I know many of you have forgotten the arcane facts of early American history. So have I, actually.
But one event has always stood out to me as an interesting first step in resisting the encroachments of the feds. Kind of an early Tea Party movement, but with more guns. Remember reading about the Whiskey Rebellion?
From various sources, “The Whiskey Rebellion was a violent tax protest in the United States beginning in 1791 and ending in 1794 during the presidency of George Washington. The so-called ‘whiskey tax’ was the first tax imposed on a domestic product by the newly formed federal government…Farmers of the western frontier were accustomed to distilling their surplus rye, barley, wheat, corn, or fermented grain mixtures to make whiskey. These farmers resisted the tax. In these regions, whiskey often served as a medium of exchange. Many of the resisters were war veterans who believed that they were fighting for the principles of the American Revolution.”
MORE NEWS: The Political Lessons Of Monty Python
Basically, the feds imposed the tax to try and pay off Revolutionary War-era debt. The farmers said, not on our backs you don’t.
Well, in these break midwinter days whiskey may be on the mind of some of you. Okay, maybe it’s just me. And I’m not calling for an armed rebellion over booze taxes or anything else. But on a related note, states need to get out of the bartender business.
What I’m talking about is the noxious practice of several states, PA and VA come to mind, to regulate the sale of alcohol by herding customers into state liquor stores and also the entrapment methods some states use to sting liquor store owners into breaking a minor law.
I must have missed the part of the Constitution that gives states the right to control what you drink. Perhaps it’s shoved into the 14th Amendment, like Roe was, in a very very big “penumbra.” Maybe the first office of the ATF whispered to the states, “Hey, get this…”
Whatever it was, state government should not have the power to control the liquor trade. It’s absurd on the face it of it. Do you think your average state worker drone knows the difference between Fireball and Blanton’s? Unlikely.
When you talk about government overreach, this is a perfect example. Even in states that don’t have state-run store systems the state still wants to stick it to the liquor trade by sending people with fake IDs into liquor stores, hoping the store doesn’t card, or misses the fake info. Then they conveniently fine the store and pocket the entrapment profits. As if state government had nothing better to do.
As Americans we legitimately complain about government intrusion into many aspects of our lives. To make a start of a rollback process at the state level we can abolish the ridiculous buttinski state liquor stores and associated practices. In a sense lads and lasses, time for another Whiskey Rebellion.
Join the Discussion
COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.