For many of the major issues facing Americans, whether it be criminality, drug addiction, or illegal immigration, the leftist "solution" is to enable bad behavior with vanity measures that only further human misery instead of interrupting it.
People who enable usually start from a place of genuine concern but conclude that the simplest action, in combination with rationalization of this action, is their solution to the problem. The fact that they are doing something, even if it perpetuates the problem, becomes enough.
Enablement is not about interrupting negative outcomes, it's about either giving the perception to others that you're attempting to stop them or ridding yourself of guilt for being part of the problem. Enablement is less about the issue and more about the responsibility for it.
I would see examples of this repeatedly on TV shows like Dr. Phil where parents would request help for their drug-addicted teen or adult child. Dr. Phil would always ask "They don't have a job, so how do they get money to buy drugs?" Their answer every time: "We give them money."
In many cases, the parents would take them to their drug dealers because they don't want to "see them in pain" from withdrawals. At that point, the drug addiction is less important to their emotional state and they're willing to perpetuate harm so they don't feel parental guilt.
What is being proposed by leftists in government is much of the same type of behavior of the enabling parent: We are to give into the bad behaviors of citizens and non-citizens by paving their road to destruction with fresh asphalt.
But to sell this methodology as a solution, you must convince everyone else that these new issues require new solutions and that we should adopt an imagination for how we approach policymaking for these difficult humanitarian circumstances.
So, if you see someone shooting drugs into their veins on the corner, the issue isn't that their drug addiction has taken hold of them or the myriad of personal matters that led them to use drugs to cope. Of course not. The issue is that they are shooting up with dirty needles!
So-called "Harm Reduction" is enablement personified and leftists have no shame in using tax dollars to perpetuate a problem rather than finding ways to bring these people into treatment while still maintaining societal boundaries for illegal public drug usage.
California is the capital of policy enablement with its laws refusing to go after anyone who steals under $900 & ridding itself of camping laws that would empower law enforcement to prevent rampant homelessness & force them into shelters or programs to get out of their situation.
And now, in a major way, our federal government is enabling an industry of illegal migration and human trafficking through our southern border and their remedy is to give them what they want by letting them stay here indefinitely, forcing local governments to take care of them.
Leftists who practice political enablement are at their core lazy and because widespread complex issues affecting human beings are incredibly time-consuming and resource-heavy, leftists in government (and the enablers of leftists) always choose the low-investment vanity approach.
The objective isn't to bring an end to a clear problem, it's to give the perception that they are attempting to find a solution. It's to be seen as bringing change and not to be concerned when change doesn’t happen: It's the thought that counts!
The American public will never have these major problems taken care of if we have enablers in positions of authority who are too lazy to follow through on the most obvious resolutions and reinforce legal and social boundaries.
If this keeps happening, they will demoralize us to the point of accepting the new normal of a boundaryless society where public defecation is permissible, criminality is in the eye of the beholder, and borders are invisible lines we should continue to ignore.
A healthy society enforces punishment for crossing those boundaries but offers ways to help people who are habitual line crossers. A dysfunctional society pays for the instrument you use to poison yourself and thinks it's loving to watch you slowly die.
Enablement isn't love.
Amazing! You’ve said so much in such a short post.
I’ve been looking at it as a problem of people imposing simple solutions on complex problems (which is an approach doomed to failure), but, like you, I’ve been struck by the so-called problem solvers are, at the end of the day, pursuing their own agenda.
In homelessness, for example, where many of the homeless have untreated addiction and/or mental health issues, there’s a population of advocates and/or activists who frame the whole thing up as a housing crisis (or the lack of affordable housing), and then they set up the homeless in tent encampments (to get the problem in everyone’s face) or they go with “housing first” approaches. Either way, they are enabling the mental health or addiction issue to remain untreated, while appearing to care deeply and appearing to be taking action.
When asked, a lot of addicts would say that their primary goal is to be drug free so they can live a more stable life, whereas for the advocacy groups the main goal is to have a roof over everyone’s head (even if they then continue to be an addict).
called boutique altruism