this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2023
84 points (89.6% liked)

Serfs Up

116 readers
1 users here now

A post-left anarchist space for the sharing and discussion of ideas relevant to the abolition of work, dismantling capitalism, smashing the patriarchy, cultivating resilient communities and mutual aid.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] snek 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think they have the right to housing, basically.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They do. But they don't have more of a right to it than you do. OP's idea that some people have greater rights than others is pretty widely regarded as evil.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

OP isn't saying they have a greater right to housing but that the right to housing outweighs the right to prettyness in public spaces. We can make them prettier by moving them to housing but not just by kicking them out with no housing options.

[–] snek 1 points 1 year ago

It's better for everyone, including homeless people, to live in homes rather than set up camp in public places where it can cause problems for them and other people. At least that's what bothered me about the post OP made. Housing-first works for a reason.

[–] lightnegative 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Public spaces are for all of the public. A subset of the public doesn't have the right to infringe on the rest of the public's enjoyment or use of a space

[–] CrayonRosary 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you put a blanket down on a beach, you are infringing on everyone else's use of that space. So... what then? No one's allowed to use public space ever, since any time someone does, the rest of the public can't use it?

The entire Earth started as public space, yet I assume you think its OK that people can build a house, put up a fence and say, "Mine". What gives them the right? People need homes and the space wasn't being used for a home. Well, now it is.

Leave the homeless people alone.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I mean, technically, your towel on the beach is very temporary. Unhoused people can be there for years.

Your point is valid, but your argument is weak. Vacating unhoused people from the streets shouldn't be the priority, the priority should be to address the underlying problem to let them get off the streets on their own. A lot of them are there because they had a traumatic experience in the shelter, they have a pet, etc.

Unfortunately, we live in a society where we fix symptoms rather than causes, because it's recurring revenue and is good for shareholders when you have "repeat customers".

[–] phthalocyanin 0 points 1 year ago

now do landlords.

[–] MrsDoyle 4 points 1 year ago

Please at least stop deliberately making public benches impossible to sleep on.

https://theconversation.com/defensive-architecture-designing-the-homeless-out-of-cities-52399

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Not just that

Put money towards helping them and also money towards preventing more from being homeless

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

To the public. All of us.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"But homeless people are icky" - NIMBYs