Herbert Hoover, 1929, Anti-dog-eat-dog

Republican Prohibitionist fanatics

Hitler’s Anti-dog-eat-dog helper (link) shakes with Brezhnev’s ally in violating the Second Amendment (link)

Hoover speech to Chamber of Commerce conference, 12/5/1929: Much construction work had been postponed during the past few months by reason of the shortage of mortgage money due to the diversion of capital for speculative purposes.
 The third line of action has been to undertake through voluntary organization of industry the continuity and expansion of the construction and maintenance work of the country, so as to take up any slack in employment which arises in other directions. (…) This is a far cry from the arbitrary and dog-eat-dog attitude of the business world of some 30 or 40 years ago.  (Hoover 1929 1974 454-5) (link)

Translation: making beer a 5-year prison term felony with a fine of over half a million 2019 dollars just before my inauguration backfired. Asset-forfeiture of everything from ocean liners to homes, automobiles and bank & brokerage accounts caused money to flee the banking system after former prosecutor Willebrandt blew the whistle on how we do it in 21 newspapers in August. We now imitate German and Italian fascism make-work projects to disguise the damage caused by using revenue laws to enforce religious prohibition. Religious fascism is not a bit like the laissez-faire liberalism that kept America wealthy and free back when beer and coca wine were as legal as sea salt.

This speech was made the year Ayn Rand married Frank O’Connor. Here is the relevant page from the Presidential Papers of Herbert Hoover:

Brot un Arbeit! Gott Mitt Uns!

Asset-forfeiture prohibitionism chased money from banks, so no mortgages, no jobs, no individualism, no laissez-faire, no freedom!

Hoover (prohibition): “This is not dictation or interference by the government with business.”

Nixon (war on drugs): “I am not a crook!”

Ayn Rand (Atlas Shrugged): “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of production and trade …”

Get the complete story in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in either of two languages. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how pseudoscience, fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy.

ProhicrashAmazon

I also produce books and articles in Portuguese, using Brazilian historical sources at http://www.expatriotas.blogspot.com or amigra.us

All persons born…

See many men among these voters?

Individuals who Voted to Enforce their Rights–and WON! Irish women won individual rights (link)

Does the Constitution allow men with guns to threaten physicians or coerce pregnant women? The Harrison Act enabled pseudoscience-addled politicians to have men with service pistols step between doctors and patients in 1914. See why missing an opportunity to vote Libertarian is tantamount to desertion under fire as mystical and collectivist reality control delegitimize individual claims to freedom of action.

Today’s guest repost is by Austin’s Constitutional Scholar Jon Roland, constitutionalism.blogspot.com.

U.S. Supreme Court: Issues with current contenders

Unenumerated rights

The first issue is presented by the statement by nominee appointee Brett  Cavanaugh in his acceptance speech, that he would not find rights not explicitly recognized in the main Constitution.. This has been an issue since the nomination of Robert Bork, who considered the Ninth Amendment, which calls for the nondisparagement of rights that are not “enumerated” (made explicit) somewhere in the Constitution, as amended, to be an “ink blot”. There is strong opposition to Supreme Court judges doing that, especially from so-called “conservatives”, who don’t understand that constitutional rights are all “immunities”, restrictions on the powers of government. They are not “privileges” to receive a sufficient amount of public resources, such as for education, healthcare, elder support, or any other objects of public subsidies.

Interestingly, in the case of Roe v. Wade, the Fifth Circuit decided that a “right to an abortion” was a Ninth Amendment right of a woman  “to choose whether to have children”, which by the 14th Amendment, was “incorporated” for the states. This presented the Supreme Court with an apparent problem,  because there was opposition to funding unenumerated rights in the Senate. The Fifth Circuit found a Ninth Amendment “right  to choose whether to have children”. So the SC tried to sustain the Fifth Circuit without embracing the Ninth Amendment. The result was an incoherent opinion. There was no way to avoid the Ninth Amendment.

It would perhaps too much to expect a nominee to venture into an extended discussion of what a “right” is, and what it is not. It is awkward to say “I will not find a ‘right’ to a sufficient amount of a public resource.” That is too complicated for most senators. So the candidate denies he will try to find any “unenumerated” rights. That is somewhat disingenuous, but the issue needs to be discussed.

1968, NO LIBERTARIAN PARTY!

Republicans, Dixiecrats, No Libertarian Party!

When “life” begins

One of the potential nominees, Amy Barrett, has been reported to have stated that human “life” begins at conception. That is a misstatement of the issue in Roe v. Wade. which in its essence was not about “life” nut about “personhood” because “Rights (immunities)” attach to “persons”, (roles in court), not to “life”, despite what the Declaration of Independence says. (That is why some activists have sought to move the commencement of “personhood” back to conception. That would be a mistake. We cannot allow each state to redefine “personhood”, because if we did, a state could define some people to be nonpersons, without rights. So there has to be a uniform definition across all states if the protections of the Constitution are not to be meaningless. That is the basis for finding the right to be incorporated under the Ninth Amendment, as the Fifth Circuit did.

So when does “life” begin?

Not at conception. Each individual is the latest in an unbroken chain of life that goes back to at least the point when the first single-celled organism became a multi-celled animal, which occurred about 650 million years ago, during the pre-Cambrian era, when the surface of the Earth was covered with ice (“snowball Earth”) and there was only one continent, Rodinia. We are all descended from that multi-celled organism. That is when “life” began.

So when does “personhood” begin?

This was declared by the jurist Edward Coke in the 15th century, and later restated by legal scholar William Blackstone, in the early 18th century, who provided most of the definitions for terms used in the U.S. Constitution. They held that “personhood” begins at natural birth, or induced natural birth (they had Cesarean sections in those days). Some of the states later found that personhood began with baptism, entry of a name in church records, or even later. Not at “conception”, the date of which could not have been defined with any precision in those days, or even now.

Consider what would happen if we defined “personhood” to begin at conception? It would make every fetus the ward of a court, with the court having power to supervise the pregnancy. It could order the woman to continue a pregnancy, and not terminate it, under penalty of law. That would be forced pregnancy. Do we want that? Every pregnant woman chained to a bed. Anyone see the play “A Handmaid’s Tale”. Good way to stop everyone from having sex.

Forcing women into involuntary servitude and labor

Sinfest.net webcomic 2 awe

Need for uniformity

Incorporation of a Ninth Amendment right is required by the need to have a uniform definition of “personhood” (legal role) across all jurisdiction, since constitutional rights attach to “persons” and not just to “citizens” or “life”.  If states could define personhood, they could deprive anyone of rights by defining him to be a “nonperson”. Thus a state could find that Blacks are not persons as a way to deprive them of their liberty.

Notes:

1. Roe v. Wade, 1221 (N.D. Tex. 1970) (“On the merits, plaintiffs argue as their principal contention that the Texas Abortion Laws must be declared unconstitutional because they deprive single women and married couple of their rights secured by the Ninth Amendment to choose whether to have children. We agree.”).

2. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).

3, A Handmaid’s Tale, Margaret Atwood.

4. Robert Bork and the Inkblot, Kurt Lash.

5. Constitutional views on abortion

See also: Ayn Rand (link)

Get the complete story on other prohibitions in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in either if two languages for the price of a craft pint. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy in 1929 and 2008.

ProhicrashAmazon

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

I also produce books and articles in Portuguese, using Brazilian historical sources at http://www.expatriotas.blogspot.com or amigra.us

 

1929 State of the Union Message

Dry Killer Herbert Hoover

Branding folks felons for beer since March 1929

On December 3, God’s Own Prohibitionist, Republican President Herbert Clark Hoover delivered his State of the Union Address to Congress December 3, 1929. Here are the highlights:

…Owing to unusual circumstances, it has been extremely difficult to estimate future revenues with accuracy. (…) I recommend that the normal income tax rates applicable to the incomes of individuals for the calendar year 1929 be reduced from 5, 3 and 1½ per cent to 4, 2 and ½ per cent, and that the tax on the income of corporations for the calendar year 1929 be reduced from 12 to 11 per cent. It is estimated that this will result in a reduction of $160,000,000 in income taxes to be collected during the calendar year 1930. (p409) (…) The long upward trend of fundamental progress, however, gave rise to over-optimism as to profits, which translated itself into a wave of uncontrolled speculation in securities, resulting in the diversion of capital from business to the stock market and the inevitable crash. (p411) (…)

AGRICULTURE: The agricultural situation is improving. The gross farm income as estimated by the Department of Agriculture for the crop season 1926-27 was $12,100,000,000; for 1927-28 it was $12,300,000,000; for 1928-29 it was $12,500,000,000; and estimated on the basis of prices since the last harvest the value of the 1929-30 crop would be over $12,650,000,000. The slight decline in general commodity prices during the past few years naturally assists the farmers’ buying power. The number of farmer bankruptcies is very materially decreased below previous years. The decline in land values now seems to be arrested and rate of movement from the farm to the city has been reduced. Not all sections of agriculture, of course, have fared equally, and some areas have suffered from drought. (p413) (…)

TARIFFS: I am firmly of the opinion that their application to the pending [tariff] revision will give the country the kind of a tariff law it both needs and wants. (p415) (…)

THE BANKING SYSTEM: The development of “group” and “chain” banking presents many new problems. (…) The relinquishment of charters of national banks in great commercial centers in favor of State charters indicates that some conditions surround our national banks which render them unable to compete with State banks; and their withdrawal results in weakening our national banking system. (p423) (…)

FEDERAL PRISONS: In order to relieve the pressing evils I have directed the temporary transfer of the Army Disciplinary Barracks at Leavenworth to the Department of Justice for use as a Federal prison. (…) We need some new Federal prisons and a reorganization of our probation and parole systems; and there should be established in the Department of Justice a Bureau of Prisons with a sufficient force to deal adequately with the growing activities of our prison institutions. Authorizations for the improvements should be given speedily, with initial appropriations to allow for the construction of the new institutions to be undertaken at once. (p429) (…)

PROHIBITION: The first duty of the President under his oath of office is to secure the enforcement of the laws. The enforcement of the laws enacted to give effect to the eighteenth amendment is far from satisfactory and this is in part due to the inadequate organization of the administrative agencies of the Federal Government. (…) First, there should be an immediate concentration of responsibility and strengthening of enforcement agencies of the Federal Government by transfer to the Department of Justice of the Federal functions of detection and to a considerable degree of prosecution, which are now lodged in the Prohibition Bureau in the Treasury. (…) The District of Columbia should be the model of city law enforcement in the Nation. …there is need for legislation in the District supplementing the national prohibition act, more sharply defining and enlarging the powers of the District Commissioners and police of the District and opening the way for better cooperation in the enforcement of prohibition between the District officials and the prohibition officers of the Federal Government. It is urgent that these conditions be remedied. (p432)

LAW ENFORCEMENT: (p435) … We need to reestablish faith that the highest interests of our country are served by insistence upon the swift and even-handed administration of justice to all offenders, whether they be rich or poor. (…) I have appointed a National Commission… for an exhaustive study… including the special problems and abuses growing out of our prohibition laws. (…) the Department of Justice has been striving to weed out inefficiency… to stimulate activity on the part of its prosecuting officers… The department is seeking systematically to strengthen the law enforcement agencies… by removal of negligent officials and by encouragement and assistance to the vigilant. (…) Increases in appropriations are needed and will be asked for in order to reinforce these offices. …if the citizen… shall insist on selecting the particular laws which he will obey, he undermines his own safety and that of his country. His attitude may obscure, but it cannot conceal, the ugly truth that the lawbreaker, whoever he may be, is the enemy of society. We can no longer gloss over the unpleasant reality which should be made vital in the consciousness of every citizen, that he who condones or traffics with crime, who is indifferent to it and to the punishment of the criminal or to the lax performance of official duty, is himself the most effective agency for the breakdown of society. Our laws are made by the people themselves; theirs is the right to work for their repeal; but until repeal, it is an equal duty to observe them and demand their enforcement.

I have been gratified at the awakening sense of this responsibility in our citizens during the past few months, and grateful that many instances have occurred which refuted the cynicism which has asserted that our system could not convict those who had defied the law and possessed the means to resist its execution. These things reveal a moral awakening both in people and in officials which lies at the very foundation of the rule of law. (Hoover 1929 1974 404-436) (link)

Money was fleeing Federally chartered banks in order to not be confiscated via asset forfeiture should some officious dry killers storm the bank. Observe also that we now call the Laffer Curve was totally operative during the Coolidge and Hoover Administrations, when every cut in federal tax rates brought increased federal revenue and, in Hoover’s words, “fertilizes the soil of prosperity.” This optimistic sermon came after the Crash, with a Crash still wrecking the German economy, and banking panics already afoot in these States, thanks to use of the income tax as a club to enforce prohibition. Herbert Hoover was already proving that he himself, while enforcing prohibition, was “the most effective agency for the breakdown of society.”

Get the complete story in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in two languages. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how pseudoscience, fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy.

ProhicrashAmazon

I also produce books and articles in Portuguese, using Brazilian historical sources at http://www.expatriotas.blogspot.com or amigra.us

1988 Great Depression, 1929 Remake

Crash? More Prohibition!

Denial that prohibition caused ANOTHER Crash!

Republicans and their Democratic abettors pretended the 1920-22 Crash and Depression were happenstancenothing whatsoever to do with a Constitutional Amendment ending the freedom of trade and production. Those closest to the public–smugglers and bootleggers–simply ignored the dry laws, and paid cops, agents, prosecutors, inspectors and judges to help them ignore them. Freedom from coercion was bought and sold like any other commodity in a mixed-economy market.

Realists understood perfectly that coercive meddling had precipitated the Crash and plunged the nation into a Depression at the onset of Constitutional Prohibition. And sure enough, nullification of the dry looters’ laws enabled the economy to recover in fairly short order. But God’s Own Prohibitionists were far from pleased. The Great Unwashed was treating them with the sort of irreverence Andrew Jackson had displayed toward the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice: “Now let’s see him enforce it.”

Methodist White Terror & Kristallnacht for boozers

Goodbye Weimar, hello Third Reich!

Battalions of brutes with service pistols and political will could, they imagined, secure “real” prohibition enforcement. Sheer murderous mobilization had, after all, served to Hooverize and throttle the Accursed Hun in 1918, had it not? So the Jones Five and Ten Law was handed to Herbert Hoover to wield as bludgeon, bayonet and blackjack. Former prosecutor Willebrandt published the complete arsenal of government weaponization in a book-length column in August and September in some 2 dozen papers, and the economy went from recovering to ruined in 12 weeks.

Suddenly, amid the wreckage of the Crash, Senator Jones Law Jones–the very incarnation of the Methodist White Terror–was running the G.O.P.  Senator Robinson, remanded to the Sahara of the Bozarts, was replaced at the Dem helm by impecunious-immigrant-turned-gold-magnate Walsh. Walsh was father of Evalyn “Hope Diamond” Walsh McLean, a hard-drinking morphine addict once best friends with the Late President Warren Harding, and married to Edward McLean, newspaper magnate nearly arrested for lying to protect a former cabinet officer in the Teapot Dome.

Events in 1987 followed the same pattern. Mystical prohibitionism ramped up until the economy crashed in 1987, then retrenched with increasing fanaticism until voters had no choice but to throw the bastards out.

Same as 1930 reaction!

Prohibition kills economy; government adds MORE prohibition! (link)

The article says:

WASHINGTON (AP) – faced with a revolt by conservatives, congressional leaders attached anti-obscenity provisions to a compromise drug bill so the measure can pass and the 100th Congress can go home.
A weary House Speaker Jim Wright predicted Thursday night that both houses would approve the leaders’ “final agreement” on the drug bill today, but cautioned that the obscenity language could not be “nailed down” until lawmakers reviewed it. The bill is the major legislation keeping Congress in session.
After marathon meetings by rank-and-file negotiators, Wright along with the majority and minority leaders of both houses – gathered to tackle the unresolved issues Thursday night.
The thorniest among them proved to be Senate-passed language to give the federal government broad new powers to combat obscenity.
Earlier in the day, rank-and-file lawmakers stripped the language from the drug bill after liberals insisted the government’s powers would be too broad.
“We were threatened with a revolt” by conservatives, said right, who admitted he began envisioning an embarrassing floor fight that would destroy his effort to unite liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, behind the bill that could help all incumbents.
A coalition of conservative groups began an intense last-ditch telephone campaign to win inclusion of the anti-obscenity provisions, said Diane quarter main, legislative affairs director of the Liberty Federation, formerly the Moral Majority.
The bill – which would authorize some $2.5 billion in new anti-drug money, is an ambitious attempt to deal with all aspects of the drug problem, including law enforcement, treatment, rehabilitation, education and help for authorities in drug-producing countries.
New initiatives would include up to $10,000 in civil fines for those caught with personal use amounts of drugs; a federal death penalty for killers in drug -related crimes; and denial of some federal benefits to convicted drug offenders, including users.
A number of lawmakers cautioned the drug bill would be meaningless without new financing, and the House Appropriations Committee took quick action Thursday.
The panel approved $500 million in new spending for the drug bill, an amount that would pay for barely a third of the estimated $1.4 billion first-year costs of the legislation. The final cost is expected to be about $2.5 billion if the multi-year measure is fully financed. The $500 million includes: $242 million for treatment, prevention and education; $179 million for new agents and equipment for federal law enforcement agencies; $42 million for the federal courts; $25 million for the Coast Guard; and the rest for programs of the departments of State and agriculture, and the FDA.
A combined bill to combat adult obscenity and child pornography had passed the Senate 97-0 previously, and was added to the drug bill when the House refused to take action. The child pornography language was approved by the drug bill negotiators.
The obscenity language passed by the Senate would allow the federal government to seize property used to commit or promote and obscenity offense; and authorize the government to seek civil fines against those producing, transporting or receiving obscene materials. Wright said the leadership agreed to target only major dealers or producers of obscene materials who were “knowingly engaged over a long period of time.” He said the language was not aimed at the bookstore owner who may have a single volume judged to be obscene.
He called the language “constitutionally respectable and acceptable.”
Lawmakers opted to accept portions of House and Senate language on a program to deny federal benefits to convicted drug offenders, including those convicted of possession.
Benefits such as federal public housing, grants, contracts, loans, mortgage guarantees, and some forms of veterans’ aid could be lost to drug offenders. Judges would have discretion, however, on whether to impose the penalty after conviction.
the president would submit a report on the program to Congress next May, allowing lawmakers to reconsider the proposal. No one could be denied benefits before next September. Social Security, Medicare, welfare benefits and some other veterans’ aid programs would be exempted even after September.
Negotiators agreed that if someone is killed during a federal drug felony, the federal death penalty could apply if: the killer was engaged in a continuing criminal enterprise; was trafficking in major amounts of cocaine, heroin or other drugs; intentionally gave an order that resulted in a killing; or killed a police officer.
In other key decisions, negotiators:
– agreed to create a “drug czar” in the president’s Cabinet, to coordinate national drug policy. The official would develop plans for every phase of the drug war, share with relevant Cabinet heads the authority to transfer personnel, and have the right to object when he believes drug funding is inadequate or misdirected.
Dropped a house provision that would’ve permitted introduction in federal court of evidence seized illegally, but in “good faith,” even in warrantless searches.
Accepted Senate language on child pornography, including a 20-year-to-life prison term for anyone convicted of facilitating use of a child for producing sexually explicit materials.
Gave the Justice Department nine months to develop a system for gun dealers to check whether purchasers are convicted felons.
Agreed that records of those punished by civil fines would be expunged automatically after a period of time.
– resolved that states initially would have to contribute 25% of the cost of federal grants for anti-drug crime programs. After the first year of the four-your program, the state portion would go to 50%. [Enter Bush Junior faith-based asset forfeiture Executive Order, which by 2008 would again wreck the economy]
– agreed to restore to US attorneys the ability to prosecute corrupt public officials under the theory that they deprived Americans of honest government services. A Supreme Court ruling in June 1987 had prevented such prosecutions.
– Agreed to finance drug education programs for private employees, low income pregnant women, gang members, students, and dropouts.
– Decided to drop proposals for random drug testing of transportation workers.

Get the complete story in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in two languages. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy.

ProhicrashAmazon

I also produce books and articles in Portuguese, using Brazilian historical sources at http://www.expatriotas.blogspot.com or amigra.us

 

1920s legalization trends

China’s republican revolution overthrowing the Quing Dynasty and restoring antiopium prohibition in 1911-12 caused a massive opiate glut. Withdrawal sickness, often medicated with alcohol as a palliative, blurred the distinction between opiate addiction and fascination with alcohol before and during the World War. The war itself was sparked by the glut in opium-producing Balkan nations and morphine-refining Austria-Hungary, Germany, France and England as pressure mounted to ratify the Hague convention. Mr Dooley, a humorous political philosopher quoted by Milton Friedman, reported surplus morphine being added to distilled spirits during the depression begun in 1907. (link)

After the Great War, the Hague antiopium convention set afoot in 1909 was finally ratified at bayonet-point as part of the Armistice and Treaty of Versailles. With President Wilson’s corporate income tax inspections as public records announcement of July 28, 1914, wheat dropped and many stock markets closed. A sharp panic and depression attended federal enforcement of Volstead prohibition beginning the night of January 16th, as coercion and banking problems spread across These States.

Death, prohibition and income taxes

Income tax and prohibition amendments lead to Crash

Canada had experienced a similar narcotic shock, and many provinces had adopted prohibition laws after the pattern of U.S. States during wartime conditions. A black market busily reallocated supply and demand, and with the return to peacetime normalcy much churchly legislation hastily enacted in the heat of war revealed itself a financial burden.

Within a few years most provinces repealed Prohibition: Quebec, British Columbia and the Yukon in 1921, Manitoba in 1923, Alberta in 1924, Saskatchewan in 1925, New Brunswick and Ontario in 1927 and 1929, and Nova Scotia in 1930. Iceland modified its dry law to admit Spanish wine, and even Russia legalized beer and vodka as violent anarchy alternated with deliberate mass murder.

A similar trend occurred in the USA, beginning with repeal of New York’s Mullen-Gage Act, to which womanizing druggie President Harding retorted that a “small and a greatly mistaken minority” imagined prohibition would be repealed. Yet Turkish authorities were busily repealing curbs on narcotics in April 1923. The 1924 Democratic platform expressed shock and dismay at the way narcotics had replaced beer.

Get the complete story in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in two languages. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy.

ProhicrashAmazon

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

I also produce books and articles in Portuguese, using Brazilian historical sources at http://www.expatriotas.blogspot.com or amigra.us

1922 Dry Law Enforcement

SAYS BEER AND WINE IS SHUNNED–blared the headlines under the banner of the Gettysburg Times on a hot summer day in 1922. Backing the blaring was Wayne B Wheeler, the Harry Anslinger of the 1920s whose Anti Saloon League drummed up votes against any politician who sided with Satan against the Godly initiation of force rallied to crush the narcotic evils of the Demon Rum, Warlock Wine and Beelzebub Beer.

Initiation of Force for God and Jesus!

Read the original article (link)

By mid-1922, the U.S. economy was a shambles not to be seen again until after the Jones Five and Ten Law of March 1929 again put the fear of the Lord into the myrmidons of Mammon. Federal wartime and Constitutional Prohibition had wrecked the economy despite the influx of money as war loans arrearage was dragged out of Europe. America’s reaction was to ignore the dry laws, buy off the fanatics with bribes, and churn out beer and bootleg gin from corn sugar glucose and Fleischmann’s yeast from Portland to Portland. It was a standoff between politicians & lobbyists versus red-blooded Americans, with freedom or coercion in the balance.

I'll beat you to death!

Spirit of Dry Enforcement, same paper (link)

Politicians of the Methodist White Terror, drawn from Republican, Prohibition and Democratic parties were convinced that lax enforcement was weakening the economy, and that with enough guns, padlocks, prison time, lynchings, murder and confiscations, the economy would be up and running again in no time. Two theories of prosperity competed toe-to-toe. Religious fanatics shouted from the rooftops that coercion by deadly force was the key to a healthy economy. James A Reed, the wet senior Senator from the Anheuser-Busch State of Missouri, argued for freedom of trade and production and repeal of cruel dry legislation grounded in superstitious myths.

This was the very same wet Senator who, three years later, would send young Robert Anson Heinlein to the Annapolis Naval Academy. (link) Heinlein’s TANSTAAFL is the banner for the 2020 Libertarian Party Convention in Austin, Texas. (link)

The same page recounts some symptoms of that relatively brief economic collapse. A photo of a morgue containing the bodies of 18 of 22 mostly immigrant workers executed by union goons at a Herrin, Illinois coal mine, showed things were not as rosy as the Anti-Saloon League lobbyist preached. Wheeler assured the Sunday School meeting that: “Over $2,500,000,000 wasted for drink has been turned into useful channels. Bank deposits and savings have increased, and the net increased wealth of the country last year was $8 billion.” In fact, bank suspensions way more than doubled in the liquidity crisis from 1920 to 1921, and stood at twice the 1920 figure in 1922. Asset forfeiture was a blunt instrument for enforcing prohibition even back then. So the search was on for something else to blame for Prohibition’s economic damage. Exploiting the Herrin massacre, labor unrest was blamed and a business “revival” invented–same newspaper. (link)

Bull as scapegoat for economic depression, 1922

1922 blame the unions, 1930, the tariff! Bottle? What bottle?

Below this cartoon, the US Shipping Board was forbidden to serve wine even off the coast of France. This because August Busch of Missouri had denounced the government’s floating bars as hypocrisy after Anheuser Busch beer was banned. But what about Congressman Kelly–the Pennsylvania Dry Hope Wheeler bragged about?

Fast forward to June 23, 1930: PENNSYLVANIAN IS SOUGHT FOR TARIFF BOARD… Congressman Kelly was shoved forward to represent his state on the federal Tariff Board even as those opposed to the increase in the tariff on sugar were blamed for the Crash and Depression! (link)

DON'T BLAME ASSET FORFEITURE PROHIBITION!

Dry Congressman Kelly urged for Tariff board, wets blamed for Crash!

By then only repeal could end the Depression, and 4 months earlier a new political party was being formed. The news story ran:

WET THIRD PARTY IDEA FROWNED ON IN CONGRESS‑‑Even Liberals Call it Impracticable‑‑by Arthur Crawford‑‑Washington DC, Feb 5‑‑Supposed formation of a new “liberal” party attracted widespread attention today as a possible development in the controversy over prohibition, but leaders in both Republican and Democratic parties were inclined to ridicule the suggestion. The proposal was made by Samuel Hardin Church of Pittsburgh, president of the Carnegie institute, at last night’s dinner in New York of the eastern directors of the AAPA (Association Against the Prohibition Amendment) (CT 2/6/30 8) More to come on how this party saved America from the Great Depression just as nullification saved us from the earlier prohibition Crash and depression…

Get the complete story in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in either if two languages for the price of a craft pint. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy.

ProhicrashAmazon

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

I also produce books and articles in Portuguese, using Brazilian historical sources at http://www.expatriotas.blogspot.com or amigra.us

 

Economic Recovery, 1923

Nullification saved the economy!

Dry law ignored 1921-22 the way hemp laws repealed after 2008 Crash

Stock markets began falling in 1916, despite War profits, because investors feared the approach of national Prohibition. Prohibitionist States had never been beacons of economic success–rather the contrary. The Crash arrived with the Volstead act the night of January 16th, 1920, and sure enough, the depression arrived. Yet two years later a fairly swift recovery had set in, (link) mainly on account of popular nullification. (link)

Slammer, no second amendment, no suffrage!

Prison terms replace light Bargain Day fines. (link)

This changed radically after the fanatically dry Ku-Klux Klan abandoned the Democratic party after “Whiskey Al” smith ran for president in 1928. Back then inauguration day was March 4th, and by March 2, the lame-duck Congress had gotten president Coolidge to sign the Jones Five & Ten law making beer a federal felony good for 5 years in the slammer and over half a million dollars in fines at current gold prices. With typical American humor Illinois papers that gloomily predicted a Dry Autocracy were soon advertising (non-Irish) Autocrat coffee. (link)

Bandana banana república da Amérika

Just like a Latin American dictatorship

Federal Prosecutor Willebrandt had meanwhile weakened 4th and 5th Amendment protection to make way for the first coercive amendments to the Constitution–the 16th importing the communist platform graduated income tax and the 18th, jointly yielding to the mystical fanaticism that loosed the Comstock Laws, Panic of 1893 and Panic of 1907 as apocalyptic plagues upon the former Land of the Free. Her tell-all exposé published as a syndicated column titled “The Inside of Prohibition.” (link)

Luckily for America, we still had unsubsidized elections and the Liberal Party’s 1931 repeal plank was published in time for the Democrats to copy it into their 1932 platform. (link) After Republican asset forfeiture enforcement brought on a Great Depression and Hoover’s Moratorium on Brains helped Hitler gain power in Germany, that wet plank walloped God’s Own Prohibitionists right out of the ballpark for the next five elections. (link)

Get the complete story in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in two languages. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy.

ProhicrashAmazon

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

I also produce books and articles in Portuguese, using Brazilian historical sources at http://www.expatriotas.blogspot.com or amigra.us