In recent years in California, we've really struggled with the distinction between "accepting" and "enabling". We've started drifting slightly towards the more coercive end of the spectrum to help...
In recent years in California, we've really struggled with the distinction between "accepting" and "enabling". We've started drifting slightly towards the more coercive end of the spectrum to help homeless drug users with severe mental issues, such as with the CARE Act.
In some ways, progressive policy has failed, in other ways, I think it is part of the process of trial-and-error and trying to see what works without having to resort to conservative solutions of punishment. We clearly need better solutions than ones of punishment, but finding better solutions involves trial and error, and sometimes you're going to have that error, like how compassionately intended policies in some cases have had outcomes that clearly violate the intuition as to what is compassionate, like letting people overdose in the street over and over until they're dead. At some point, we have to abandon the idea that a drug user's autonomy must never be violated. In this respect, I hope the CARE Act navigates that careful balancing act and violates autonomy as minimally as necessary. I certainly would hope that if I ever end up in a similar situation (where I am under the throes of addiction and living on the street) that people do not abandon me to my own devices out of the thought that they're being compassionate towards me.
Progressive policy has also failed the public to an extent - homeless people on drugs (especially stimulants) that the police do nothing about absolutely terrifies the kind of regular people that do not participate in this sort of online discourse. Even if the level of crime is the same (or less!) than a city that sweeps their homeless drug user problem under the rug, the public nature of the issue still has mental health consequences for the rest of society.
On the strict matter of drug addiction though (without the intersection of homelessness), it's worth to keep in mind this saying: "the opposite of addiction is not sobriety, the opposite of addiction is connection". People generally don't abuse drugs like heroin if they have places to be, people to see, and other social obligations and responsibilities to keep up on and some kind of reason to live and take care of themselves. Everyone has the right to set the standards for the company they keep, but cutting someone off for drug usage is only likely to send them further down the rabbit hole instead of pulling them out of it. Our society is becoming increasingly isolated and disconnected, and within that is a recipe for an epidemic of drug addiction.
She’s right. In the US, we’ve basically abandoned drug users to their own devices. We treat those who need us most with derision and fear, and we’d prefer to ignore them till they simply, somehow,...
Vincent has emerged as one of the leading voices in the U.S. pushing to humanize and rally help for drug users, like herself, even when they're not yet willing or able to live sober.
"We have made it OK to abandon people who use drugs. We tell an entire group of people it's OK if they die," she said.
She’s right. In the US, we’ve basically abandoned drug users to their own devices. We treat those who need us most with derision and fear, and we’d prefer to ignore them till they simply, somehow, just go away.
I share the guilt of this, of course. I don’t do anything to help alleviate the situation, which I think is important to say. I’m learning as I go.
It's also an easy out to not fix our problems. Step 1. Make those society has failed so miserable they can't help but be tempted to use drugs. Step 2. Criminalize drug use. Step 3. Only enforce...
It's also an easy out to not fix our problems.
Step 1. Make those society has failed so miserable they can't help but be tempted to use drugs.
Step 2. Criminalize drug use.
Step 3. Only enforce said drug use laws on said failed members of society.
And now you have the framework of the War on Drugs! AKA the 'War on those the establishment does not like'. Originally crafted to suppress counterculture and ethnicity, it was embraced whole heartedly by the Prohibitionist faction as well.
Do you like drugs?
Are you a respected member of the community?
Then stay in line and you'll be safe!
Of course, I am vastly oversimplifying things, but I'm always so frustrated with the fact that there can never be honest discourse on subjects where a very easy hard-line can be drawn that usually ignores half of reality for populist points.
We can never have an honest discussion on drug use, because no one stands to gain on advocating for those shunned by society unless they have power. And ironically those in power often can be drug users, but the 'right' kind of drug user that isn't labeled a drug user.
I would really like to participate into programs like she is talking about, and getting into helping drug addicts in a progressive way (being a former drug user, and wanting to help out active...
I would really like to participate into programs like she is talking about, and getting into helping drug addicts in a progressive way (being a former drug user, and wanting to help out active users). Does anyone know of any resources of how to get into that sort of thing in the u.s.?
It's a very nuanced problem, of course, but I can't help but feel that drug addition is an economic problem more than anything else. As our mutated version of capitalism continues on, I see it...
It's a very nuanced problem, of course, but I can't help but feel that drug addition is an economic problem more than anything else. As our mutated version of capitalism continues on, I see it only getting worse. If people can't provide for themselves with some dignity, turning to drugs to cope seems almost... logical? Maybe not logical, but understandable. I don't think any of us who are powerless to affect our economic system should feel guilty about those who the machine eats. Empathy, of course. It's like being made to feel guilty about not recycling, when the biggest culprits of waste aren't working class individuals. But it's a meat grinder out there, by design, and we've been funneled into isolation. It's hard.
In recent years in California, we've really struggled with the distinction between "accepting" and "enabling". We've started drifting slightly towards the more coercive end of the spectrum to help homeless drug users with severe mental issues, such as with the CARE Act.
In some ways, progressive policy has failed, in other ways, I think it is part of the process of trial-and-error and trying to see what works without having to resort to conservative solutions of punishment. We clearly need better solutions than ones of punishment, but finding better solutions involves trial and error, and sometimes you're going to have that error, like how compassionately intended policies in some cases have had outcomes that clearly violate the intuition as to what is compassionate, like letting people overdose in the street over and over until they're dead. At some point, we have to abandon the idea that a drug user's autonomy must never be violated. In this respect, I hope the CARE Act navigates that careful balancing act and violates autonomy as minimally as necessary. I certainly would hope that if I ever end up in a similar situation (where I am under the throes of addiction and living on the street) that people do not abandon me to my own devices out of the thought that they're being compassionate towards me.
Progressive policy has also failed the public to an extent - homeless people on drugs (especially stimulants) that the police do nothing about absolutely terrifies the kind of regular people that do not participate in this sort of online discourse. Even if the level of crime is the same (or less!) than a city that sweeps their homeless drug user problem under the rug, the public nature of the issue still has mental health consequences for the rest of society.
On the strict matter of drug addiction though (without the intersection of homelessness), it's worth to keep in mind this saying: "the opposite of addiction is not sobriety, the opposite of addiction is connection". People generally don't abuse drugs like heroin if they have places to be, people to see, and other social obligations and responsibilities to keep up on and some kind of reason to live and take care of themselves. Everyone has the right to set the standards for the company they keep, but cutting someone off for drug usage is only likely to send them further down the rabbit hole instead of pulling them out of it. Our society is becoming increasingly isolated and disconnected, and within that is a recipe for an epidemic of drug addiction.
She’s right. In the US, we’ve basically abandoned drug users to their own devices. We treat those who need us most with derision and fear, and we’d prefer to ignore them till they simply, somehow, just go away.
I share the guilt of this, of course. I don’t do anything to help alleviate the situation, which I think is important to say. I’m learning as I go.
It's also an easy out to not fix our problems.
Step 1. Make those society has failed so miserable they can't help but be tempted to use drugs.
Step 2. Criminalize drug use.
Step 3. Only enforce said drug use laws on said failed members of society.
And now you have the framework of the War on Drugs! AKA the 'War on those the establishment does not like'. Originally crafted to suppress counterculture and ethnicity, it was embraced whole heartedly by the Prohibitionist faction as well.
Do you like drugs?
Are you a respected member of the community?
Then stay in line and you'll be safe!
Of course, I am vastly oversimplifying things, but I'm always so frustrated with the fact that there can never be honest discourse on subjects where a very easy hard-line can be drawn that usually ignores half of reality for populist points.
We can never have an honest discussion on drug use, because no one stands to gain on advocating for those shunned by society unless they have power. And ironically those in power often can be drug users, but the 'right' kind of drug user that isn't labeled a drug user.
I would really like to participate into programs like she is talking about, and getting into helping drug addicts in a progressive way (being a former drug user, and wanting to help out active users). Does anyone know of any resources of how to get into that sort of thing in the u.s.?
Search for "(your area name) harm reduction" and see what orgs are working in that area.
It's a very nuanced problem, of course, but I can't help but feel that drug addition is an economic problem more than anything else. As our mutated version of capitalism continues on, I see it only getting worse. If people can't provide for themselves with some dignity, turning to drugs to cope seems almost... logical? Maybe not logical, but understandable. I don't think any of us who are powerless to affect our economic system should feel guilty about those who the machine eats. Empathy, of course. It's like being made to feel guilty about not recycling, when the biggest culprits of waste aren't working class individuals. But it's a meat grinder out there, by design, and we've been funneled into isolation. It's hard.