Iceland review - 2004, Page 30

28 ICELAND REVIEW
In the beginning, temperance thinkers
called for limitations or prohibition of alco-
hol by reason of potential harm to the self
and the effects drinking had on others, the
innocent bystanders. Eventually, the tem-
perance movement shifted from convincing
consumers to pushing for legislation - to
taking the choice away.
Iceland’s laws are indeed founded in tem-
perance logic, but a total prohibition only
lasted about three years. Around 1922,
when the government of Iceland agreed to
trade codfish for Spanish red wine, the ban
on wine was lifted. Wine is around 12%
alcohol content. Hard liquor is 30-60%.
Beer, banned until 1989, is only 5-7% alco-
hol. Thus, a government hell-bent on mod-
eration picked on little ol’ beer and not the
hard stuff.
The arguments against legalization of beer
turned on the foundations of Icelandic iden-
tity. “It’s the myth of the Viking,” says Dr.
Helgi Gunnlaugsson, professor of Sociology
at the University of Iceland. “The sagas all
tell of Vikings abusing alcohol. Now we
have urban myths – big tales of alcoholic
doctors or alcoholic students in Copenhagen
doing something terrible. So the elite pro-
tect this idea that Viking blood is somehow
different. These myths are rooted in Iceland
policy. Because beer is seen as part of the
working class, not the elite. There’s also this
idea that beer would be in the fridge next
to the soda which would give kids greater
access to it and allowing them to become
more acquainted with it.”
Most people living in Iceland agree that
since the ban on beer was lifted in 1989,
alcohol culture has improved. “Before the
first part of the 20th century, most political
leaders were brought up in the rural areas,
so they had a temperance mentality. They
saw policy as a way to advance moralistic
ideals,” says Gunnlaugsson, who believes
that the current drinking culture is directly
related to government controls and that the
prohibitory system has created the current
Alcohol 14.6.2004 21:26 Page 28