1 2 > 
 
   
 

Seattle is Dying (Documentary)

 
Antisocialdarwinist
 
Avatar
 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
Total Posts:  6685
Joined  08-12-2006
 
 
 
20 March 2019 11:24
 

Seattle is Dying (full, one hour documentary)

A look at Seattle’s “homeless” problem and the well-intentioned but misguided policies that exacerbated it: essentially, decriminalizing crime. It’s pretty grim. (Could also have been titled, “San Francisco is Dying.”)

Image Attachments
 
Resize_of_Property_Crimes.JPG
 
 
 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
24 March 2019 15:46
 

I lived in Seattle about 15 years ago. The homeless were a big problem at the time, and now it is even worse. It is what happens when compassion is ideological and short-sighted. You know how animal lovers do more harm than good with respect to the welfare of animals? The most extreme cases are the animal hoarders, i.e. the crazy cat ladies, whose net effect each is lifelong misery for hundreds of animals reproducing exponentially, with populations kept in check only by limited food. Their effect is exactly the opposite of their intention. Liberal city leaders are much like crazy cat ladies, not with cats, but with human beings.

Many solutions are available, and all of them require sacrificing our short-term compassion. I propose this solution: any time a hard drug abuser is locked up in prison for the third time, supply his or her cell with a vast quantity of the drug that he or she is addicted to, along with the needed drug accessories. Keep him or her locked up in that cell for at least two weeks. This will effectively send fewer of them back on the streets, and more of them will die happy.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
24 March 2019 17:11
 

The end of the video provides a seemingly good solution that I expect almost everyone can agree to, without social Darwinism: anti-addiction medication within prison.

 
Antisocialdarwinist
 
Avatar
 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
Total Posts:  6685
Joined  08-12-2006
 
 
 
25 March 2019 08:27
 
Abel Dean - 24 March 2019 03:46 PM

Liberal city leaders are much like crazy cat ladies, not with cats, but with human beings.

Ha ha!

Abel Dean - 24 March 2019 05:11 PM

The end of the video provides a seemingly good solution that I expect almost everyone can agree to, without social Darwinism: anti-addiction medication within prison.

In order for that to work, the addicts first must be put into prison. The problem in Seattle, if I understand the documentary, is that they stopped locking addicts up for their crimes, so the option of “coercing” them into treatment while in prison isn’t available.

Abel Dean - 24 March 2019 03:46 PM

Many solutions are available, and all of them require sacrificing our short-term compassion. I propose this solution: any time a hard drug abuser is locked up in prison for the third time, supply his or her cell with a vast quantity of the drug that he or she is addicted to, along with the needed drug accessories. Keep him or her locked up in that cell for at least two weeks. This will effectively send fewer of them back on the streets, and more of them will die happy.

I’ve actually seen this proposed before, in an editorial in the SF Chronicle, although based on a medical/psychological evaluation instead of a “three strikes” policy. Put them in a safe place and let them kill themselves with their drug of choice.

 
 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  5079
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
31 March 2019 00:56
 

I’ve lived in the Pacific Northwest my whole life and I’m intimately familiar with this issue. I’ve worked with coalitions to provide basic needs and transitional opportunities. I don’t necessarily know what the large scale solution looks like but I can report that a lot of citizens are working hard to improve the situation on the ground and have not surrendered. Cohorts within homeless communities are trying valiantly to improve conditions from within. Citizens groups from many factions are collaborating on both formal and informal solutions.

Using the issue of blight as a partisan wedge and an ‘I told you so’ is most definitely not helpful and not defensible on a broad view. You can play this game from any angle and engineer the narrative if that’s your agenda. Compare numbers state by state, for instance. Compare statistics by nation. Follow the trail of legislation that has relaxed regulation on pharmaceutical companies or left people without mental health services or family planning. Who is cutting benefits and pensions for civil servants? Broad brushing the blame is easy for anyone with a chip on their shoulder. It’s not how we find solutions. The pain of other people does not exist so that we can congratulate ourselves for knowing better. It dishonors the hard work of people who actually working on the problem. (directed at no one in particular but seriously… we can all do better than this)

I feel for the issues presented in this doc. This is where I live. What I don’t feel is the approach of leading with emotion and imagery and anecdote and metaphor and leading rhetorical questions. Again, anyone can do that. Just consider the number of peculiar theories than can and have been promoted using these tactics. I hope we are smart enough to see through the production value and appreciate substance.

For those willing to think and act constructively I’m all ears and I’m here to help.

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3209
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
31 March 2019 06:48
 
Brick Bungalow - 31 March 2019 12:56 AM

I’ve lived in the Pacific Northwest my whole life and I’m intimately familiar with this issue. I’ve worked with coalitions to provide basic needs and transitional opportunities. I don’t necessarily know what the large scale solution looks like but I can report that a lot of citizens are working hard to improve the situation on the ground and have not surrendered. Cohorts within homeless communities are trying valiantly to improve conditions from within. Citizens groups from many factions are collaborating on both formal and informal solutions.

Using the issue of blight as a partisan wedge and an ‘I told you so’ is most definitely not helpful and not defensible on a broad view. You can play this game from any angle and engineer the narrative if that’s your agenda. Compare numbers state by state, for instance. Compare statistics by nation. Follow the trail of legislation that has relaxed regulation on pharmaceutical companies or left people without mental health services or family planning. Who is cutting benefits and pensions for civil servants? Broad brushing the blame is easy for anyone with a chip on their shoulder. It’s not how we find solutions. The pain of other people does not exist so that we can congratulate ourselves for knowing better. It dishonors the hard work of people who actually working on the problem. (directed at no one in particular but seriously… we can all do better than this)

I feel for the issues presented in this doc. This is where I live. What I don’t feel is the approach of leading with emotion and imagery and anecdote and metaphor and leading rhetorical questions. Again, anyone can do that. Just consider the number of peculiar theories than can and have been promoted using these tactics. I hope we are smart enough to see through the production value and appreciate substance.

For those willing to think and act constructively I’m all ears and I’m here to help.

There does seem to be far too much emphasis and attention paid to critics rather than finding and supporting concrete solutions by those willing to do the hard work.  Of course the problems and failures must be known and acknowledged in order to proceed, but there needs to be less talk and more action.  And this seems to be the case regarding all complicated social problems.

 
 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
31 March 2019 07:25
 
Brick Bungalow - 31 March 2019 12:56 AM

I’ve lived in the Pacific Northwest my whole life and I’m intimately familiar with this issue. I’ve worked with coalitions to provide basic needs and transitional opportunities. I don’t necessarily know what the large scale solution looks like but I can report that a lot of citizens are working hard to improve the situation on the ground and have not surrendered. Cohorts within homeless communities are trying valiantly to improve conditions from within. Citizens groups from many factions are collaborating on both formal and informal solutions.

Using the issue of blight as a partisan wedge and an ‘I told you so’ is most definitely not helpful and not defensible on a broad view. You can play this game from any angle and engineer the narrative if that’s your agenda. Compare numbers state by state, for instance. Compare statistics by nation. Follow the trail of legislation that has relaxed regulation on pharmaceutical companies or left people without mental health services or family planning. Who is cutting benefits and pensions for civil servants? Broad brushing the blame is easy for anyone with a chip on their shoulder. It’s not how we find solutions. The pain of other people does not exist so that we can congratulate ourselves for knowing better. It dishonors the hard work of people who actually working on the problem. (directed at no one in particular but seriously… we can all do better than this)

I feel for the issues presented in this doc. This is where I live. What I don’t feel is the approach of leading with emotion and imagery and anecdote and metaphor and leading rhetorical questions. Again, anyone can do that. Just consider the number of peculiar theories than can and have been promoted using these tactics. I hope we are smart enough to see through the production value and appreciate substance.

For those willing to think and act constructively I’m all ears and I’m here to help.

I grew up in the Pacific Northwest, and I always heard plenty of talk and saw plenty of action in attempts to solve “the homeless problem.” The pattern of action among those trying to help has seemingly contributed to the problems. If the problems are getting progressively worse, then it would be a good time to step back and examine different ideas, include the offensive ideas. And, the proposal at the end of that video isn’t even offensive on the face: addiction treatment within prisons. I expect it would be offensive within an ideological framework popular among urbanites, and that is the sort of mental confinement we ought to expand out of.

 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  5079
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
31 March 2019 10:59
 

Things I’ve seen work and have participated in:

Community policing, Restorative justice, Drug rehab, Neighborhood beautification, Occupational rehab, Art therapy, Careful reflection about the real meaning of human dignity.

Things I’ve seen fail:

Grandstanding, Opportunistic partisanship, Sarcastic throwaways, False dichotomies, Election cycle dramatizations, Over generalizations. Police state tactics.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
31 March 2019 11:28
 

If the numbers show that it works, then I say go for it, even if it is… art therapy? The numbers need to be there, they need to be generalizable, and they need to be critically reviewed. I found an abstract of a relevant meta-analysis (I wish I had the full text) that compares the results of drug treatment programs within prisons. They recommended “therapeutic communities” most of all, and they also found positive results for residential substance abuse treatment and group counseling. Any of those solutions would begin with incarceration, and I expect no reasonable alternatives. Outside of jail we would be depending on the free will of drug abusers, and free will doesn’t exist.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226387590_Does_incarceration-based_drug_treatment_reduce_recidivism_A_meta-analytic_synthesis_of_the_research

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17472
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
31 March 2019 12:09
 

After decades of trying to save the animals, there are now more then ever and the they require more and more resources to support them, the simple lesson here is “Don’t Feed the Animals”, let nature take it’s course.

 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
 
Avatar
 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
Total Posts:  6685
Joined  08-12-2006
 
 
 
31 March 2019 17:27
 
Brick Bungalow - 31 March 2019 12:56 AM

I’ve lived in the Pacific Northwest my whole life and I’m intimately familiar with this issue. I’ve worked with coalitions to provide basic needs and transitional opportunities. I don’t necessarily know what the large scale solution looks like but I can report that a lot of citizens are working hard to improve the situation on the ground and have not surrendered. Cohorts within homeless communities are trying valiantly to improve conditions from within. Citizens groups from many factions are collaborating on both formal and informal solutions.

Using the issue of blight as a partisan wedge and an ‘I told you so’ is most definitely not helpful and not defensible on a broad view. You can play this game from any angle and engineer the narrative if that’s your agenda. Compare numbers state by state, for instance. Compare statistics by nation. Follow the trail of legislation that has relaxed regulation on pharmaceutical companies or left people without mental health services or family planning. Who is cutting benefits and pensions for civil servants? Broad brushing the blame is easy for anyone with a chip on their shoulder. It’s not how we find solutions. The pain of other people does not exist so that we can congratulate ourselves for knowing better. It dishonors the hard work of people who actually working on the problem. (directed at no one in particular but seriously… we can all do better than this)

I feel for the issues presented in this doc. This is where I live. What I don’t feel is the approach of leading with emotion and imagery and anecdote and metaphor and leading rhetorical questions. Again, anyone can do that. Just consider the number of peculiar theories than can and have been promoted using these tactics. I hope we are smart enough to see through the production value and appreciate substance.

For those willing to think and act constructively I’m all ears and I’m here to help.

It’s true, the documentary focused on one particular aspect of homeless advocacy: not charging them for the petty crimes they commit. But that’s what made the difference—according to the documentary—in the allegedly successful program back east. By charging them for minor crimes and getting them locked up, they were able to coerce them into addiction and mental health treatment programs. Whereas in Seattle, they never get locked up and cannot be persuaded into treatment.

I agree, the documentary is too mawkish. It distracts from the salient point.

 
 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  5079
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
13 April 2019 10:02
 

I think projects like this do more harm than good. By speaking in broad, unqualified generalizations like the title of this film the creators are affirming a narrative held by a significant portion of America who has never visited Seattle.

They are pouring gas on an entrenched and fundamentally irrational partisan squabble that will never be resolved because it subsists on tribal instincts rather than any assessment of fact.

They are feeding a feud between people who have parallel economic interests but have conceded them in order to blame their neighbors for systemic problems that are frequently created by wealthy investors with no partisan allegiance. The deliberate decentrification of urban centers has been studied with some care. Downtown blight cannot be blamed solely on rowdy hobos. Persons with property interests at the urban growth boundary count on it.

The solution offered isn’t new or novel. We have tried to solve the problem of poverty by locking it into cages for all of recorded history. It may be a short term solution for certain parties but it doesn’t raise all boats. It’s a pipeline and an industry and a long term strategy employed by powers who have no interest in equal society.

 
Antisocialdarwinist
 
Avatar
 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
Total Posts:  6685
Joined  08-12-2006
 
 
 
13 April 2019 21:36
 
Brick Bungalow - 13 April 2019 10:02 AM

I think projects like this do more harm than good. By speaking in broad, unqualified generalizations like the title of this film the creators are affirming a narrative held by a significant portion of America who has never visited Seattle.

They are pouring gas on an entrenched and fundamentally irrational partisan squabble that will never be resolved because it subsists on tribal instincts rather than any assessment of fact.

They are feeding a feud between people who have parallel economic interests but have conceded them in order to blame their neighbors for systemic problems that are frequently created by wealthy investors with no partisan allegiance. The deliberate decentrification of urban centers has been studied with some care. Downtown blight cannot be blamed solely on rowdy hobos. Persons with property interests at the urban growth boundary count on it.

The solution offered isn’t new or novel. We have tried to solve the problem of poverty by locking it into cages for all of recorded history. It may be a short term solution for certain parties but it doesn’t raise all boats. It’s a pipeline and an industry and a long term strategy employed by powers who have no interest in equal society.

I agree that the documentary’s focus on “rowdy hobos” probably distracts from its more salient point. But the salient point, in my opinion, is still valid. Which is that the real underlying problem is not homelessness or poverty, but addiction and mental illness. Since we can’t force addicts and lunatics into treatment anymore, the alternative is to arrest them when they commit a crime and “coerce” them into treatment while in prison.

Do you disagree that the real underlying problem is addiction and mental illness rather than poverty and homelessness? Did the documentary get that wrong?

 
 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  5079
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
13 April 2019 23:41
 
Antisocialdarwinist - 13 April 2019 09:36 PM
Brick Bungalow - 13 April 2019 10:02 AM

I think projects like this do more harm than good. By speaking in broad, unqualified generalizations like the title of this film the creators are affirming a narrative held by a significant portion of America who has never visited Seattle.

They are pouring gas on an entrenched and fundamentally irrational partisan squabble that will never be resolved because it subsists on tribal instincts rather than any assessment of fact.

They are feeding a feud between people who have parallel economic interests but have conceded them in order to blame their neighbors for systemic problems that are frequently created by wealthy investors with no partisan allegiance. The deliberate decentrification of urban centers has been studied with some care. Downtown blight cannot be blamed solely on rowdy hobos. Persons with property interests at the urban growth boundary count on it.

The solution offered isn’t new or novel. We have tried to solve the problem of poverty by locking it into cages for all of recorded history. It may be a short term solution for certain parties but it doesn’t raise all boats. It’s a pipeline and an industry and a long term strategy employed by powers who have no interest in equal society.

I agree that the documentary’s focus on “rowdy hobos” probably distracts from its more salient point. But the salient point, in my opinion, is still valid. Which is that the real underlying problem is not homelessness or poverty, but addiction and mental illness. Since we can’t force addicts and lunatics into treatment anymore, the alternative is to arrest them when they commit a crime and “coerce” them into treatment while in prison.

Do you disagree that the real underlying problem is addiction and mental illness rather than poverty and homelessness? Did the documentary get that wrong?

I agree those are problems. But I’m frankly angry at the ease with which an issue with a complex myriad of root causes that frequently reduce to greed is so easily laid at the feet of its most desperate victims. I guess I know too many homeless people. Families bankrupted by cancer treatment. People evicted from tenements for failing to pay rent that tripled in the space of two years. Wounded veterans. And of course people who just want to live without the constraints of material possessions and are criminalized for doing so.

Sure, opioids and mental illness… but that didn’t come from nowhere. Why can’t people of ordinary means afford simple preventative and palliative care? Why are so many Americans incarcerated for months and even years because they cannot afford cash bail? Why can’t we provide basic housing that corresponds to a basic wage? This list goes on and on. There are dozen or more nations who have progressive and functional solutions to these issues and have reduced crime. Reduced drug addiction. Improved education. Improved healthcare. We could do it. We don’t it.

Take the total GNP of the United States. Compare this with other nations of comparable population. Now compare indexes for infant mortality, incarceration, homelessness, illiteracy, infectious disease et cetera. If we are to offer a gross oversimplified cause for a complex problem like this I think it’s that many of us just don’t give a shit. We are a passive or active accomplice to certain interests who actually want the problem to remain static or get worse. Shades of 1984.

Sorry if that is overly blunt. It is my honest conclusion.

 

 

 
Antisocialdarwinist
 
Avatar
 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
Total Posts:  6685
Joined  08-12-2006
 
 
 
14 April 2019 16:31
 

My guess is, the homeless people you know aren’t the “rowdy hobo” type. The documentary found a near 100% correlation between “rowdy hobos”—those homeless people who do get into trouble—and drug addiction/mental illness. What it failed to look at is what percent of homeless people are “rowdy hobos.” Which creates the impression that it is all of them. Which is probably not true. What percentage is it? Wouldn’t it make sense to lock that percentage up so they don’t ruin it for all those people “who just want to live without the constraints of material possessions” without committing crimes? Wouldn’t it make sense to lock up the crime-committing drug addicts and lunatics for their own good, if it means they’ll get the treatment they need?

By the way, the documentary does not advocate charging people merely for living “without the constraints of material possessions.” It advocates charging people who commit crimes for which anyone else—people like you and I—would be charged. Instead of continuing to turn them loose out of a sense of misguided compassion.

So while I appreciate your frustration, I think your “honest conclusion” is more than a little hyperbolic and offers nothing in the way of a practical solution. You appear to be saying, “Too bad, people of Seattle. You deserve to have ‘rowdy hobos’ defecating on your sidewalks, shooting up in plain sight and leaving needles and trash lying around, shoplifting, vandalizing, and harassing you—because the country isn’t run the way I think it should be.”

 
 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  5079
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
15 April 2019 09:52
 
Antisocialdarwinist - 14 April 2019 04:31 PM

My guess is, the homeless people you know aren’t the “rowdy hobo” type. The documentary found a near 100% correlation between “rowdy hobos”—those homeless people who do get into trouble—and drug addiction/mental illness. What it failed to look at is what percent of homeless people are “rowdy hobos.” Which creates the impression that it is all of them. Which is probably not true. What percentage is it? Wouldn’t it make sense to lock that percentage up so they don’t ruin it for all those people “who just want to live without the constraints of material possessions” without committing crimes? Wouldn’t it make sense to lock up the crime-committing drug addicts and lunatics for their own good, if it means they’ll get the treatment they need?

By the way, the documentary does not advocate charging people merely for living “without the constraints of material possessions.” It advocates charging people who commit crimes for which anyone else—people like you and I—would be charged. Instead of continuing to turn them loose out of a sense of misguided compassion.

So while I appreciate your frustration, I think your “honest conclusion” is more than a little hyperbolic and offers nothing in the way of a practical solution. You appear to be saying, “Too bad, people of Seattle. You deserve to have ‘rowdy hobos’ defecating on your sidewalks, shooting up in plain sight and leaving needles and trash lying around, shoplifting, vandalizing, and harassing you—because the country isn’t run the way I think it should be.”

I didn’t say or imply anything like that.

 
 1 2 >