![]() |
Photo taken from wineaccess.ca By: Chris Valletta |
Cameron Hughes of Cameron Hughes Wines believes that "The bill that is proposed takes away consumer choice. It's an anti-choice amendment." This is an intriguing comment, for now the aspect of pleasure begins to shape in the political argument. Now Hughes points out freedom of choice regarding a substance that enhances one's pleasure. Alcohol has long been a desirable substance for its euphoric feeling after consumption, but at the same time it has been deadly for millions of Americans due to its abuse. Alcohol has been the chosen topic of discussion because of its pleasurable effects and no other reason. Because of its pleasurable effects, people desire it and crave it, which results in money for its producers.
The overarching theme, as in almost any case, is money. The bill would result in a tax for the consumers of the product and also give the government more control. This sounds unreasonable, but since the substance is alcohol, people's desire for it will overcome any additional money. For as we have seen in history, people will find a way to satisfy their desires. Another interesting thing to note with this bill is an example of government and society seeking to repress desires for something pleasurable. This bill only increases a negative stereotype for alcohol since it puts a restriction on it in almost a way to deter people from buying it. However, this is not a surprise since anything to do with pleasure is always going to have a negative stereotype tagged onto it's back.
No comments:
Post a Comment