Ideology+-Raina

Raina Martens Temperance Ideology

The American temperance union was a top down reform effort. Their goal was to get rid of all alcoholics. They did this with a “better than thou” perspective. Many of the people in the American temperance union were involved in politics. They were attempting to solve the problem from a position of power. This is in contrast with the Washington temperance society. The society was formed of former alcoholics. These men were working class and had no political power. It began as grassroots organization formed directly out of their collective desire for a better life. They realized that drinking was costing them a lot of money and they could have just as much fun without it. The American temperance union, according to the author of __Symbolic Crusade__, practiced coercive reform. This means that the reformer did not perceive the subjects of his reform with sympathy or warmth [1]. The Washington temperance society, however, according to Gusfield, used assimilative reform, characterized by sympathy toward those needing help. Assimilative reformers believe that that people they are helping will be able to rejoin society and contribute to a better world. Contrastingly, coercive reformers believe that the actual people that they’re trying to help cannot be helped. His explains why the American temperance union decided to go about reform through lawmaking instead of giving direct help and support to those in need as Washington temperance society did. One of the fundamental differences between the two temperance groups was the way in which the framed the problem of drinking. The ATU viewed alcoholics as the central problem of society. They thought that the alcoholics were addicted to drinking because of their moral failings. Most of the people in the of American temperance union were proto aristocratic elites. These elites wanted nothing to do with the so called “rough-respectable” drunkards. They thought that all the problems of society stemmed from the unrestrained nature of the alcoholics. The Washington temperance society however, viewed alcohol and grog sellers as the source of the problem. They were frustrated because the grog sellers and making money off of something that did not have good results, which to them violated the idea of republicanism that says that the good of the community is greater than the good of the individual. The American temperance union and Washington temperance society were very different and because of this, did not view each other in a good light. One of the reasons for this can be explained by the wheel of respectability. It says there is an axis of antipathy between the rough respectable and the proto aristocratic. William Henry Blair, a New Hampshire senator, and proto aristocrat, wrote a book on the temperance movement. In the section where he discusses the Washington temperance society he questions its validity because of the fact that it was started by drunkards. “On the whole it may be doubted whether the Washingtonian excitement was a blessing or a curse…” [2]. He also complains about the unwillingness of the members of the Washington temperance society to deal with the politics of the issue.

Blair, Henry William. //The Temperance Movement//. Boston: William E. Smythe Company, 1888. //Google Books//. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. .

Gusfield, Joseph R. //Symbolic Crusade//. Urbana: Univerity of Iillinois Press, 1963. Print.

[1] Joseph R. Gusfield, __Symbolic Crusade__ 87. [2] Henry William Blair, __The Temperance Movement__ 435.