“Safe supply” is itself an addictive drug, and a political ideology

Related Articles

“Safe supply” is itself an addictive drug, and a political ideology

The progressives' insistence on "safe supply" has little to...

The progressives in Ottawa and at liberalvision CTV “News” aim to exhaust us with lies

When even the government-appointed "special Interlocutor" (LOL) is as...

Marco Misinformer

Lots of tweets this morning about Marco ("Misinformer") Mendicino,...

The Article

The progressives’ insistence on “safe supply” has little to do with science, facts, ethics, or morals. Certainly not “saving lives.” It is raw political ideology at play here for the most part.

They are playing to the notion — an ignoble deceptive one, I would contend — that they are “the compassionate set” — and (any one of them) the “compassionate party.” And their principal claim to fame is that they’re “helping out the little guy.”

But their drug addiction policy works contrary to their stated goal. Their policy is evidently killing people, keeping them addicted, keeping them poor, and keeping them vulnerable to illness, violence, and abuse; wrecking communities, families, and really, the whole of society. And they’re keeping them reliant on government, which is itself a malady rooted in evil, and replete with horrible outcomes.

They’re not “helping the little guy,” they’re harming or killing him and her. And wrecking a large part of our civilized society in the process. It’s an utter abomination.

What’s worse is that I think they know this. So what’s going on?

I italicized keeping them reliant on government up there for a reason. I think it’s one of, if not the paramount of “what’s going on.” Any objective observation of left-wing or “progressive” politics today has to accept the obvious conclusion that a huge part of their philosophy is that government (and them, in particular, in government) is the salvation of not just society writ large, but on a less macro scale, of communities, families (I could even argue they seek to be a replacement for family), and right down to the individual, whom they seek to devolve (progressive?) into a total or near-total reliance on government, and the adjacent loss of any sense of personal responsibility. Personal responsibility was once a key attribute of successful people — and of the building of great nations like Canada! But the destruction of it is now literally a key plank in the progressives’ guidebook.

I said “What’s worse…” before, but it gets worse! What’s worse (worser?) is that I think they’re hiding this nefarious “government reliance” motive. (Talk about your “hidden agenda.”)

But what else is behind this stubborn idiocy? Unfortunately, while literally deadly, this insistence on “safe supply” is now among the most visible of the faces of left-wing, progressive political ideology. They’re dug in. They’re fully invested in this. And therein lies a big part of the problem — for them and us, it seems.

It’s a failed ideology, the failure of which they zealously guard against being revealed because it would lay bare their failure as a political force. It would render them impotent as a political force. So they will stop at nothing to hide that they are, in at least this regard, a political farce — and a dangerous one at that. Self-preservation at the expense of humanity. (Think that’s impossible or it’s an outrageous accusation, progressives? “At the expense of humanity” is exactly what you glibly append to conservative policies every damn day. Except on abortion, duh!)

I situate myself squarely in the school of Michael Shellenberger, who has spent more time than most humans researching and writing honestly about the drug addiction and mental health issues plaguing our cities and towns, mostly from the perspective of San Fransisco and its (morbid, and ongoing) experience. He authored “San Fransicko,” a huge best-seller and as far as I’m concerned, the authoritative guide, together with his later Substack writings on the issue.

In it, he describes the problem in objective detail, speaks with uncountable victims and experts, and politicians on both sides, and devises solutions that in a select few places where the likes of it are being tried, have proven to work. Many other jurisdictions have begun, if trepidatiously, to employ his methods — Alberta being one (and a big underline needs to be placed under the word “trepidatiously,” here). Given time, we’ll see how it pans out there. It’s an oil tanker. It takes a long time to turn or stop.

The current progressive-left ideology on the subject runs almost exactly counter to Shellenburger’s. And it’s not just their support of “safe supply” alone that causes that contradistinction. It’s the lack of treatment policies (aside from the usual blather with promises to fund more treatment, yadda). This must include some measure of mandatory treatment where needed — of drug addicts and the mentally infirm. Safe supply can in some measure be a part of a well-managed addiction abatement program, but the focus has to on the treatment. Not the supply, which guarantees — by definition — that you maintain addiction; and thus that people will suffer and die, and/or be relegated to wards of the state. (As I said, arguably, they’re OK with the latter, and it may even be a big part of their Utopian goal.)

Why society accepts this and even remotely considers voting for this in every election (as is the case wherever this problem persists), is beyond me — maybe it’s the province of a sociologist or psychologist — or a cult expert, or something. But vote for it they do. It’s like a mind virus has taken hold over people, much as it has in the case of rabid climate alarmism, so-called “systemic racism,” the gender ideology religious cult, and so many other social media-induced woke contagions.

There’s a lot more to this than I could write here. But do what the progressives have not: read a book. Stand back and be objective and real. Be honest. And truly compassionate.

The mentally ill and the addicted need help. But progressives are addicted too (I”ll leave the question of “mentally ill” to you!). “Safe supply” is, in fact, a drug of choice. Ideology is also a drug of choice. “Safe supply” is an addictive drug and political ideology.

So progressives need help — getting voted out of office.

Joel Johannesen
Follow Joel
Latest posts by Joel Johannesen (see all)

You can use this form to give feedback to the editor. Say nice things or say hello. Or criticize if you must. 

    Your Name (required)

    Your Email (required)

    Your Message

    Do you Have a File to Send?

    If so, choose it below

    This is just a question to make sure you're not a robot:

    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

    — Normally this would be an ad. It's a doggy. —spot_img