Go to any city subreddit, search "homeless" and watch the genocidal comments fly. Why is :reddit-logo: like this?
A massive, centuries long propaganda and cultural reproduction effort to mark the most destitute and alienated as unclean and nonpersons, aided by the fearsome nature of staring into the cruel product of your social order?
The dark side of believing that society is fundamentally just is that you think people who are at the very bottom have done something to deserve being there.
It's not a huge leap from that mindset to viewing them as something that needs to be exterminated.
Many Americans, especially older Americans, feel entitled to a specific American experience. They put the work in and do all the right things or whatever and then they get rewarded with a perfect American home in a perfect American neighborhood. The existence of homeless people in their oh so special slice of America both takes away from the perfect fantasy America they deserve, and de-legitimize the system that props it up.
Libs have to reject homeless people because the contradictions of capitalism are so blatantly obvious in their appearance, let alone their experience, that they have to reject them out of hand, before any real arguments get to the table. It's easiest to think of if you imagine them thinking through it backwards.
I know this system is great because it gave me all this great stuff that I definitely deserve, so if this system has done great stuff and homeless people have always existed regardless of the system then it's probably just a fact of life and not a consequence of capitalism. Then once they've decided that homeless people are their own immutable category of people it's pretty easy for them to justify relegating them to the corners of society. Why would those who don't fit into this great society want to be a part of it anyway? Tons of libs have stories about a homeless person that chose to be homeless because they hated to work, or some other reason.
Also when you're so used to the idea of segregation based on class and you think that there is some inherent justice to the class system someone trying to build a homeless shelter in your community is like telling them that they deserve to be homeless.
:cedar-rapids:
Libs' idea of class analysis is the mythos of Protestant work ethic.
People trying to solve the obvious problem of homelessness that doesn't involve socialism or any legitimate moral system.
Or having to actually put their money where their mouth is.
In the USA, at least: because the absolute worst thing you can possibly be in American culture is a moocher. Of course it's good to be as self-sufficient as you can be and to give back in proportion to what you receive, but American culture takes this to absurd excess as a result of capitalist programming.
First, in that their reaction is wildly disproportionate to how bad the offense is. Even if someone is legitimately trying to cheat the system and get away without pulling their weight even though they could if they wanted to, that's not that bad. Even though it's kind of a dick move, that's honestly a pretty natural thing you'd expect to happen sometimes. But, based on the amount of contempt the average American has for someone who does this, you'd think it was one of the worst, most disgusting things a person can do. For some reason (hmm I wonder why) this does not apply to rich people who live off inheritance.
Second, and most importantly, this hatred is so vitriolic that it extends to any case where it looks like it could possibly be happening and completely obliterates most people's natural empathy. The "makers/takers" narrative is very neat and simple, and it allows for a clear enemy that people can hate without presenting a threat to the powerful. So, when people see someone asking for change on the street, this ingrained ideology categorizes them as a "taker" with no consideration for what the circumstances might be, and then they get mad enough that they don't question it.
Because they are visually and psychologically repulsed by poverty and indicators of poverty.
It's why they try to force upper class cultural signifiers on PoC and Poverty-striken communities to try to "fix" them while claiming its for raising them out of poverty. So you end up with underfunded schools without librarians and schoolbooks from the 80s in South Central LA that have 3-4 times a year visits to the LA Symphony and Ballet,
I remember one of my kids (work with foster kids) was complaining about a "gay ass musical" that they were forced to watch in class over zoom, and it ended up being Hamilton.
I reprimanded them for using the word gay as a pejorative but affirmed their ability to express their opinion.
Idk but https://invisiblepeople.tv/stories/ is a great pro homeless propaganda tool, spread it around
"This could be you, be it not for your work ethic and faith in the system. Best stick to your work."
"my near perfect liberal democracy has destitutes! it must be their fault for being horrible junkies"
There are several factors at play here.
First of all the visible presence of the homeless is a scary reminder about what will happen if you fuck up somehow. Deep down they know that they are just a medical emergency, a pink slip, a few accidents from losing their privileged position and end on the wrong side of society.
Visible homeless people are also ideologically annoying. Libs like to think that the system that benefits them is fair and that they themselves are good people for supporting it. They like to believe there is a "safety net" that takes care of the poor although they don't like paying the taxes to fund it. When the homeless are visible it challenges the liberal belief in a just world which angers them.
And then there is the, not totally unjustified, fear that the desperate homeless seeing all the nice stuff the the upper middle class have might attempt to rectify the injustice by taking some of it for themselves.
A "the customer is always right"/Karen mentality also plays a part. Well of libs believe they worked hard to get what they have and when they buy a nice house in a nice neighborhood they expect it to stay nice and free from unsightly people like the homeless. After all that is what they paid for.
Because of the lack of imagination that we could end homelessness by giving people housing and money, they believe the two choices are: let them set up a tent city in your back yard and piss on your stoop or genocide. And genocide doesn't lower your property values.
'cause they're conservatives that like to play the "its their own fault that they suffer" card instead of realizing that neoliberalism is bunk.
A large part is that a lot of homeless people have drug/alcohol issues, and non-addicts really hate junkies most of the time.
