It was against personal liberty.
Yes, criminal ganga existed before prohibition but prohibition gave them an extreme chance to proliferate into the everyday life of citizens.
If prohibition succeeded so well why was it repealed?
Response: Every law known to man restricts "personal liberty," and in that sense is "against personal liberty." In most instances Libertarianism means Libertine-ism. The isolated individual floating in the void with relation to any other person, place or thing. Solipsism comes to mind.
Excellent!
I started thinking of all the reasons it failed when you post jolted me back from the brink of a pointless exercise.
It was repealed because people like to drink and be drunk, a little or a lot. When we can vote to get what we want, regardless of the consequences on larger culture, we do. Self restraint in the individual is rare, in the broader society rarer still.
Just another Joe:
“Whether prohibition succeeded or failed on a social plain is irrelevant.”
Really? Now you tell me. For years, elite libertarians were screaming prohibition didn’t work, and now when I confront them with facts, it doesn’t matter? Okay. Tell that to them.
“It was against personal liberty.”
That depends on who we’re talking about doesn’t it? Liberty for the drunk or the beaten wife? Sure there are beer-first libertarians but there are road-safety libertarians too, my guess.
Interesting too how some professional libertarians define “liberty” for the rest of us with a communist iron fist.
“Yes, criminal ganga existed before prohibition but prohibition gave them an extreme chance to proliferate into the everyday life of citizens.”
No it didn’t. In many places crimes dropped.
“If prohibition succeeded so well why was it repealed?”
For numerous reasons related to culture, as Coulter points out. Read the whole piece. But I never said it was perfect, the point being it wasn’t a disaster either. There is a middle ground!