Indonesia will be “alcohol free” soon ?

[DanInAceh]

I drink alcohol and i am proud to say i have never beaten anyone or been violent because of the fact, i have never raped a woman or hurt anyone or caused any damage whilst drunk driving, and my liver is fine thanks. All these cliches associated with drinking alcohol totally discard the hundreds of millions of people that drink responsibly on a regular basis. To use the violent rapist and drunk driver as an argument against alcohol just doesnt stand up any more than any other stereotype image.

3 million + deaths are now "cliches."

Got it.

[dafluff]

Observe the fatalist attitudes present: why bother banning anything when we can just get it illicitly? Indonesia will always be corrupt and inefficient.

And so it will if people believe such a narrative. It does not have to be that way and we don't HAVE to tolerate millions of alcohol related deaths just because it's 'socially acceptable.'

It is not fatalist. It is realist. I'm not saying we HAVE to tolerate millions of alcohol related deaths, I'm saying that banning alcohol will not change that fact. Especially not in Indonesia. What it will do is deny access to medical treatment for addiction, stigmatize addicts, increase criminal element involvement, increase death from tainted alcohol poisoning, etc. It will also disproportionately hurt the poor.

Also, prohibition doesn't really work:
Alcohol consumption is on the rise throughout the muslim world.

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_-_Alcohol_and_Drugs

Now lets look at the death rate due vehicle accidents (don't really care about cirrhosis, people should be allowed to drink to death if they want to):

http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/publications/global_alcohol_report/profiles/en/

Vehicular deaths by country:
Country, Deaths per 100,000 (male/female), percentage attributed to alcohol (male/female)
Germany 7.8/2.3, 12.4%/4.9%
Canada 11.0/4.1, 13.8%/4.8%
Saudi Arabia 50.9/10.2, 0%, 0%
Yemen 59.2/17.4, 0.1%, 0%
Indonesia 34.4/13.6, 3.6% 0.2%

So lets see: Arabs and Yemeni die about 5 to 7.5 times more on the road than Germans or Canadians. If I had to take a guess, probably because they can't have a relaxing drink, so they are more prone to road rage. (Ok, this is a joke....I do not condone drunk driving).

Indonesians die on the road at a rate of almost half of Yemenis, and only about 2.6% (averaging both male and female) of accidents of involve alcohol. This translates to about 3050 deaths a year. Obviously not great, but not in the top 100 causes of death in Indonesia, I imagine.

If one's main agenda is to reduce innocent deaths on the road, I think you should ban Arabs from driving before you'd ban alcohol.

[ScooterIndo]

3 million + deaths are now "cliches." Got it.

So whats that Dan 3 million deaths a year compared to how many units of alcohol consumed per year or compared to the billions of people that had a drink in a one year period and suffered absolutely no ill consequences ?? 3 million people a year is nothing. Look how many people die in road accidents per year compared to how many take a drive in a car and dont - shall we ban cars as well ???

[BAJakarta]

Just how much? We can quantify that, and it's a pittance compared to alcohol's role in abuse of women. Sorry, but the further I discuss the more desperate all of you become.

"but religion!" what a silly, silly false equivalence.

Aside from that, how does this tu quoque argument negate the fact that alcohol is central to the abuse of women? I mean, seriously? The best you guys can come up with is a distraction from alcohol's clear issues?

Ahhh, but Dan can you really quantify that objectively and is it really a pittance??? Excluding rape from the discussion, don't forget you are defining "abuse of women" by your own religious standard. Some might disagree with your definition. Just sayin......

[johntap]

So whats that Dan 3 million deaths a year compared to how many units of alcohol consumed per year or compared to the billions of people that had a drink in a one year period and suffered absolutely no ill consequences ?? 3 million people a year is nothing. Look how many people die in road accidents per year compared to how many take a drive in a car and dont - shall we ban cars as well ???

No. Ban speeding and drink driving.

[Mr Fizzywig]

Because. Math.

How many people are killed by "religion" each year? Not too many. How many people are killed by alcohol? Millions. I mean... what? These two aren't even comparable. Religious charities and educational institutions are a solid benefit. Alcohol's benefits are still _______ with you people.

Let's rephrase that to "How many people are killed because of their religious beliefs or the beliefs of others?"

Quite a few actually.


Here is a very simple fact. Alcohol has been with us for millennia, and will be with us for many millennia more.

If Indonesia goes "dry"then I would imagine many will do as they do in Saudia Arabia (for example), and nip over to Thailand for a good bevvy before returning to their home country pristine and pious.

However, if we are going to ban alcohol for its negative effects on society, let's also ban the following while we are at it:

Television - often leads us to re-enact the violence we see
The Internet - avaiability of free information and pornography
Handphones - very distracting and often used for lewd and libidinous purposes
Supermarkets - perhaps the main cause of gluttony avarice and debt
Cars - without cars we would stop the wholesale slaughter on our roads, reduce pollution, exercise more and spend more time with our famillies
Electricity - a huge number of people die every year from electrocution and being up late at night often causes a drop in work productivity
Sex (within marriage of course) - with advances in fertilisation techniques this messy and disease spreading activity should be banned as it often is the main cause of poor working habits and late starts to work


I am sorry for the sarcasm Dan, well a little bit at least. We live in a world with many temptations and vices. We can have a glass of wine, or sit down and finish an entire bottle of Wild Turkey. We can use the Internet to look at donkey sex, or buy tickets to a museum etc etc. People beat their wives because it is in them to do it, alcohol doesn't put that desire in them, it simply reduces their impulse control. Anger management classes would in this case be more appropriate than an alcohol ban.

Banning alcohol won't stop people drinking it, but it will lead to a massive surge in illegal and unsafe alcohol being sold, putting money into the hands of gangsters and other nasties, and people caught drinking it, even in moderation, will face unnecessary and costly criminal proceedings which will place a burden on an already over taxed and time consuming legal infrastructure.

Teaching young people about the risks of alcohol in a non-hysterical way, is a far more productive use of government resources. We have far greater and more pressing issues to deal with in Indonesia first. I would suggest we focus in on them before tackling what is a fairly unsolvable problem.

[DanInAceh]

So whats that Dan 3 million deaths a year compared to how many units of alcohol consumed per year or compared to the billions of people that had a drink in a one year period and suffered absolutely no ill consequences ?? 3 million people a year is nothing. Look how many people die in road accidents per year compared to how many take a drive in a car and dont - shall we ban cars as well ???

A clumsy comparison considering how many of those accidents involved alcohol.

Vehicles provide a solid benefit. We can quantify the benefit of mobility for populations, industry surrounding such transportation is a cornerstone of our modern economy.

Alcohol is not. Alcohol's main benefit is that people like it. Is that enough to justify the associated deaths and other ills? Not really. When we compare alcohol accurately, to other substances, instead of ideologies or transportation... we find that alcohol is an absolutely terrible burden on humanity.

[DanInAceh]

Let's rephrase that to "How many people are killed because of their religious beliefs or the beliefs of others?"

Quite a few actually.

How many? Is it anywhere close to 3 million + per year? Is it? lol, no. Goofy argument is goofy. Until you can produce a yearly religiously informed genocide you'll have to sit tight knowing that alcohol is more dangerous than the supposedly dangerous pathology of "religion."

Here is a very simple fact. Alcohol has been with us for millennia, and will be with us for many millennia more.

To quote Tanto, "What do you mean "we," white man?" There are some indigenous cultures in Indonesia with alcohol. It is certainly not unknown to them. It was largely unknown in the Americas, so "us" as all of humanity is like saying tobacco smoke has been with "us" for ages and where is smoking going in developed economies? Smoking, if you hadn't been paying attention, is working its way into a full on ban in the United States. Why? Because smoking is rightly seen as extremely harmful. People have long said that smoking is "too good to give up," and yet we continue to see it decline. We have educated people about its harm. Alcohol is no different.

If Indonesia goes "dry"then I would imagine many will do as they do in Saudia Arabia (for example), and nip over to Thailand for a good bevvy before returning to their home country pristine and pious.

I was waiting for the horseshit about widespread Muslim hypocrisy and moonshine operations in Saudi Arabia. We discussed this last time, it appears to be the domain of hearsay and personal anecdotes rather than something factual. I'm certain there are some hypocrites. Is to the degree that you are suggesting with "they" (implying ALL of them)? Hell no.

However, if we are going to ban alcohol for its negative effects on society, let's also ban the following while we are at it:

Television - often leads us to re-enact the violence we see
The Internet - avaiability of free information and pornography
Handphones - very distracting and often used for lewd and libidinous purposes
Supermarkets - perhaps the main cause of gluttony avarice and debt
Cars - without cars we would stop the wholesale slaughter on our roads, reduce pollution, exercise more and spend more time with our famillies
Electricity - a huge number of people die every year from electrocution and being up late at night often causes a drop in work productivity
Sex (within marriage of course) - with advances in fertilisation techniques this messy and disease spreading activity should be banned as it often is the main cause of poor working habits and late starts to work

All of the above have legitimate purposes, advancement of our species, and vast economic activity associated with them. These are necessary technological advances and a necessary biological function.

Alcohol is nothing like the above. The benefits of alcohol, which are modest, are far outweighed by the laundry list of ills. To run our society as it exists today we need all of the above, with the possible exception of headphones as a totally absurd, desperate and hilarious addition to this list. Do we need alcohol (for recreational consumption) to operate our society... like at all? Of course not. We see NEGATIVE economic activity with alcohol. Look, we could do a cost analysis of all of the above and I guarantee you that we see MORE economic benefit from all of the above than not. Alcohol? Hell no, look at how many people it kills. That's a lot of lost productivity, a lot of lost dollars.

You people are so obsessed with this tu quoque that you're unable to actually discuss and admit to the obvious: that alcohol has a body count and the ethics behind it are questionable.

I am sorry for the sarcasm Dan, well a little bit at least. We live in a world with many temptations and vices. We can have a glass of wine, or sit down and finish an entire bottle of Wild Turkey. We can use the Internet to look at donkey sex, or buy tickets to a museum etc etc. People beat their wives because it is in them to do it, alcohol doesn't put that desire in them, it simply reduces their impulse control. Anger management classes would in this case be more appropriate than an alcohol ban.

Alcohol lowers inhibition. To exonerate alcohol for its role in violence is absurd.

Banning alcohol won't stop people drinking it, but it will lead to a massive surge in illegal and unsafe alcohol being sold, putting money into the hands of gangsters and other nasties, and people caught drinking it, even in moderation, will face unnecessary and costly criminal proceedings which will place a burden on an already over taxed and time consuming legal infrastructure.

Teaching young people about the risks of alcohol in a non-hysterical way, is a far more productive use of government resources. We have far greater and more pressing issues to deal with in Indonesia first. I would suggest we focus in on them before tackling what is a fairly unsolvable problem.

Uh, wut? We're speaking of Indonesia, a country with lawful alcohol that is dangerous... and you're worried about harmful moonshine? I'm not speaking about it being dangerous the way I was before, I mean the alcohol itself is tainted and kills people.

There is no responsible way to handle alcohol. It's about as much as there's a responsible way to handle amphetamines, which have legitimate medical uses. Those are a scheduled drug. They're fun to take. You can take them for years with no consequences. And they can also kill you. They're a controlled substance, with good reason.

Alcohol has even fewer accepted medical applications, and yet it's legal. It kills more than other substances.

[rabbit_39]

Typical weak minded view: I can't resist, so please remove the temptation from me. But then again, it's easy to subscribe to a fundamentalist opinion and interpretation of ancient texts when one is weak minded. Give me the rules, let me stick by them, remove everything that doesn't fit from this world and let me go to heaven because I followed all the rules.

[DanInAceh]

Typical weak minded view: I can't resist, so please remove the temptation from me. But then again, it's easy to subscribe to a fundamentalist opinion and interpretation of ancient texts when one is weak minded. Give me the rules, let me stick by them, remove everything that doesn't fit from this world and let me go to heaven because I followed all the rules.

Observe that rabbit is summoning up religion as the reasoning, but that's not at all the issue at hand. I have brought forth facts concerning the damaging potential whereas my foes bring nothing more than nostalgia and "culture" as their excuse for the indefensible and unethical.

[Mr Fizzywig]

Ok Dan let's look at the points you made one by one.

How many people are killed by "religion" each year? Not too many
My response to this was to clarify the statement you made, and to indicate that deaths caused by religious intolerance is indeed greater than not too many.

"What do you mean "we," white man?"
To deny the fact that alcohol consumption is widespread throughout the world, and that many many cultures had found their own way to brew a variety of alcoholic potions befoer the Europeans came along is quite silly, and requires no further comment.


Alcohol is nothing like the above. The benefits of alcohol, which are modest, are far outweighed by the laundry list of ills.
Alcohol has a place in many cultures world wide, indeed in some cultures it is so deeply entrenched that it even appears in religious ceremonies. The fact that alcohol does have, at times, a very negative impact on the lives of some of its consumers cannot be ignored. But it is the misuse of alcohol which is causing these problems, not the fact that alcohol is available. Education on how to drink safely and responsibly will help most young people to develop safe drinking habits, most of the time at least. Preaching abstinence as the only solution to this problem is, in my opinion, naively foolish and shows a basic ignorance of human nature. People drink alcohol for a variety of social reasons, and the moderate use of alcohol can bring pleasure to our lives. The misuse of alcohol can result is us waking up in a gutter in a pool of our own vomit, it is very much how and why we drink that dictates the outcome of our evening.

Alcohol lowers inhibition. To exonerate alcohol for its role in violence is absurd.
I don't believe I was exonerating alcohol, I was however stating there are other factors at work which lead a man to beat his wife. I wouldn't imagine a mentally healthy man would beat his wife whether he was drunk or sober. I do feel that those with mental issues of one form or another might, but the arguement that alcohol is responsible for causing a man to beat his wife is facile. The man beat his wife. Being drunk doesn't exuse you from personal responsibility for your actions under the law, and as such it cannot be argued that alcohol is responsible. The man is.

I come from a country where the misuse of alcohol is wide spread and prevelant, where violence related to drunkeness is common so I perhaps have first hand knowledge on this topic. I cannot blame alcohol for this nor do I exhibit such behaviour myself, either drunk or sober. In fact, I can't actually remember the last time I was drunk, even though I do regularly consume alcohol I do it responsibly.

People are responsible for their actions. Education is required to teach people to drink responsibly, and this is happening in countries which have a mature attitude to the problem. Countries such as Indonesia, where vast quantities of alcohol are consumed yearly (I presume only by the Chinese and Batak populations? ) have no such educational initiatives in place because "people shouldn't drink because alcohol is bad, and if they do drink it means they are bad." This is a stupidily naive attitude and ignores basic human nature and the needs of a government to educate and inform its populous.

You people are so obsessed with this tu quoque that you're unable to actually discuss and admit to the obvious: that alcohol has a body count and the ethics behind it are questionable.
Alcohol has a body count, driving a car has a body count, playing computer games has a body count, drinking water has a body count. Living has a body count.
While some people feel that a life of prayer and inner contemplation is a rewarding and noble way to spend your life, the rest of us just want to live our lives, have friends, socialise and spend time together with our family. The moderate use of alcohol does not affect a persons ability to perform these functions, infact in some cases it enhances them, again the key word is IN MODERATION.

I was waiting for the horseshit about widespread Muslim hypocrisy and moonshine operations in Saudi Arabia
I made no such inference. I did state, based on personal knowledge, that some people do escape out of the country to do things they are not permitted to do in their home country. Corruption, double standards, widespread alcohol use among apparently pious and respectable pillars of society, rampant use of prostitution, poverty, abuse of children in child labour, greed for power... heaven forbid I would use these as examples of widespread Muslim hypocrisy for they are indeed a Human problem and it wouldn't be fair to single out Muslims as the guilty party.

There is no responsible way to handle alcohol.
About 2 billion people across the world consume alcoholic drinks. The fact the planet is not a burning cinder proves the lie to this rather silly statement.

With so many people consuming alcohol across the world, you will see some pretty scary statistics as a result.
Can we ignore the dangers of alcohol misuse? No
Should we educate our people on responisble and safe alcohol use. Yes
Should we provide non judegemtal support for those who develop alcohol related problems. Yes
Should we attempt to mitigate alcohols negative effects on society? Yes
Should we attempt to state that the only way to deal with alcohol is to ban it and risk looking a bit silly as a result? No.

[rabbit_39]

Observe that rabbit is summoning up religion as the reasoning, but that's not at all the issue at hand. I have brought forth facts concerning the damaging potential whereas my foes bring nothing more than nostalgia and "culture" as their excuse for the indefensible and unethical.

It is the issue at hand. Having a weak mind and self control and not wanting to place the responsibilities of one's actions upon oneself is one of the few reasons people become religious fanatics.

So weak mind = can't handle temptation = religious fanatics = wanting to remove said temptations

Your facts are usually ones that refer to back to themselves.

[Interloper]

Party till you puke!

[nyonyahbesar]

Not gonna happen. What people are not allowed to buy, they will make it themselves.
Speaking of which, I just remember having a botol aqua full of cap tikus on the fridge.

[SomeoneHere]

Not gonna happen. What people are not allowed to buy, they will make it themselves.
Speaking of which, I just remember having a botol aqua full of cap tikus on the fridge.

hey hey..."ngana dapat darimana? kyapa nyanda kirim pa kita?"...

or if that not possible... "buka bersama yuk! but please bring the mouse with you..."

i really miss that drink...