Comment by fc417fc802
1 month ago
> running out of people to kill with our indifference.
I wouldn't call it indifference. It's the drug policies that we've very intentionally adopted in the west that result in people purchasing from the black market. It's about as indifferent as the deaths due to denatured alcohol poisoning during prohibition when the additive was silently switched.
We know these policies result in mass deaths; we know other policies result in many fewer deaths; we choose the former policies.
I think that is partly because enough people consider those addicted to drugs to be subhuman - enough don't care much what happens to the addicted people. IMHO in that's because we a large political movement encourages indifference to those different from us, whether the difference is race, politics, gender/sexuality, nationality, or anything else.
> I think that is partly because enough people consider those addicted to drugs to be subhuman - enough don't care much what happens to the addicted people. IMHO in that's because we a large political movement encourages indifference to those different from us, whether the difference is race, politics, gender/sexuality, nationality, or anything else.
I think this is a false dichotomy: Either you campaign for $SPECIFIC_SOCIAL_CHANGE or you think that addicts are subhuman? There's no in-between? You don't think that casting the conversation in this light ("Anyone not with us thinks $PEOPLE are subhuman") is a bad faith argument?
The most reasonable explanation I can think of is that people just don't care enough about some $SPECIFIC_SOCIAL_CHANGE.
Someone not interested in voicing their opinion on Palestine/Gaza, BLM or addicts doesn't mean that they think the victims in those circumstances are subhuman.
> > enough people consider those addicted to drugs to be subhuman
Well yes and no. Only addicts to opioids go into hibernation and become detached and 'subhuman'
Those who are addicted to uppers (cocaine, nicotine, meth etc) are considered thugs and or violent
What policies? Not legalizing heroin or other opioids?
I am not convinced we can claim what you think with any level of confidence.
The parent could be alluding to the sort of novel approaches jurisdictions barely engage in, but with even the most traditional and politically conservative policy approach to these problems, medical treatment, BC is still not really engaging in that with the effort one would expect from an announced "crisis".
If you walked up to a doctor in BC and said you have a fentanyl drug use disorder and you've hit rock bottom and you're ready for treatment, they can't help you, and you'll be put on a waiting list. I imagine many other jurisdictions across North America are the same.
Of course what happens is that in the days that follow the window of opportunity is missed, the person goes and gets some more street drugs to self medicate their addiction, the only option because there is no prescribed option, and those street drugs are cut with toxic who knows what and the person overdoses and dies (because there is no safe known dosage of street drugs that contain ???).
No real surprise that 6-7 people have been dying a day for years now.
You'd think at some point someone would build some more treatment beds but that costs money and how dare you raise taxes. So the status quo of indifference and death continues.