5 ms·

While "Empathy for the homeless" can situationally mean talking nicely about them, it also means stopping, blocking, and undoing directly terrible actions again

While "Empathy for the homeless" can situationally mean talking nicely about them, it also means stopping, blocking, and undoing directly terrible actions against the homeless. Bulldozing peoples' stuff is in fact pretty bad. Having laws against giving money to people is in fact pretty bad. Putting hostile architecture everywhere is in fact pretty bad. People make decisions, over and over again, to not just hurt homeless people, but also hurt the people trying to help homeless people. Stopping people from doing that is called "empathy for the homeless". It's called that because saying and feeling bad things about people is part of the process of hurting them. It's how people agree who is and isn't okay to hurt. By stopping group efforts to make things worse, you only have to worry about random individuals trying to make things worse for other random individuals. Which is unstoppable but untargeted.

pdimitar 2y ago
Sounds nice and virtuous... until you remember there exist gangs of homeless people who mug law-abiding citizens, retreat into the structures that you want defended from demolishing, and cry victim when people want to stop their crimes. Not to mention they use the said structures as a hub to distribute drugs to the local community of teenagers. You see, the problem with every such discussion is the lack of nuance and the willingness to demonize e.g. parents who want their kids to be safe in their neighborhoods. What you call lack of empathy for the homeless is, in some instances, the concern and actions of the said parents. So do these parents truly lack empathy, how do you think? Or they say "no matter what hand life dealt you, please just stay away from my kids"? What's your opinion?
- xboxnolifes 2y ago
  If people are mugging, they should be arrested. I see no need for the other laws.
  - pdimitar 2y ago
    And if they use abandoned / derelict buildings to group up and start their "operations"? Removing those is a nice first step.
    - sagarm 2y ago
      So, should we bulldoze homes in case they house thieves?
      - pdimitar 2y ago
        I specifically said abandoned / derelict. Shall I point you at the wiki page of a "straw man argument"?
    - xboxnolifes 2y ago
      I'm not interested in policing thought crimes,just real ones.
      - pdimitar 2y ago
        And I also mentioned those. Not sure what your goal is here.
        xboxnolifes 2y ago
        I read your message as removing abandoned buildings because they might be used as some sort of gang HQ. Either they are doing illegal things and should be put into the legal system, or they aren't.
- rbits 2y ago
  Your dislike of "gangs of homeless people" existing shouldn't be directed at the homeless people, but the gangs. In an area where black communities have high crime rates, the answer wouldn't be to go after black people, but address the crime directly. I don't see why this should any different.
  - pdimitar 2y ago
    I heard police officers say that lot of homeless people are doing some sort of crime. It's not an oppression to read statistics. It's a good first step in trying to fix stuff.
    - chaps 2y ago
      God help us; the vagrants are doing some sorts of crime. And reading statistics on this stuff? Hah! The police don't even report crime statistics: https://www.themarshallproject.org/2023/07/13/fbi-crime-rates-data-gap-nibrs https://www.themarshallproject.org/2023/07/13/fbi-crime-rate...
      - pdimitar 2y ago
        ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I was a guest in communities where people said they had problems with homeless people on a regular basis. You are free to not believe it. I for the moment believe my eyes and ears.
        chaps 2y ago
        Of course that shit happens on a constant basis and it's silly of you to think that my position isn't that shit happens. Think about it like this: if you had no food, were starving, and the only way to eat for the night is to steal something, wouldn't you do it to? Or are you going to allow yourself to literally die because you're afraid to commit a crime? Nah. You will want to live. I was once held up at gunpoint by three folk who stole my wallet, keys, phone, etc. Over the next 48 hours or so I watched the phone bill logs to see where they were calling. Hospital and HIV clinic were on the list. I asked the main dude why he was robbing me and he responded, "Man, we're just trying to live." Grow some empathy for your fellow man.
- btreecat 2y ago
  > Sounds nice and virtuous... until you remember there exist gangs of homeless people who mug law-abiding citizens, retreat into the structures that you want defended from demolishing, and cry victim when people want to stop their crimes. Not to mention they use the said structures as a hub to distribute drugs to the local community of teenagers. There are folks who are not homeless who participate in criminal enterprise. It's unlikely that a successful criminal is homeless, as doing crime successfully generally leaves you with money. Like wage theft. > So do these parents truly lack empathy, how do you think? Or they say "no matter what hand life dealt you, please just stay away from my kids"? > > What's your opinion? Yes, some parents let the empathetic part of their brain that covers people not in their family die. "Fuck you, I got mine" is a popular mentality amongst those who believe in bootstrap and american excepptionalism.
  - pdimitar 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - btreecat 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - pdimitar 2y ago
        > Supporting actions out of retribution Not retribution. Justice. Mugging / robbing people of valuables is illegal. > Watching out for others is good and necessary, but in now what is "bulldozing peoples stuff" a real form of watching out for others. I am losing patience with you. You blame me for not reading while you are not doing it yourself. I said those abandoned / derelict buildings were used as "bases" / "operation centers" if you will. Sigh. > Violence is already illegal. I am not sure what value you or any one gains by "otherising" a boogeyman rather than addressing the issues that cause violence. ...? Seems you just need somebody to talk with because you are just dissecting words here. Glad we at least managed to agree on something super basic like, you know, that what I described homeless people are doing is actually illegal. It's a start. > Both myopic and under-informed on that particular subject. Meh. Bye.
- CFLAddLoader 2y ago
  My view is that you cannot sacrifice other peoples' lives and belongings, and call it good, without also sacrificing some of your own. It does not actually have to be "an eye for an eye", the sacrifices do not have to be anywhere close to balanced. But willingly hurting other people and paying no price whatsoever cannot possibly be considered good. > Sounds nice and virtuous Yeah it is. I care about people about as much as it is possible to care about people, because I can't truly separate myself from anyone. If I know someone is happy, I feel like I am happy. If I am aware of someone on death row, I feel like I am on death row. My brain doesn't actually mix up real and imagined sensations, but I lack the ability to hear of something happening to someone and go "that can't happen to me". In some sense, I "am" humanity: I want everyone to be happy and get what they want. I empathize towards trans people and transphobes simultaneously (though ultimately side with trans people). I feel near-completely unable of actually making a difference with anything, but my mind does give me rather strong yanks to "make this war go away" all the time. Though the one exception to all this is people who hurt other people and call it good, especially if they call it "for their own good". I feel quite a lot of rage when I hear about incidents like that. If you share goals and desires with someone, you are "the same person" as them. You are a "law-abiding citizen". Their successes are your successes, their failures are your failures. You are not the same person as "homeless people". Their successes mean nothing to you. Same with your failures. They are capable of causing problems to you (as all people do), but your desire to retaliate is not limited by the desire to not "cut off your nose to spite your face" that you would have if the cause of the problem was a "law-abiding citizen". In my understanding of the world, it is not possible to convince you to care about homeless people. The desires of different people are fundamentally not comparable. My desire to stay alive does not outweigh your desire to not stub your toe, and if those desires come into conflict, it does not matter which one wins. (Though as I also consider myself to be you to some extent, I desire both to stay alive and for you to not stub your toe. And you too are probably also "humanity" to some extent, though probably not as strongly as I am. Not that it actually matters beyond simply describing what happens) I see groups of parents looking out for their kids and feel good. I see groups of homeless people being hurt and feel bad. You go, "I'm defending the lives and non-drugginess of the kids of my community. That makes me a good person". Does it? You are making a decision to help the people you feel closest to at the expense of the people you feel further away from. On one hand, no such decision is better than any other decision. On the other hand, people are being hurt at all.

pdimitar 2y ago

Sounds nice and virtuous... until you remember there exist gangs of homeless people who mug law-abiding citizens, retreat into the structures that you want defended from demolishing, and cry victim when people want to stop their crimes. Not to mention they use the said structures as a hub to distribute drugs to the local community of teenagers. You see, the problem with every such discussion is the lack of nuance and the willingness to demonize e.g. parents who want their kids to be safe in their neighborhoods. What you call lack of empathy for the homeless is, in some instances, the concern and actions of the said parents. So do these parents truly lack empathy, how do you think? Or they say "no matter what hand life dealt you, please just stay away from my kids"? What's your opinion?

xboxnolifes 2y ago
If people are mugging, they should be arrested. I see no need for the other laws.
- pdimitar 2y ago
  And if they use abandoned / derelict buildings to group up and start their "operations"? Removing those is a nice first step.
  - sagarm 2y ago
    So, should we bulldoze homes in case they house thieves?
    - pdimitar 2y ago
      I specifically said abandoned / derelict. Shall I point you at the wiki page of a "straw man argument"?
  - xboxnolifes 2y ago
    I'm not interested in policing thought crimes,just real ones.
    - pdimitar 2y ago
      And I also mentioned those. Not sure what your goal is here.
      - xboxnolifes 2y ago
        I read your message as removing abandoned buildings because they might be used as some sort of gang HQ. Either they are doing illegal things and should be put into the legal system, or they aren't.
rbits 2y ago
Your dislike of "gangs of homeless people" existing shouldn't be directed at the homeless people, but the gangs. In an area where black communities have high crime rates, the answer wouldn't be to go after black people, but address the crime directly. I don't see why this should any different.
- pdimitar 2y ago
  I heard police officers say that lot of homeless people are doing some sort of crime. It's not an oppression to read statistics. It's a good first step in trying to fix stuff.
  - chaps 2y ago
    God help us; the vagrants are doing some sorts of crime. And reading statistics on this stuff? Hah! The police don't even report crime statistics: https://www.themarshallproject.org/2023/07/13/fbi-crime-rates-data-gap-nibrs https://www.themarshallproject.org/2023/07/13/fbi-crime-rate...
    - pdimitar 2y ago
      ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I was a guest in communities where people said they had problems with homeless people on a regular basis. You are free to not believe it. I for the moment believe my eyes and ears.
      - chaps 2y ago
        Of course that shit happens on a constant basis and it's silly of you to think that my position isn't that shit happens. Think about it like this: if you had no food, were starving, and the only way to eat for the night is to steal something, wouldn't you do it to? Or are you going to allow yourself to literally die because you're afraid to commit a crime? Nah. You will want to live. I was once held up at gunpoint by three folk who stole my wallet, keys, phone, etc. Over the next 48 hours or so I watched the phone bill logs to see where they were calling. Hospital and HIV clinic were on the list. I asked the main dude why he was robbing me and he responded, "Man, we're just trying to live." Grow some empathy for your fellow man.
btreecat 2y ago
> Sounds nice and virtuous... until you remember there exist gangs of homeless people who mug law-abiding citizens, retreat into the structures that you want defended from demolishing, and cry victim when people want to stop their crimes. Not to mention they use the said structures as a hub to distribute drugs to the local community of teenagers. There are folks who are not homeless who participate in criminal enterprise. It's unlikely that a successful criminal is homeless, as doing crime successfully generally leaves you with money. Like wage theft. > So do these parents truly lack empathy, how do you think? Or they say "no matter what hand life dealt you, please just stay away from my kids"? > > What's your opinion? Yes, some parents let the empathetic part of their brain that covers people not in their family die. "Fuck you, I got mine" is a popular mentality amongst those who believe in bootstrap and american excepptionalism.
- pdimitar 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - btreecat 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - pdimitar 2y ago
      > Supporting actions out of retribution Not retribution. Justice. Mugging / robbing people of valuables is illegal. > Watching out for others is good and necessary, but in now what is "bulldozing peoples stuff" a real form of watching out for others. I am losing patience with you. You blame me for not reading while you are not doing it yourself. I said those abandoned / derelict buildings were used as "bases" / "operation centers" if you will. Sigh. > Violence is already illegal. I am not sure what value you or any one gains by "otherising" a boogeyman rather than addressing the issues that cause violence. ...? Seems you just need somebody to talk with because you are just dissecting words here. Glad we at least managed to agree on something super basic like, you know, that what I described homeless people are doing is actually illegal. It's a start. > Both myopic and under-informed on that particular subject. Meh. Bye.
CFLAddLoader 2y ago
My view is that you cannot sacrifice other peoples' lives and belongings, and call it good, without also sacrificing some of your own. It does not actually have to be "an eye for an eye", the sacrifices do not have to be anywhere close to balanced. But willingly hurting other people and paying no price whatsoever cannot possibly be considered good. > Sounds nice and virtuous Yeah it is. I care about people about as much as it is possible to care about people, because I can't truly separate myself from anyone. If I know someone is happy, I feel like I am happy. If I am aware of someone on death row, I feel like I am on death row. My brain doesn't actually mix up real and imagined sensations, but I lack the ability to hear of something happening to someone and go "that can't happen to me". In some sense, I "am" humanity: I want everyone to be happy and get what they want. I empathize towards trans people and transphobes simultaneously (though ultimately side with trans people). I feel near-completely unable of actually making a difference with anything, but my mind does give me rather strong yanks to "make this war go away" all the time. Though the one exception to all this is people who hurt other people and call it good, especially if they call it "for their own good". I feel quite a lot of rage when I hear about incidents like that. If you share goals and desires with someone, you are "the same person" as them. You are a "law-abiding citizen". Their successes are your successes, their failures are your failures. You are not the same person as "homeless people". Their successes mean nothing to you. Same with your failures. They are capable of causing problems to you (as all people do), but your desire to retaliate is not limited by the desire to not "cut off your nose to spite your face" that you would have if the cause of the problem was a "law-abiding citizen". In my understanding of the world, it is not possible to convince you to care about homeless people. The desires of different people are fundamentally not comparable. My desire to stay alive does not outweigh your desire to not stub your toe, and if those desires come into conflict, it does not matter which one wins. (Though as I also consider myself to be you to some extent, I desire both to stay alive and for you to not stub your toe. And you too are probably also "humanity" to some extent, though probably not as strongly as I am. Not that it actually matters beyond simply describing what happens) I see groups of parents looking out for their kids and feel good. I see groups of homeless people being hurt and feel bad. You go, "I'm defending the lives and non-drugginess of the kids of my community. That makes me a good person". Does it? You are making a decision to help the people you feel closest to at the expense of the people you feel further away from. On one hand, no such decision is better than any other decision. On the other hand, people are being hurt at all.