General Discussion

gateley

(62,683 posts) Fri Apr 20, 2012, 11:16 PM Apr 2012

Has anybody else ever heard that J. Paul Getty was behind prohibition?

I read/heard something about cars being able to run on alcohol at the time, and since that kept people from buying his oil, he financed temperance groups to get alcohol outlawed. I can't find any info on that, and I have no idea where I got this tidbit, so does any one have any insight/info? I was thinking if true, it may have been inspiration for the Brothers Koch.

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Has anybody else ever heard that J. Paul Getty was behind prohibition? (Original Post) gateley Apr 2012 OP

I hadn't heard that one, but WR Hearst is said to be one of the powers Jackpine Radical Apr 2012 #1

Ha! Reefer Madness looks like a Hearst production. gateley Apr 2012 #2

I don't think Prohibition prevented alcohol from being used as fuel fishwax Apr 2012 #3

If that's correct, my outrage at Big Oil in this instance kind of deflates. :-) nt gateley Apr 2012 #4

plenty of other instances for outrage, at least fishwax Apr 2012 #8

Auto engines in that period could barely manage 6:1 compression ratios. It takes over 12:1 Monk06 Apr 2012 #5

One thing I learned from watching Ken Burn's "Prohibition"on PBS, Congress was having Uncle Joe Apr 2012 #6

Hadnt heard that. HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #7

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)

1. I hadn't heard that one, but WR Hearst is said to be one of the powers

Reply to gateley (Original post)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 11:19 PM

Apr 2012

behind outlawing pot because he owned huge forest properties & didn't want competition from hemp as a base for paper.

None of this shit would surprise me. Psychopathic businessmen are nothing new.

gateley

(62,683 posts)

2. Ha! Reefer Madness looks like a Hearst production.

Reply to Jackpine Radical (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 11:23 PM

Apr 2012

I hadn't heard that about him, though. None of it would surprise me, either. It's always the money, isn't it? Greed.

fishwax

(29,149 posts)

3. I don't think Prohibition prevented alcohol from being used as fuel

Reply to gateley (Original post)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 11:26 PM

Apr 2012

Only for consumption as an intoxicant.

gateley

(62,683 posts)

4. If that's correct, my outrage at Big Oil in this instance kind of deflates. :-) nt

Reply to fishwax (Reply #3)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 11:31 PM

Apr 2012

fishwax

(29,149 posts)

8. plenty of other instances for outrage, at least

Reply to gateley (Reply #4)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 11:56 PM

Apr 2012

Monk06

(7,675 posts)

5. Auto engines in that period could barely manage 6:1 compression ratios. It takes over 12:1

Reply to gateley (Original post)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 11:37 PM

Apr 2012

to burn pure alcohol IIRC. That sounds like a fable.

Uncle Joe

(58,364 posts)

6. One thing I learned from watching Ken Burn's "Prohibition"on PBS, Congress was having

Reply to gateley (Original post)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 11:37 PM

Apr 2012

booze delivered to themselves at the Capital Building while Prohibition was in effect for everyone else, they had their own private bootlegger.

Thanks for the thread, gateley.

HooptieWagon

(17,064 posts)

7. Hadnt heard that.

Reply to gateley (Original post)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 11:50 PM

Apr 2012

I always thought it was the WCTU and bible thumping preachers that drove the temperance movement. In their defense, per capita alcohol consumption was huge prior to prohibition. This was mostly men, since women werent permitted in bars. Since men were the breadwinners back then, I can understand women being pissed their husbands were drunk much of the time.

Reply to this discussion