Wine as the Mark of Civilization: Kengor's Argument for Wine Over Water and Beer
Source: https://www.facebook.com/americanspectator/. "In Vino Veritas — and Civilization | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics." September 26, 2026. spectator.org
The Gist
The author argues that wine is a mark of civilization and good living, pointing to history, Italian cuisine, and even the Bible (Jesus drinking and creating wine) as proof. He concludes that people who don't drink wine—whether due to culture, taste, or mistaken religious belief—are missing out on something valuable and deserve sympathy.
Conclusion
Wine is essential to good food, celebration, and civilized life—including Christian faith—and people who abstain from drinking wine (whether by cultural upbringing or misguided religious belief) are missing something important, and deserve pity.
Premises
- Historically, cultures that favored wine (Romans, French, Italians) were considered civilized, while those favoring beer or water were viewed as 'barbarians' by contemporaries (e.g., Tacitus on Germanic tribes, French and Russian diplomats on early Americans)
- Wine complements and enhances fine food and dining in a way that water, soda, or beer cannot; beer in particular fills you up and clashes with food
- Italian immigrants, who brought wine-drinking culture to America, also brought virtually all of America's celebrated cuisine, unlike Protestant teetotaler founders who did not leave a culinary legacy
- Christianity, properly understood, does not prohibit alcohol—Jesus himself drank wine at the Last Supper and turned water into wine (a large quantity) at Cana, and instituted wine as a literal sacrament
- The teetotal impulse in American Christianity stems from a specific Protestant (especially progressive-era) movement, not from Christianity itself, and is contrasted with Islam, which C.S. Lewis identifies as the true 'teetotal religion'
- Wine is tied to merriment, fellowship, and celebration in a way other beverages are not, as evidenced by the wedding feast at Cana
Assumptions
- That aesthetic/culinary judgments about food-and-drink pairing constitute meaningful evidence for broader claims about civilization or moral worth
- That historical value judgments by ancient or foreign observers (Tacitus, French/Russian diplomats) are objectively correct rather than culturally biased or self-serving
- That religious permissibility of wine-drinking (per Catholic theology) settles the question of whether abstaining is a loss or deficiency
- That culinary achievement can be attributed wholesale to ethnic groups in a way that is historically and causally sound
- That there is a meaningful, non-arbitrary distinction between wine-drinking cultures as 'civilized' and beer/water-drinking cultures as inferior or 'barbaric'