“Since one o’clock this morning Prohibition has been a fugitive in the remote quagmires of the Bible Belt,” wrote H.L. Mencken in June 1932 for Baltimore’s Evening Sun. In a matter of hours, the Democratic National Convention had torn from the party platform the compromise plank on prohibition (the “damp”) and replaced it with the “wet wet” position: full and immediate repeal of the 18th Amendment and the associated enforcement measures. This proved to be another nail in the coffin for the embattled Hoover-led Republicans, who had maintained a damp position, not expecting to be outflanked by the Southerner-heavy Democrats.

The popular image of the prohibitionist is embodied in the Kentucky-born temperance leader Carrie Nation, who described her armed raids on illegal liquor-dealers with a glorious Americanism, “hatchetations.” (You may infer Nation’s signature weapon of choice.) Nation was white, evangelical, and, at the perihelion of her influence, elderly—a perfect fanatic of uplift that Mencken would have struggled to invent. The prohibitionists were, in the popular memory, religious, nosy, and disagreeable, waging a one-sided war on fun; conveniently forgotten is the undeniable mass social dysfunction arising from the abuse of alcohol that stirred them up in the first place.

For most Americans, the prohibition story ends with repeal—Roosevelt won, the Amendment was appealed, and These States settled down for the Depression and the Second World War fortified with their preferred chemical aid. Lost in the shuffle: the oldest third party in America, the Prohibition Party (mascot: the camel), which had won and then lost its signature issue without ever elbowing its way into power in Washington. 

Few Americans realize the Prohibition Party is still a going concern; the Prohibitionists have fielded a presidential candidate every year since 1872, and they are not about to break the streak now. The party is small and far from the levers of power, and is more modest in its aims than at the time of the movement’s zenith; yet in its current form it still preserves an older idiom of politics, crystallizing certain tensions that have bedeviled the American system since the beginning.

Michael Wood, a retired Californian tech CEO who is the party’s presidential nominee, is under no illusions about the party’s electoral prospects. “It is mathematically impossible for the Prohibition Party to win this election. Nonetheless, third parties play a critical role in American politics—raising important issues that the two major parties refuse to address, or in some cases refuse to even see,” he wrote in an email interview with The American Conservative.

This year has, in some respects, been more difficult than usual. Ballot access has received an unusual amount of attention in the 2024 cycle; tight and often ambiguous polling has put the fear of spoiler candidates into the major parties, so their legal apparatus—particularly that of the Democrats—has been working overtime to keep the likes of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Cornel West, and the Prohibition Party off state slates. 

“Indeed, this is a sore spot. We entered the campaign with sufficient funds and plans to get on the ballot in five states. Certainly not enough to win the Electoral College, but a platform to help us spread our message of a more healthy America,” wrote Wood. “Unfortunately, the rules allowing third parties to access the ballot, and to give Americians a real democratic choice, are determined by the duopoly. Those who are already in power have zero motivation to give voters additional choice, and the barriers to ballot entry become more difficult and complex with each passing election. As it stands, we have ballot access in our primary-focus state of Arkansas and in the preference election in Guam.” 

Zack Kusnir, the national chairman of the Prohibition Party, seems unlikely to commit any hatchetations. A soft-spoken Californian, Kusnir was a USC defensive tackle and now lives in New York, where he has worked in finance and tech. He also emphasized the theoretical and pragmatic importance of ballot access in an interview with TAC. 

“It’s very difficult and very expensive and very impractical for third parties to get on the ballot. Now, I understand you have to have some kind of rules in place so the ballots aren’t being absolutely flooded and having all these ridiculous parties that are people doing something for comedy,” Kusnir said. “But when you have a party like the Prohibition Party, which is so historically important and has been on every presidential ballot since 1872 or you know, you have something like the Green Party, which is well established, and they don't have as much funding as these big parties. Why should they have to be so financially well off, or be so constrained and have to limit where they can get on the ballot?”

Fundamental divisions between third parties make it difficult to act as a bloc on ballot-access campaigns. “We were approached by some other third parties, but due to differences in our basic platform stances we chose to go it alone in 2024,” wrote Wood.

Per Wood and Kusnir, the party has roughly 5,000 registered voters and 70 dues-paying members. Per Wood, they are also unlikely candidates to participate in evangelist-led hatchetations. 

“The idea of states’ rights—of local people being able to decide what is best for their communities—drives the party base more than the religious aspect you mention,” wrote Wood. “In fact, in 2024 the party voted to adopt a change to the issue of abortion; recognizing that this is a very personal issue, we call for every woman to have the right to decide based on her own conscience. The religious aspect still remains a factor in some southern states, where conservative faiths strongly discourage alcohol abuse.”

The candidate emphasized the party’s change in tactics since the failure of the national prohibition regime of the 1920s. “In regards to our signature issue of alcohol, it is important to note that we are not looking to bring back national prohibition or to take away anyone’s beer—this is not your grandfather’s Prohibition Party!” wrote Wood. The party instead has three core policies: heavy restrictions on alcohol advertising, similar to those on tobacco products; an excise tax, the proceeds of which will go to ameliorating the dysfunctions arising from alcohol abuse; and a zero-tolerance law for consuming intoxicants and driving.

The last of these touches on part of Wood’s personal political journey. “Two personal events in my early adulthood raised my awareness of the dangers of alcohol,” he wrote. “A cousin who died of alcohol poisoning at a frat party and a close relative who suffered life-changing injuries in an alcohol-related traffic accident. The combination of these factors drew me to the Prohibition Party.”

Kusnir echoed Wood’s articulation of the alcohol planks of the party platform while explaining his own path to the Prohibitionists. “While as a party, we’re not looking to go back to the 1920s I think that a lot of people and a lot of communities who may be uninformed or vulnerable or susceptible to the negatives that can be attributed to alcohol,” he said. “I’m big on health as well, so it really tied into that. And I just thought, hey, you know, like, I think this is the right party for me to join.”

Outside the alcohol-related planks, the party’s platform has much in common with Trump-era conservatism: a strong defense of the Second Amendment; a non-interventionist foreign policy outlook; a call for infrastructure renewal; closing the border and remedying the gross abuses of asylum law. (And, as mentioned by Wood, the Prohibition Party has softened its position on abortion, much like the Trump-era GOP.)

“I’m always America First, and I think Americans should be prioritized with everything that our government does. And the Prohibition Party has that outlook,” said Kusnir.

“We’re very anti-war as a party,” he explained. “You know, as I said, we’re America First, and we understand that we have our our allies that may need assistance, but there’s a lot of things that need to be done internally, and we shouldn’t be letting Americans suffer and prioritize others in other countries who have their own governments to take care of them for what it may be.”

Caring for the American people and their land is a through-line for Kusnir. “Something new that I actually decided to add myself to our platform is: I’m a big proponent of regenerative farming as it ties in with my health beliefs,” he said. “Reducing and eliminating GMOs and meat and animal products are a big part of the diets of many Americans, and provide plenty of health benefits. But if we’re going to be farming meat, I do believe the animals need to be treated very ethically, and that some of the industrial farming practices can be refined.”

Absent electoral success, what can the Prohibition Party accomplish in 2024?

“The best catalyst for change is to let your voice be heard. In a state like Arkansas, where the Republican candidate has taken more than 60 percent of the vote in each of the last three elections, voters can go unheard. If you care about one or more of the issues that the Prohibition Party represents, a vote for us can be a vote for change,” wrote Wood. “Perhaps that change will not come in November, but when enough people choose a third party this election the major parties will begin to ask themselves why and start to address some of the issues we stand for. As a small start, RFK Jr. has begun to use one of the Prohibition Party taglines, ‘Make America Healthy Again’—that goes to show that enough small voices can and will be heard!”

“Even our campaign, at least in my view, is a form of spreading our message which ties back to the signature issue, where we want to be that shining light provide a source of support and education for these specific communities and individuals that might be hurting from the implications of alcohol,” said Kusnir. “So we’re really around trying to promote healthier, safer, cleaner and informed America, in addition to preserving our history.”

Promoting a substantive message for something, rather than against someone, gets to the heart of Kusnir’s original affinity for the party.

“When I was in college and was able to register as a voter, I did not feel that either the Democrat or Republican Parties quite resonated with me,” he said. “They each had, you know, policies and sentiments that I liked. Each had ones that I disliked. But I was really turned off by a lot of the mudslinging, because I turned 18 right around an election. And I was like, you know, I don’t want to join in on either side of this.”

Kusnir never wants the Prohibition Party to go down that road. “You go on TV a lot of times, you don’t see an advertisement for why your party’s great. You see an advertisement for why the other party’s bad. And I totally despise that,” he said. “So I had said, that’s never something that you’re going to see me doing. And I don’t want the party to go that route. I want us to focus on our main objective, where we want to preserve American history by keeping the party as the oldest active third party in the country, as well as being there as a resource for people who need it, and spreading our message on our signature issue.”

The Prohibition Party lives at the strange crossroads of American political theory, the point of convergence whence all paths radiate: What is the true meaning of “freedom”? Are you personally free if you are under chemical domination? Are you politically free if you are under partisan domination?

“We support individual freedoms, but, you know, my personal view: When it comes to alcohol and drugs, are you really free when you’re under the influence? You can’t operate machinery, you can’t drive a car, you can’t think clearly,” said Kusnir. “And I don’t think a lot of people view it that way, which I do. So, you know, my concern is that people are free and they’re healthy, and that, you know, communities are productive, safe and happy.”

Dry or wet, who could disagree with that?