Kathryn Vitek 

The Noble Experiment–Prohibition: A Case Study of Human Nature and Motivation

             Edward Bellamy’s hero in Looking Backward is constantly stating a belief that in order for a capitalist society to evolve into a Utopian Society, there must be some basic change in human nature. With each mention of this assumption, he is reassured by Dr. Leete that there is no need for a change in human nature because, “Conditions of human life have changed, and with them the motives of human action” (Bellamy 40).  Through his character Dr. Leete, Bellamy espouses a belief that what is commonly thought of as “human nature” is truly nothing more than a reaction to the current competitive environment of humanity and that if the competitive world in which humans live were to become non-competitive, motivations of greed and self-preservation would perish. Whether or not this could possibly be true seems unanswerable in light of the fact that to date, the world has not seen a successful utopian society. Still, I find it so engaging that it will be my first research question: Can humanity reach the goal of a Utopian society without undergoing a change in human nature? In considering how to investigate human nature in the absence of a competitive society, I realized that Utopian literature tends to focus on existing utopias, illustrating the ways in which a utopian community proceeds at a given point in time without explaining how that point was reached. It seems to be suggested that a millennial event is required for such a prodigious change to take effect. However, one may argue that the human race would prefer to reach the goal of harmonious living without having to first endure a horrific calamity. But how would this be achieved? Might it be possible to form a Utopian Society one step at a time? This is the second question I will attempt to answer. Because these questions can only be explored on a theoretical level, I decided the best way to explore them would be to choose a real “case study” that exhibits similar factors of human reactions to exterior stimuli: prohibition.

            I began by researching the Women’s Christian Temperance Union and their motives for wanting alcohol to be banned. Through the organization’s website cited below, I learned that the WCTU was founded in 1873 for the purpose of limiting the use and abuse of alcohol. Members had an underlying religious belief that all things should be enjoyed only in moderation and that God intends humans to practice self-control. Because they thought alcohol abuse was leading to a lack of self-control, they naturally believed that it was a form of evil that must be done away with in order for morality to prevail. Ironically, the banning of alcohol also prevented people from practicing self-control in the form of self-moderation. Said Percy Andreae, an anti-prohibition leader and spokesman, “Prohibition, or that which it implies, is the direct negation of the term self-control. In order to save the small percentage of men who are too weak to resist their animal desires, it aims to put chains on every man, the weak and the strong alike.” (Quote taken from Ohio State University website.) This contradiction supports Bellamy’s idea that in order for human motivations to change, the stimulants of those motivations must be absent.  Rather than attempting to manipulate human nature, the WCTU thought that they could remove the underlying cause of evil and that the evil would simply disappear. Their very name for prohibition – the “Noble Experiment” exhibits a Utopian language that suggests their belief in the possibility of a peaceful society. Utopian literature partly supports their idea: there are no alehouses or taverns in Sir Thomas More’s Utopia, “nor any other means of corrupting each other” (More 42). The prohibitionists’ idea seems a logical one–if only alcohol were the only evil involved in the phenomenon of human excess and greed.  Frances Willard was a woman who understood that predicament.  She became president of the WCTU in 1879 and held the position for nineteen years, adding to their agenda moral reforms in general as well as reforms for women’s rights, most notably suffrage. The Institute for Liberal Values, in an article examining the beliefs of religious crusaders, quotes Willard as saying, "I charge upon the drink traffic that it keeps the people down, and capitalists and politicians know it. Nothing else could hold wage-workers where they are today except the blight that strong drink puts on all their faculties and powers” (Peron). Willard seems to have realized that alcohol was only one of many problems that was prohibiting the evolution of society. She also seems to have been accusing members of the government of voluntarily upholding the status quo–a common theme of capitalist societies.

While my previous research has shown that some prohibitionists believed that men could not voluntarily evolve, further exploration showed that anti-prohibitionists believed that prohibition actually reversed positive evolution by degrading men. In 1857 an article in the New York Times stated, “How many false oaths have been taken; How many good men have retreated to horse stalls (corner closets) to take a drink; How many households have provided themselves of generous private supplies–households which in older times never thought to keep liquor except in very small quantities for occasional use as medicine…”

This calls to mind Sir Thomas More’s reflections on thieves in Utopia. More explained that a society cannot justly punish criminals if the laws of that society are  responsible for creating an environment that inherently forces those men into criminal activity for their own livelihood. Further supporting this claim is Percy Andreae’s statement, “for every decent, well-ordered saloon they destroy, there springs up a dive, or speak-easy, or blind tiger, or whatever other name it may be known by…” It is hard to argue that prohibition was a contributing factor to the increase in crime in the 1920s, particularly when considering the infamous case of Al Capone.  Some writers even speculated that it led to corruption of law officers as well as government officials who compromised moral values for the sake of money by repealing the 18^th amendment for the sake of collecting a liquor tax, which boosted revenues for a suffering economy trying to revive itself after the Great Depression. In these many ways, it is argued that prohibition caused more trouble than it prevented.

I began this research with two questions in mind: 1. Can humanity reach the goal of a utopian society without the occurrence of a change in human nature? 2. Can humanity reach the goal of a utopian society without the occurrence of a catastrophic millennial event?  My factual findings show that prohibition’s attempt to remove negative motivations failed, thereby making it impossible to tell whether or not a change in human nature is possible at all, let alone whether that change would allow society to evolve into a utopia. However, I formed an impression while conducting my research that, while not fact based, is implanted in my mind as true. The noteworthy anti-prohibitionists all seemed to be from areas of low socioeconomic status, or “blue-collar towns” such as Chicago, New York, and various areas of Ohio. Being from Ohio myself, my experience shows that Ohioans today drink more frequently and more abundantly than people in other states that I am familiar with. I also believe that if prohibition were to be enacted again, my Ohioan peers would be the first to fight back. I believe these people of low socioeconomic status are more dependent on alcohol because of the plight our capitalist society has put them in.  Francis Willard’s ideas of the government wanting to keep down these people, who stand to benefit most from a change in the social order, also seem to hold true. Conversely, supporters of prohibition seemed to be wealthier members of society, particularly political leaders, who benefit from the nation’s status quo. It seemed that these people were able to adapt to prohibition. These speculations, encouraged by Edward Bellamy’s depictions in Looking Backward, lead me to answer that the changes in “human reactions” (not “human nature”) that Bellamy described are indeed possible. They also lead into my answer to my second question, regarding the necessitation of a millennial event.  The occurrence of a millennial event seems to grant the greatest likelihood of success to a Utopian experiment. By removing only one single cause of “evil”, alcohol, the government inadvertently led men to other types of corruption while simultaneously creating new criminals. Although, if society were to make a step-by-step attempt, it seems logical to me that we may have a chance at success if the first step were taken by people of the highest power, those who currently benefit the most from our current economy.  If those people, who have some of the least true motivations for greed based on self-preservation, can demonstrate the ideals of a utopian society successfully, then I believe others would join in their cause little by little.  The phenomenon is not much different in my mind than that of people moving out of disorderly, dangerous neighborhoods and into safer, better-maintained neighborhoods. I acknowledge that it would be an incredibly difficult and even dangerous undertaking, but I do believe it could be possible.

Works Cited

Boudreaux, Donald J. “Thoughts on Freedom ~ Alcohol, Prohibition, and the Revenuers.” The Freeman: Ideas on Liberty Jan. 2008 58.1. 14 June 2009

<http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/thoughts-on-freedom-alcohol-prohibition-and-the-revenuers/>

Peron, Jim. “The Rise, Fall, and Resurrection of the Religious Right, (Part 1)” Institute for Liberal Values New Zealand. 14 June 2009.

<http://www.liberalvalues.org.nz/index.php?action=view_article&article_id=247>

 Prohibition and Deception: Results in Maine – How the Law for the One has Increased the Other. (1882, September 10). New York Times (1857-Current file),p. 3.  Retrieved June 14, 2009, from ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2005) database. (Document ID: 102786465).

Temperance and Prohibition. Ohio State University College of Humanities and Department of History. 2009. 14 June 2009. <http://prohibition.osu.edu/>