|
I feel that this is a basically reactionary perspective, despite the author's assertion that it is not. Doomscrolling, like drug addiction, is largely the product of the holistic social-biological environment of the actor. People generally do not intentionally throw away stimulating, happy, healthy lives to become destitute drug addicts, and a comparison of opening a parking payment application to being offered alcohol seems hyperbolic. Smartphones are in many ways materially superior to carrying stacks of paper, just as driving a car is usually materially superior to horse-drawn carriage. It is materially inappropriate to allow the Choice of horse-drawn carriage on the interstate highways. These technologies do require increased infrastructure and investment (that interstate), perhaps, but this is the way the human body itself is laid out: a network of interdependent, largely centralized organs. Compare to a simpler life form like a yeast. Less "infrastructure", but also less going on. I do agree with some of the sentiment of the author. It is not very libertarian of me, but in my opinion, some increased top-down regulation of social networks might be necessary, i.e., KYC. The ability to hide behind aliases to publish whatever you want without any "skin in the game" seems to have decreased the level of coherence overall and permitted for neurotic anti-reality perspectives to proliferate. If government regulation of behavior and chemicals is appropriate, government regulation of garbage information probably is as well. |
It’s true that people don’t intentionally become destitute drug addicts.
However, it’s completely false to claim that people wouldn’t get addicted to drugs if they had stimulating, happy lives.
A very common entry point to drug addiction in modern life is when people are having a great time in life, doing well enough to afford large amounts of drugs, and feeling invincible because so many things in their life are going their way. People willing experiment with drugs for fun, which can quickly turn into a habit and a cycle.
I don’t know where this myth comes from that drug addicts are a product of their environment, not their own actions. When one of my friends was in rehab (fully recovered now for many years, thankfully) one of their rules was that people had to accept responsibility for their choices and actions in getting involved with drugs. Apparently it was common for people and their families and friends to generate a lot of “not your fault” excuses to absolve them of any responsibility for getting involved with drugs: Blaming peer pressure, a breakup, a bad job, a tragedy. This made people temporarily feel less guilt, but it also allowed them to avoid addressing their own behaviors and actions. Their theory was that entirely externalizing the drug addiction and turning the patient into a 100% pure victim just opens the door to relapse when those circumstances happen again, because it teaches them that it’s not their fault and out of their control anyway.