Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Teaching a specialized skill to one homeless man doesn’t solve homelessness, nor does it address why said man is homeless in the first place



I once knew a man named C. C choose to live homeless because when he lived with his family he drank, and he was an alcoholic. Living homeless, he was able to stay sober, while indulging in pot once in a while. He also regularly worked odd jobs, seasonal work, etc. I just blew someone’s mind. I’m obviously not saying all homeless individuals choose to be homeless, they don’t. But the idea that all homeless people are the same, whether that be destitute or lazy, and just in need of a specialized skill and all their problems will be solved is ridiculous. Now, I don’t think the techie, Patrick McConlogue, below is that simplistic, but I don’t think he understands the complexities of homelessness.

Will Oremus felt the need to defend McConlogue’s proposition as McConlogue shares in the link above. McConlogue laments in his piece that he walks past a homeless man every day. Oremus doesn’t defend McConlogue’s point of view. He is just as critical of the language employed by McConlogue as everyone else. McConlogue in pretentious fashion decides he’s going to fix it. McConlogue writes off most homeless people, but there is one guy, who he dubs “the journeyman hacker,” he feels is capable of learning, so he decided to spring into action.

McConlogue offers the man two options (he claims not to have offended the man, but I have my doubts)”

  • Offers to come back the next day with $100 in cash
  • Offers to come back the next day and give him three JavaScript books and a cheap laptop. Then he intends to come by an hour a day to teach the man to code when he feels ready

McConlogue asked his readers what they think the homeless man will do, and what he should do moving forward. Because while his intentions might be from a good place, albeit he has a limited understand of homelessness and lacks the ability to empathize, he turns it into a social experiment. His approach to the problem is full of patriarchy and paternalism after all he never asks the man anything about himself to inform the situation.

Oremus feels the Internet’s response to McConlogue is over-the-top. Oremus calls out Slate’s Evvgeny Morozov and Daily Beast’s Jamelle Bouie as examples. Morozov is kind of known for criticizing techies, while Bouie was just really not impressed by McConlogue’s point of view. Here is what Oremus says about why people are unhappy with McConlogue’s post:
“McConlogue’s post makes people uncomfortable not only because it is naïve and condescending, but because it raises an issue over which many of us quietly harbor guilt and doubts of our own. What is the proper response when your heart aches for a homeless person you pass everyday on the way to work? Is it to flip a few coins in the guy’s direction now and then? Maybe buy him a sandwich or two? Resolve to donate some money to a local shelter this year? Turn your head and walk on? And if your answer is any of the above: What makes you so sure that your approach is doing any more good than McConlogue’s?”
I’m going to pause here to answer these questions. Because these other methods don’t make assumptions about the “deserving poor.” Because giving someone money allows them to make decisions for themselves. Giving someone a sandwich has immediate results. And finally, because offering to teach a specialized skill to a man without any means to employ that is condescending. But maybe what we should all do is engage with them in conversation, speak with them as people and not some scenery on the way to work. Moving on…

Oremus notes that helping the homeless takes a level of commitment that many people can provide, and while most people would focus on the tangible things like food, shelter, and basic needs. Oremus thinks we should forgive McConlogue for his misguided attempts because he’s hearts in the right place. But I’m not convinced. See he turned this into a social experiment and his separates the deserving from underserving. This outlook on poverty is archaic and dangerous. It is rooted in the idea some poor people are lazy and doing it to themselves because being poor is better than working for a living. See if you just teach this homeless man some skill all his problems will be solved. It doesn’t matter who this man is, only McConlogue’s perceptions of him. Does McConlogue even know why this man is homeless? Does he have any medical or mental health issues? Because I can't imagine teaching someone in the middle of a schizophrenic episode, which many of the homeless suffer from (thanks Reagan!).

Below you’ll see the tweets from Bouie about this whole thing.


No comments: