As a veteran of the Barrow Booze Wars my heart goes out to the good people of the Bethel region as they wrestle with a problem that seems all too intractable. Booze in Bush Alaska has created more death and destruction of families, villages and cultures than anything since the flu epidemics of the early part of the last century.
So the question must be asked as to why booze continues to be such a demon in this state in general, but in the Bush in particular.
The statistics that are quoted with monotonous regularity seem to show that Bush Alaska would be a quiet and peaceful place without booze. Some statistics go so far as to suggest that 9 out of 10 random criminal acts in the Bush are fueled by alcohol. The state and federal government have poured hundred of millions of dollars into funding programs to treat the disease and try to come up with alternatives that will keep young people from taking that first step towards disaster. But continuing horrific statistics seem to point to failure on all fronts in this war.
Now before people start hitting the send button on their e-mails let me hasten to add that I am well aware that there are some programs that seem to show some success in treating alcohol problems. I am also very aware that for many people in this state, sobriety means giving up booze but smoking pot daily. One could quibble about whether they are technically sober or not. Definitions of sobriety can be slippery in reality if not academically.
Most people would prefer to live in a community with a good quality of life for them and their families. So it seems counterintuitive for people to vote to make a substance legal that causes their community’s quality of life to go straight down the porcelain commode. But when the problems created by alcohol seem to continue whether the status is wet, dry or damp, then it stands to reason that at some point people are going to figure, “What the hell? I might as well be able to have a glass of wine with dinner at my favorite restaurant. It’s not like keeping the town dry keeps booze out of the hands of people who want it.”
Going back to those statistics, the reports from the Bethel region seem to indicate that Bethel is not particularly feeling the impact of its new status as much as the surrounding villages are. After an initial spike, police in Bethel say statistics have flattened out. Surrounding villages say they are feeling the most impact, though much of the information seems to be anecdotal. However, as anyone who has lived in a small village is very well aware, you know with some immediacy what is happening in any home in your village. So credibility must be given to anecdotes.
There could be an argument made that if you let the villages have liquor in the same way that Bethel does, eventually the thrill will wear off and the only people who will continue to abuse liquor are the hardcore drunks who would anyway. But living in a small village in which liquor is freely available is going to be pretty miserable until people get used to its constant availability and sort out into chronic drunks, bingers, occasional weekenders and those who could care less.
I tend to be believe that setting limits on availability does some good initially but in the long run is useless unless you are making some progress towards a true understanding of the issue and can offer some realistic ways to combat the problem. Given that both Russia and England have admitted to significant social problems caused by alcohol abuse, it would seem that constant availability doesn’t really decrease the desire for more. Alcohol abuse is a worldwide problem that is just felt more intensely when it occurs in small, isolated surroundings. Our villages are microcosms of a much larger problem.
The one thing we know for sure about alcohol abuse is that complete prohibition doesn’t work. Beyond that, we can only say that it is a problem for every society in which alcohol exists. And no one has yet found the magic bullet to address it successfully.