What if I took them somewhere remote where there are no drugs and didn't let them leave?
My heart hurts for them, but I have no idea if it's a good idea or not.
Regardless, I think his heart is in the right place. Time will tell whether or not it's actually useful.
The problem isn’t the camps but the people who have the authority in them and how the treat people especially if the cure isn’t working.
Not everything can be cured by organic food, fresh air and labor.
BTW is the food the grow for the farms only or is selling it part of the plan?
If the latter then it’s about cheap labor
That is to say, to any sane modern human, curing gayness is nothing like curing drug addiction.
We have to do something. Because whatever we've been doing for the past two decades has amounted to nothing.
And maybe that ends up being the answer, that there is nothing you can do. But I'll never insult someone for trying, no matter the method.
>But I'll never insult someone for trying, no matter the method.
No matter the method is a bad take, that’s how we got gruesome people doing gruesome experiments on people who need treatment.
And the camp thing is pretty old and they always end the same: abuse of power.
Perhaps, but I have family going through this and it just makes you so mad. I'd pay to send him to a camp where he's beat with a bullwhip every day if I knew it could cure him.
Perhaps it clouds my judgment a bit, but the alternative is just watching him die, which I'm not stoked about.
Would you do the same if the chance of curing or killing him is 50:50?
Or if it’s uncertain that it works at all?
This is not only immoral and vile, but borders on the psychopathic. The man should have never been allowed to make any decision affecting public health.
But they don't, they outsource the job to a group of (mostly) sadistic, uneducated-in-rehab, "boot camps" that somehow think that violently invading an individual's rights and actions is how to "cure" drug addiction, without attempting to treat the underlying causes of addictive behavior.
If we assume a drug abuser is doomed for death in the next 6 months. But by using them as slave labor in terrible conditions for 3 years guarantees they will live to old age, regardless of any psychological trauma from said experience, is it worth it?
I'm not taking a position, I'm just making a thought experiment. It's more of a moral philosophical thing than an answer, I guess.
I think a lot of people not in the midwest may not understand the gravity of the fentanyl problem in the US. Literally every family is affected, whether directly or indirectly.
It's basically a religious war. One side seems to think they need to "break people's spirit" by "work camps", the other side seems to believe in "healing from violence" by compassion. You're free to pick your side, but it's going to get harder to switch, and the other side will treat you as their enemy.
The answer is a very obvious "no" in any society that claims to be free.
> I'm not taking a position
Frankly it's terrifying that these sorts of questions are being posed as real dilemmas in western societies in 2025.
2) its entirely voluntary and non-coerced
The current administration is setting up a modern day Spiegelgrund.
I've been in max security prisons. There are generally far more drugs inside these than I've ever seen in the outside world.
I don't want to piss on rehab too much, it can work. But for every decent rehab facility there are probably 100 bogus ones.
Also remember, that to an addict who has been to prison, rehab feels like prison. It has the same locked-down, heavy-on-the-rules design that can cause serious PTSD issues for (practically everyone) who suffers some sort of trauma from being incarcerated.
RFK might be an idiot, but even idiots might be right once in a while
Or the fact that you're not longer in the environment with its stressors that cause you to seek out drugs in the first place? Lots of people sleeping rough go for drugs of any kind just to be able to put their mind to rest.
Finland shows this with its "housing first" policy, giving people a home is a relatively easy way to get them off of drugs.
"Work will set you free from your addiction."
this understanding of metaphors is not that it was used then. the understanding happens today a contemporary application of historical knowledge.
and honestly, it's obvious.
https://www.splcenter.org/resources/reports/lying-about-ausc...
I've visited two concentration camp memorials, with their cynical writing at the gate.
I've read the Auschwitz documents edited by 2001 Verlag. I've watched the Holocaust movie series of the 1970s (way to early)
nonetheless, I was not aware of concentration camps being labeled as recreational leisure camps of some sort by the nazis.
my point being: it was no lack of education to not know that additional aspect of systematic brain sick evil.
The closest thing I can find is here: https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/deceiving-...
And this film was never even shown broadly as it was made near the end of the war. Also, it's technically for a ghetto and not a concentration camp.
No AI I've asked and no links I've found suggest that concentration camps were broadly propagandized as anything similar to "wellness farms".
> Some 18,000 Germans from all walks of life are being held in the political concentration camps in various parts of the country.
> Wilhelm Frick, Prussian minister of the interior, explains that they will be kept there until they become "fit citizens," reconciled if not converted, to the Nazi regime of Adolf Hitler.
> Sanitary conditions generally are described as excellent. There are doctors at each camp to care for the health of the inmates, and some of them report that the political prisoners are adepts [sic] at getting on morning "sick call."
> The physical culture includes morning setting-up exercises, football matches and similar group games. The manual labor is mostly tidying up the camp premises and barracks, but there are odd Jobs too, such as sewing or painting swastika emblems on confiscated Communist flags.
> Taeglische Rundschau sees political ideas of tomorrow coming from the concentration camps of today. Quoting a prisoner as saying "Sure we'd like to get out; but this is a good enough place to think things over," the paper comments:
[0] https://newspapers.ushmm.org/historical-article/1933-camps-u...
> At most of the camps privileges are few. Major Kauffman, head of the big Heuberg camp in Wuerttemberg, said his prisoners were allowed to write one letter a month. There are no visiting days there.
It literally even calls them political concentration camps in the article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksverhetzung
this legislation is a consequence of the paradox of tolerance.
Which if you had clicked and read you would see comes from the US Holocaust museum and is heavily focused on Theresienstadt. I was making a point that you're not really interested in engaging with anything I'm writing and are instead focused on just getting your own point across as evidenced by your use of "Theresienstadt" as a point in reply.
the 2010 "source" further above is abysmal Holocaust denial.
your source (ushmm) of course is not.
I got confused on the small smart phone display about who I was responding to.
apologies again.
Do you recall Karl is sent to Theresienstadt where the art studio secretly paints the holocaust?
That is the "paradise ghetto", the potemkin village concentration camp the Nazis created to give tours to international observers to fool them about conditions. Sometimes called a retirement village or the gift of the Fuhrer to the Jewish people but of course, just a temporary pause for transports going further east to the death camps.
I also found the Reichsparteitagsgelände (Nazi Party Rally Grounds) permanent exhibition the most useful content I was exposed to: they really show how fake news on all available channels and mega-church style mass entertainment were key to overturn a democracy and enable the atrocities. that and first bullying and then eradication of opposition.
I'd really hope US up their resistance and democracy protection game at this point in time. I'm afraid. As in existential fear.
edit: ...also I didn't know it was even used this way, back then, see my TIL reply in some "cousin" comment.
But if you still mean that the specific term "wellness farm" COULD have been used as a euphemism for concentration camps (regardless of whether or not it ever was), then what's the point? Like people also COULD have used the term "suburb" as euphemism for a concentration camp. Should we also be skeptical of anyone who says they want to build suburbs? What's even the point of of saying that a term COULD have been used as euphemism historically?
If it was a well accepted term it’d be one thing, but when made up on the spot it very much sounds like “place we sen out undesirables” to me.