduce substance use in movies and other popular media, and increase negative portrayals

According to these experts, also at play may be increasingly graphic ad campaigns, including the “Tips From Former Smokers” campaign begun last year by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and fewer incidents of smoking in popular movies. Research shows that the more times a young person sees smoking in the movies, the more likely he or she is to take up smoking, and from 2005 to 2010, young people saw far less smoking in PG-13 movies. (Many of those youths are now adults and would have been captured by the new report, though smoking in movies has since increased.)


Stuff that needs more research

Increase the price of the substance at retail locations via taxes

This has been a very effective tactic for reducing smoking, but you said that it had already been tried for alcohol. More research needs to be done to see if this would work if the other methods listed above were implemented.

Richard Grucza, an associate professor in psychiatry at Washington University School of Medicine who studies tobacco policy, cited the 62-cent-per-pack federal tax increase that took effect in 2009, as well as laws that ban indoor smoking, cigarette vending machines, the sale of packs of fewer than 20 cigarettes and the distribution of free cigarettes, as major contributors to declining smoking rates.

In other words, increasing the tax, outlawing distributions of small quantities, and banning official distribution of free cigarettes worked together to make it more expensive.

and

[Dr. O’Sullivan said,] “In New York, we’ve gotten it down to 14 percent, and one of the big reasons is price. Here it’s $12 a pack. Even our schizophrenia patients, who are the most addicted, who used to smoke two and three packs a day, even they are smoking less because of the price.”

Stuff that probably won't work

Don't rely on school education programs

These turned out to be less effective than other methods.

School education programs, for example, don’t appear to be very effective, most likely because schools are difficult places to change social norms and it is hard to do the programs well given all the other demands in the school day, [Dr. Glantz] says.

Also, to my knowledge, there are no current efforts to prevent someone from growing their own tobacco or consuming it on private premises. These tactics were not effective for prohibition of alcohol in the US, so a society trying to reduce alcohol consumption would do well not to try.

Thunderforge
  • 1,156
  • 1
  • 10
  • 20
  • 1
    Op already mentioned that taxation and limitation did nothing but create a black market. – cde Jun 05 '17 at 18:08
  • 1
    @cde Fair point. I've moved that to the bottom and put a bit about how it may be effective when paired with other methods, but more research should be done. I think I'll ask a question on History.SE or Politics.SE about why taxes were historically effective for smoking, but not alcohol, although I strongly suspect it has a lot to do with what other measures were paired with it. – Thunderforge Jun 05 '17 at 18:13
  • 2
    Pricing works (to some degree) for tobacco because you can't produce it yourself, in most countries in the world anyway. Anybody with access to fruit or vegetables can produce more than enough alcohol for their personal consumption. – alephzero Jun 07 '17 at 02:07
  • Tobacco and alcohol aren't as similar as they seem... The only release an addicted smoker receives is a relief of withdrawal symptoms. Alcohol produces a very different effect, drunkenness. – apaul Jun 08 '17 at 02:16
6

Legalize marijuana.

Some people want to feel different. Like your men. MJ lets them scratch that itch. Weed is safer than alcohol in the short and long term: less organ damage, less potential to die of overdose or withdrawals, less aggressive behavior. People don't suffer from hangover related effects the next morning: less missed work. Marijuana is a superior recreational drug in comparison to alcohol.

The US is in the middle of an experiment about this. It is too soon to know for sure if legal MJ will really reduce alcohol use but one can hope. Here is Time stating beer sales are down in places with legal marijuana.

http://time.com/money/4592317/legal-marijuana-beer-sales/

cde
  • 698
  • 4
  • 9
Willk
  • 304,738
  • 59
  • 504
  • 1,237
  • 2
    What's AM - the morning after, the aftermath? Also why is MJ an acronym, a google search for MJ brings up a singer-songwiter. – Pranab Jun 05 '17 at 05:24
  • @Pranab MJ -> Mary Jane -> Marijuana – fyrepenguin Jun 05 '17 at 06:32
  • 3
    Any idea on AM? I'd expect "in the A.M." if it were supposed to mean the morning after, but perhaps the OP can clarify. – Pranab Jun 05 '17 at 06:50
  • I'm not sure whether it would give huge reduction, however I gave +1 for data showing that legal weed reduces beer consumption. – Shadow1024 Jun 05 '17 at 07:28
  • I don't know giving them another substance to abuse is really a good long term solution. – AmiralPatate Jun 05 '17 at 07:42
  • 7
    This will also increase pizza delivery sales boosting your economy. – Tomáš Zato Jun 05 '17 at 07:44
  • @AmiralPatate depending on why you have a problem with people drinking too much, it might work. People who abuse marijuana generally get lazy and giddy, but not dangerous or violent. Socially speaking, it's a big improvement. – Erik Jun 05 '17 at 07:58
  • 1
    @Erik I find that people die from weed-induced bad decisions just as irrevocably as they die from alcohol-induced ones. Abuse will exist regardless of the substance, I just don't really see the improvement in terms of public health and safety. – AmiralPatate Jun 05 '17 at 08:03
  • @AmiralPatate okay, I don't hear a lot of news about people getting themselves killed from weed-induced bad decisions. Most people I know who smoke weed just sit at home, laugh about nothing and order pizza. Maybe there's a cultural difference or something. – Erik Jun 05 '17 at 08:31
  • @Erik Road accidents, and people can die because others DUI. Weed can induce paranoia and psychosis. Different people, different reactions. The point isn't one drug is better than the other, the point is they're all very dangerous and should be treated as such. Ultimately, people abusing a substance have problems that are strictly independent of the substance, and changing said substance will not solve said problems. – AmiralPatate Jun 05 '17 at 09:00
  • @AmiralPatate studies suggest that the impact of weed on driving is negligable. The point is that some drugs ARE better than others in that the danger is (much, much) lower. Caffeine is classified as a drug, but I doubt many people consider it "very dangerous" or consider people who drinks 3 cups a day to be "addicts with serious problems" – Erik Jun 05 '17 at 09:21
  • @Erik To address your specific comment, a lot of people are delusional about their coffee addiction, as much as I think a lot of people are delusional about the safety of weed. To conclude my general argument: 1) Weed isn't a solution because it doesn't attack the root cause of substance abuse, it only replaces one addiction by another. 2) Heroin was supposed to solve cocaine addiction, that should a be cautionary tale. Hell, alcohol and tobacco should be a cautionary tale enough. 3) Long term effects are often unforeseen. – AmiralPatate Jun 05 '17 at 10:01
  • 1
  • I should avoid US slang: MJ is marijuana. AM is ante Meriden; before midday; morning. Lost work from hangovers is a big problem with alcohol. – Willk Jun 05 '17 at 12:12
  • 1
    False equivalency between alcohol and weed. Just the number of alcohol poisoning deaths alone make replace it with weed, which you cannot overdose on, and aggressive behavior reduction will significantly reduce the issues that make the addiction a problem to society. – cde Jun 05 '17 at 18:03
5

Prohibit anyone other than the government from selling alcohol. Put your government alcohol outlets in dingy warehouses on out-of-town industrial estates, staffed by civil servants who have customer service skills that are too poor for them to work anywhere else. That is pretty much guaranteed to make alcohol deeply unfashionable, while preventing large-scale black market sales, since its availability from the government will cap the prices that black market dealers can get.

Mike Scott
  • 20,186
  • 3
  • 41
  • 81
  • 5
    Sounds like Pennsylvania. – cde Jun 05 '17 at 18:09
  • as well as Virginia! the commonwealth's are all about control... – albert Jun 07 '17 at 02:21
  • From the OP I tried putting large taxes and limiting the stores that sell alcohol but that led to cottage industry of low quality moonshine sold on the black market. – KevinDTimm Jun 07 '17 at 15:28
  • 1
    @KevinDTimm Yes, but that's the taxes, not the limitation of who can sell alcohol. And it's important that it is sold incompetently by people who are bad at customer service, which wasn't mentioned. – Mike Scott Jun 07 '17 at 15:33
  • limiting the stores that sell alcohol could easily contain your argument – KevinDTimm Jun 07 '17 at 15:47
1

Give people a chance to succeed. Keep corruption under control, and provide opportunities for education that leads to meaningful work. There will always be a few people that will turn to drug or alcohol abuse, but seeing the potential to have a meaningful future is the best deterrent substance abuse.

1

Up the penalty for consuming alcohol to death by being flayed alive in the public square along with five, randomly-selected family members, with a guarantee that whatever family member(s) reports them prior to their arrest will be spared. Further, when the government catches moonshiners, give them methanol-tainted moonshine to distribute to all their customers (which will kill them painfully.) In return, give any moonshiner who succeeds in causing a noticeable uptick in methanol poisoning in his area a swift execution instead of a painful one, and spare his family.

Expect people to turn to other intoxicants instead of alchol, but you didn't say anything about that.

Do note that figuring out why people are consuming excessive quantities of alcohol and addressing that issue will solve the problem with a much lower body count, but it will also take government officials who are actually competent, whereas the proposed method merely requires finding a core group of vicious psychopaths and giving them license to hunt.

Perkins
  • 4,275
  • 11
  • 18
  • 1
    I'm not sure what the downvote's for. The OP didn't ask for nice, friendly, cuddly-wuddly methods. He asked for effective methods. Secret police, horrendous penalties, and turning practically everyone into a government spy are not nice methods, but history demonstrates that they do work (at least until the revolt.) I would not suggest this as a method of choice for the real world, but for the worldbuilding forum it is something to consider based on the nature of the hypothetical government. – Perkins Jun 12 '17 at 23:58
0

There are several reasons for alcoholic consumption, and so there are several ways to stop it.

The main reason for alcoholic consumption is people being not happy with their lives, people who are homeless, idle and that are maybe in recent breakups, or recently lost someone they loved, are the most to be drinking alcohol, and so to reduce it, many regions have tried putting a fine on drinking, which clearly didn't work and in some cases, completely backfired.

So, seeing the reason they are drinking, the best way of making them stop drinking, is by fixing their lives, not telling them to stop, but making them stop, by maybe increasing physical activity, social interaction, etc....

This seems to be clearly the best way to stop alcoholic consumption in whatever region or place.

-1

Simple answer - put heavy fines on making moonshine. Make sure this is enforced, and make sure police are kept on the alert about this.

Philipp
  • 48,627
  • 16
  • 95
  • 171
  • 8
  • 2
    @nmit026 You still had 60% alcohol consumptions and 80% of alcohol deaths, and at the same time a huge raise in criminal activity which soon expanded from alcohol production and distribution to non-alcohol-related crimes like racketeering. That's why it was repealed. – Philipp Jun 06 '17 at 10:40
  • 1
    @nmit026 I don't think it's "Western countries have falsely convinced themselves it doesn't" as it is "Western countries have realized it's not worth it". Maybe in OP's fictional society it's worth it, though. – Erik Jun 06 '17 at 13:49
  • @nmit026, what is your position? You reject the hypothesis "Legalization of drugs never works or isn't worth it" because of Singapore? But you say "Strong laws work"? Huh? – Wildcard Jun 07 '17 at 05:01
  • I'm not sure how good an example Singapore is, given that it's a single city, not really a country. I live in a tiny little country and it's still 60x bigger than Singapore. (Also, we do score higher than Singapore in the World Happiness Report) – Erik Jun 07 '17 at 05:53
  • @nmit026 if Singapore has strong anti-drug laws then it can't possibly prove anything about the workability or unworkability of NOT having laws about drugs. So your logic "because Singapore" makes absolutely no sense to me. – Wildcard Jun 07 '17 at 07:27
  • @nmit026 let's see if I can spell out your logic (and note that I am not discussing your conclusions, only your logic). Hypothesis: legalization of drugs (i.e. failing to make any laws about them) does not work, is not "worth it." Test: Singapore has lots of laws about drugs and effectively enforces them. Conclusion: hypothesis is false, i.e. making NO drug laws can work and be "worth it." Now—do you see any problems with your logic? – Wildcard Jun 07 '17 at 09:52
  • @nmit026 okay. To quote you: 'So the hypothesis "Legalization of drugs never works or isn't worth it" can be rejected because Singapore. (And other examples throughout history.)' I take it you're retracting that statement. Thank you for clarifying your position. – Wildcard Jun 07 '17 at 10:10
  • 1
    @nmit026 :D No problem, happens to everyone sooner or later. Just a typo. Very gratifying acknowledgement, though, thank you! :D – Wildcard Jun 07 '17 at 10:21