Sunday, October 02, 2011

Ken Burns' Prohibition Doc and Culturist Corruption




This Ken Burn's documentary ad has appeared all over NYC.  The tag line "How did a nation founded on rights ever go so wrong?" has deep problems.  Here are some questions / debates it invites.

"A nation founded on rights?"  When does Mr. Burns date the founding of our nation?  Many people confuse the founding of our government with the founding of the nation.  Okay, technically we were colonies beforehand.  But, our national character started well before.

I like to date the founding of our nation with either 1607 or 1620.  The Puritans, who landed in 1620, did not set up a system based on rights.  They came here to found a nation purer than any before.  If you were a drunk, the community would lessen your status.  And, they could even take you children away or publicly punish you.

Jamestown started in 1607.  They had a bit of individualism going.  But they quickly discovered, as the Puritans already knew, that individuals are dependent on the community. If people did not stand guard or work, they would be killed by starvation and hostile indians.  Our nation, was not "founded on rights."

Well what if you take the 1776 date?  Still, 'rights' did not trump all. Many colonies had official religions.  And, the Founding Fathers did not set up a system of anarchy wherein no one had any limits and everyone had a protected right to be anti-social.  We, again, impact each other.  A democracy or republic is not a system of government if it means the community can never define itself or regulate accordingly.

Prohibition had good attributes.  Perhaps a bit of a spike of crime and corruption, now apparently to be sensationalized by Burns, happened.  But drunkenness went down.  Hospital visits due to alcohol, such as poisoning and drunk driving, went down.  Wife battering went down.  Men spending all their family's proceeds went down.  

Ken Burn's ad shows that he is a terrible historian.  The ad already announces that he will only engage Prohibition as a nightmare. Real historians debate.    But with 'rights' based thought, all impositions become evil.  Responsibility is restraint.  Everyone has a right and the people can make no rules. 

If Burns studied history, he'd note that a law such as Prohibition could only happen in a Puritan-based culture.  That would lead him to see that our nation was not simply founded in 1776.  He might read their writing wherein they say that license without responsibility doesn't lead to liberty; it leads to national suicide. But like most modern historians he probably considers the Puritans "so wrong" too for having violated rights.

We need to reclaim our sense of public good when creating values.  We need to recognize the truths the Puritans told us and not just justify our anti-social mores with 'rights talk.'  We cannot simply subsidize irresponsible behavior due to rights.  We need to proudly reinsert our cultural heritage into our legal system.  One must inform the other.

www.culturism.us

5 comments:

cjk said...

Very good.
I have often wondered if prohibition was really a net gain or a net loss for society myself.
Sure a lot of gangsters were shooting up each other and some corruption was fostered. What about the positive aspects you mentioned though? How much societal destruction was avoided by making the access to Demon Rum difficult?
These are legitimate debatable questions which seem to never be addressed especially when the whole argument is framed by the left.
Surely this 'new' documentary will just be more of the same.
Too bad.

Unknown said...

Yes, bashing of public morals will happen. The argument will then be framed to call all drug laws wrong.

This is not a purely a left or right issue. Libertarians also demonize all attempts to have public morals. All comes down to individual choice. And, this leads to moral relativism.

As a culturist, I believe we should consider the public impact of our individual decisions. Decency is not a horrible thing.

Thanks for the comment! JP

M. Simon said...

I'm all for public morals. Can we all agree on sharia?

What? You had some other set in mind?

M. Simon said...

Sharia bans alcohol. So there is that.

Pastorius said...

Great post, John.

I'm guessing you would say that the arrival at an idea of what is right and wrong is a cultural construct, a cultural agreement worked out over time, and ever-evolving.

If that is so, I think we still have such a thing, but the Gramscian left wants to remake that in their image, which means

Global Warming is evil

and

those without money are Saints.

Or something like that, anyway.