Upon further thought, I think there is at least in theory a way to pretty much eliminate the recreational use of alcohol without having to do anything oppressive in the process. Invent a superior substitute, something that has the pleasant effects of alcohol with fewer of the downsides. Use social pressure and propaganda to convince people to switch while subsidizing its production to make it cheaper than alcohol. Call it the Synthehol Solution to alcohol, after the stuff in Star Trek.
In college I learned about Siberians and their relationship with Amanita muscaria, a mushroom whose toxins cause dizziness, distortions in perception of size and distance, a desire to damage inanimate objects, and other effects. These toxins are not processed by the kidneys, so some people would drink the urine of other people in order to obtain the toxins.
They didn’t have easy access to alcohol. When Russians introduced the Siberian tribes to alcohol, their interest in Amanita mushrooms vanished almost overnight: they’d found a far superior way to get fucked up.
And that’s the thing, as others have said: people love to get fucked up. Every week on the playground I watch kids spin on a tire swing until they’re about to vomit (sometimes past that point), laugh and shriek and stagger around, and get back on. It’s the closest they can come to taking drugs. We love to get fucked up.
The chance that eliminating alcohol would eliminate this desire are pretty much nil. Instead, people would turn to other intoxicants.
Don’t compare alcohol to a lack of alcohol. Compare it to other intoxicants. Alcohol in moderate quantities has euphoric properties, is a relaxant, has minor health benefits, and is rapidly processed and eliminated by the body. What intoxicant are you suggesting people replace it with?
Because it will be replaced.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Upon further thought, I think there is at least in theory a way to pretty much eliminate the recreational use of alcohol without having to do anything oppressive in the process. Invent a superior substitute, something that has the pleasant effects of alcohol with fewer of the downsides. Use social pressure and propaganda to convince people to switch while subsidizing its production to make it cheaper than alcohol. Call it the Synthehol Solution to alcohol, after the stuff in Star Trek.
[/QUOTE]
If it has the same sorts of effects but with fewer downsides, wouldn’t it become even more addictive? Psychologically, if not physically?
-XT
If it has the same sorts of effects but with fewer downsides, wouldn’t it become even more addictive? Psychologically, if not physically?
[/QUOTE]
Making it nonaddictive (or a cure for addiction in general) would come under the category of “fewer downsides” I’d think, since the addictive effects are after all one of the major such downsides.
Another possibility that occurred to me would be making it sensitive to the biochemicals involved in certain strong emotions, like anger. If getting angry made you sober up there’d be a lot fewer drunken fights I’d think. People would probably even avoid getting angry in the first place to avoid wasting their drinks.
Great idea! I suggest cane toads. They will provide an alternate intoxicant as well as eliminate infestations of the cane beetle. It worked so well in Australia:rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Making it nonaddictive (or a cure for addiction in general) would come under the category of “fewer downsides” I’d think, since the addictive effects are after all one of the major such downsides.
[/QUOTE]
There are different types of addiction was my point. Sex, for instance, isn’t really physically addictive…but it can become psychologically addictive. Take away the downsides to something like alcohol (by which I presume you mean things like the harmful effects to your liver and such, the hangover, etc) and you will have people wanting to hit the bar for their pellet as frequently as they can move their nose. Take away the pleasure effects and you aren’t going to be able to convince anyone that it’s ‘just as good’…sort of like it’s hard to really convince people that eating a tofurkey is really just like eating a nice turkey dinner.
-XT
I dunno, you have to deal with all the pesky doubters and neigh-sayers… it’s dispiriting.
No.
That, sir, may be an alcoholic drink, but it is not wine!! 
That, sir, may be an alcoholic drink, but it is not wine!! :
Well said!
Some really great, edifying responses here. Consider my ignorance well and truly fought. As much as it pains me to admit it, it looks as though alcohol has become such an integral part of US culture and economy that even attempting to get rid of it would likely do more harm than good.
Pity though. It seems that there is a fundamental human need to mess ourselves up - I only wish there was a better way to do it that didn’t have such a high associated cost. I personally don’t drink, as you might have guessed, but while I would never look down my nose at people that drink responsibly, I can’t help but pass a load of rowdy, disruptive drunks without shaking my head and wishing there could be a better way.
US culture? As others have said, there’s a reasonable chance that alcohol is the reason that we have civilization in the first place: people discovered that certain seeds, stored in non-waterproof pits, turned into a fermented mash, and the effects of that mash were so awesome that it was worth giving up the hunter-gatherer lifestyle to obtain more of it. Monkeys also love to get pissed, for that matter.
If you’re looking for a cultural approach to alcohol that’s fairly rare, you represent it yourself: the idea that abstaining from alcohol is a virtue. It’s common in US protestantism, and it’s common in Islam, but I’m unaware of other cultures with a similar attitude.
I’m Muslim, so that explains my own abstention, but I’m certainly not judging US culture - just agreeing with the assertion that alcohol seems irrevocably entwined with modern life to the degree that attempts to get rid of it would likely be harmful as well as fruitless.
I’ve lived in the UK practically all my life and we have a growing problem with binge-drinking here that raises gasps of horror from other supposedly bibulous (great word!) European countries like German, France and Italy. The problem has been noted frequently in the papers and commented on by the Government, so it’s prompted me to wonder whether we’d be better off without alcohol altogether - hence the thread.
The totality of alcohol related problems in modern society may be highly overstated. They make good new stories, and are more directly observed, but there are many more serious problems that we could eliminate with wishful thinking. Admittedly, alcohol can enable stupid behavior by people, but it’s not the only thing that does. You could find plenty of people who point out that religious and political movements cause many more problems than alcohol does.
This is a fun and easy-reading book on the historical impact of both alcoholic and caffeinated beverages.
Bit of a nitpick, but the fact of the matter is that despite what the newspapers would have us believe, binge-drinking, overall alcohol consumption, and alcohol-related automobile accidents are actually all on the decline in the UK. Many in the media have been utterly shameless in their use of alarmist rhetoric sketchy data to paint the UK as a worsening cesspool of chronic alcoholism. The wonderful and entertaining Pete Brown has written a lot on this topic, and I’d recommend giving him a read.
I disagree with the premise that alcohol is bad for either people or society. It’s definitely a social lubricant, and as such makes my life more fun, and it appears to make you live longer:
I’ve asked myself this question before, and it usually ends up with “yes, we will be better because I don’t like alcohol”.
But given this is GD, I think a more appropriate question would be to try and determine what it is about alcohol that makes it unique, and is that thing good or bad?
The answer, I think, is alcohol’s ability to loosen one’s inhibitions and relax a person’s sense of morality. People do things on alcohol that they wouldn’t do while sober. Maybe these are deep-seated desires they’ve always wanted to do or say but don’t have the nerve, or just some random bout of spontaneity that they are willing to act on while under the influence.
So then it becomes if that occasional release of inhibitions is good or bad for society. I believe that question lies with whether or not you think mankind can handle that well. Are there still drugs and hallucinagens in this non-alcohol world? Would people simply move on to something else? Would pot-smoking be like drinking, anyone can do it as long as you’re old enough?
Ultimately, I don’t trust people that much yet. Maybe in a utopian Star Trek-like 24th century where most people have mastered their inner demons and society is much more egalitarian. Right now, I think it does more harm than good.
In Sweden, no children would be born. I don’t know if the same holds true for the US. But who would want to live in a future without Swedes?
That was already tried (Prohibition). It was a goddamn disaster. Besides, at the risk of seeming to be a selfish twit, why should I give up a small and simple pleasure because some other fool can’t control himself? Now if the objection is on religious grounds, we can have a good argument over that too.