And Now, The Sin Police

By ROBERT H. BORK

WASHINGTON Virtuocracy which may be defined as the bureaucratization
of personal morality is on the move again. We have just seen public
hatred of tobacco companies whipped to a fever pitch with some dubious
arguments.

Now it is the turn of the liquor industry. Before we succumb once more, it
would be well to examine the social science and raise some questions that
social science cannot answer.

William J. Bennett recently noted that a high density of liquor stores and
a high rate of crime often coincide. For that reason, he argues, the number
of liquor stores and the amount of liquor advertising in poor neighborhoods
should be limited by law.

Moreover, "if the liquor industry does not start acting in a more socially
responsible way," Mr. Bennett wrote, "it may soon find itself held in the
same kind of esteem in which the tobacco companies are now held."

There are, it is said, only three or four arguments in the world. Two of
them are, "It's a slippery slope" and, "No, it's not." In this case, the
slope is indeed quite slick. After tobacco, alcohol is next on the hit list
of the morally superior and the trial lawyers (two groups that are not to
be confused).

Already we are hearing that Absolut Vodka advertisements are the Joe Camels
of drinking and that, since larger automobiles tend to crunch smaller ones
in accidents, sportsutility vehicles are the Joe Camels of automobiles.
What will be next? Only the plaintiffs' trial lawyers know for certain.

Taken one at a time, a good case exists for banning any number of products
and services. And surely there is a link between alcohol and violence. But
there is also a link, as Mr. Bennett and his colleagues note, between
strong community norms and the decline of both violence and drinking. There
is also a connection between police presence and the decline of drinking
and violence.

Alcohol can be a very serious problem. But taking away what people want
because it is bad for them lets loose a principle that is very hard to
contain. Such a virtucratic answer is possible to any social problem.
Though Mr. Bennett is an astute cultural commentator, not a virtucrat, he
is providing the virtucrats a social science cover.

This is not to say, however, that nothing can be done. I've noted that
strong community norms and traditional institutions can be effective in
curbing alcoholrelated disorders. Of these influences, the religious
institutions of a community are probably the most important propagators of
real virtue virtue that leads to personal responsibility rather than
social manipulation.

John DiIulio Jr., a professor of politics and public affairs at Princeton
who studied the link between alcohol and crime with Mr. Bennett, has
announced that he will now spend the majority of his time working with
innercity ministers to restore to their communities the values that are
now too frequently absent.

New York City, moreover, has demonstrated that effective policing can
reduce crime, perhaps by almost half. These sorts of efforts are far more
likely to be productive than simply beating up on liquor companies.

The United States achieved greatness by relying on individuals to take
personal responsibility for their behavior, a reliance usually buttressed
or inspired by religion.

As James Q. Wilson, one of the country's premier social scientists, has
observed, "In the mid19th century England and America reacted to the
consequences of industrialization, urbanization, immigration, and affluence
by asserting an ethos of selfcontrol, whereas in the late 20th century
they reacted to many of the same forces by asserting an ethos of
selfexpression."

The ethos of selfcontrol was inculcated by churches and by other
institutions related to religion. That is why efforts to revitalize
innercity churches are so important.

To accept the virtucratic answer to our problems is to accept the ethos of
selfexpression as inevitable and beyond our capacity to alter, except by
legal compulsion.

Perhaps that is the case. But it would be better to try to inculcate
morality, personal responsibility and selfcontrol before we adopt the
strategy of treating adults as recalcitrant children.

Robert H. Bork, a regular contributor to The American Enterprise magazine,
is the author of "Slouching Towards Gomorrah."