Public sentiment is on the side of the incoming administration under President-elect Donald Trump. On many topics, such as immigration, gender ideology, and homelessness, traditionally left-leaning areas are shifting rightward.
The usual Democratic proposals for homeless policy involve “compassionate” means of alleviating their immediate afflictions by providing no-requirement housing, zones for tent cities, or promises to reform the system that pushes people into homelessness.
The problem is that these solutions do not help the homeless become self-sufficient. Free-for-all housing gives ease and privacy to drug use, tent-living mocks standard human living conditions, and blaming the state ignores the reality of the homeless person’s life and choices. When a prolonged nonoffensive is confused for compassion, this sort of tension results.
The city of Berkeley, California, is the most prominent among progressive towns with changing approaches to homelessness. Whereas the city has tolerated and, prodded by activists, even supported the overflow of places such as public parks with tent pop-ups, Berkeley is now restricting and removing homeless encampments. Add to that Phoenix, Denver, Washington, D.C., and San Francisco.
It is a shift toward a commonsense approach that has become more and more acceptable since Trump won the presidency this November. Even so, the solution is not so straightforward as cracking down on the homeless and shaking them into reform.
Public safety and compounding homelessness brought the problem to a new stage of address, and these are real concerns. But as protesters rage against cities’ efforts (some in Berkeley even destroyed construction equipment), they overlook the deeper solution for which policies such as encampment restrictions make room.
In the bubble of a homeless-run and otherwise avoided zone, those living in the camp will have little contact with others, be they role models or loved ones. People need other people in order to recognize their own humanity, and it is that recognition that ultimately motivates them to want more for themselves. In this case, “more” is the simple pursuit of help or a house.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Some homeless organizations, such as Christ in the City in Denver, aim at just this mission of providing the homeless with some real compassion and friendship. And while they do not measure their work in numbers, the reality is that such service is uncommon — certainly, it is counteracted by the progressive ideal that more so ignores the homeless. Beyond that, research has shown the benefits of “cross-class exposure” to economic success. Again, people need to meet others, and more often than not, building relationships with people who model good choices or who have more opportunities is going to propel a person otherwise doomed by his poverty.
Until the Left can learn to coexist with differing ideas, these important relational efforts might not flourish the way they should. And so all they have are seemingly insufficient and harsh policies.