When something in society is widely practiced or tolerated — like everyone drinking alcohol before Prohibition, or 14 million migrants living and moving within the country — it becomes a “normal” part of U.S. life. If the government suddenly makes that behavior illegal or criminalizes it, it can clash with public expectations and social habits. During Prohibition (1920–1933), the federal government banned the production, sale, and transport of alcohol, attempting a heavy-handed crackdown on behavior that had previously been socially accepted. Because drinking had long been tolerated, many Americans ignored the law, defied enforcement, and relied on bootleggers and speakeasies, creating widespread conflict with authorities. Over time, the government’s inability to enforce the ban effectively, combined with public resistance and the rise of organized crime, led to the eventual repeal of Prohibition, returning alcohol to legal status. Similarly, because people have long treated migrant movement as acceptable and they have been allowed to integrate into the US employment pool, many do not fully accept government enforcement actions today. As a result, citizens often break the law, resist enforcement, obstruct authorities, or protest in response, creating friction between ordinary social practices and the state’s attempt to assert control. The issue is compounded by a divided Political establishment and divided country.
interesting comparison, genuinely, but i dont think the comparison is valid. because alcohol consumption is a staple of human life going back thousands of years, as is xenophobia. we're literally hard wired to fear the other. and while alcohol consumption is not genetic, it is so habitual and normalized that trying to outlaw it was never going to work.
by contrast its not that we're outlawing a human characteristic when it comes to immigration, in fact we attempted under biden (and to be honest since WW2) to actually legalize something that goes against human nature. yes america is a melting pot, but it's not really. for hundreds of years we thrived as a somewhat ethnically diverse nation of enclaves, there was no melting pot. we drew upon different cultures to enrich america as compartmentalized groups who lived and worked within their general area. the idea that you can simply place all of these people in a blender, hit pulse, and the end result will be better is absurd. and the political backlash to conservatives trying to turn back the clock is actually interesting for the opposite reason of alcohol prohibition. that being that people latch onto these ideals of multiculturalism even though the ideas themselves are fairly new.
its really an act of almost Orwellian historical revision. they somehow convince 30-70 year old people that the nation they grew up in was filled with intermixed racial demographic neighborhoods, and that assembly lines ran at top efficiency with a miltiracial cast of characters working side by side like a netflix series. so the ideas are new, but somehow the roots have grown deep. and somehow america first and conservative voters are the ones who are accused of pandering to people a version of america in the past that didnt exist. "when was america great", they say. "when was america an actual melting pot with general peace" i ask. no answer. never an answer. because there is none.
This post was edited by thesnipa on Jan 16 2026 12:11pm