Adjusting our View of Addicts

Hari's write-up on the Huffington Post could not have come at a more interesting time for me. I encounter addicts in every aspect of my life, some still in their addiction, some more or less recovered. Her perspective of how society treats addicts, in my opinion, is so spot on. Just speaking from my own personal experience in knowing people with different types of addictions, it can be hard for the person to even realize the root of why they're repeating the behavior. Yes, agreed, there are chemical aspects to an addiction, whether it be actual drugs or an associative release of brain chemicals, but there's always a reason why an addict started that behavior in the first place. I think it's so, so, so important to recognize that a large part of the rehabilitation process has to do with mental health and a sense of belonging. Many, if not all of the addicts I've known continue to partake in their vice of choice for reasons like anxiety, fear of running out, not wanting to exist in a sober world, social lubrication, etc. It becomes a coping mechanism. And without it, these addicts struggle and, without the proper support system, are very likely to fail and relapse.

The interesting part becomes when the addiction is to things like social media. It's a weird paradox, because you're searching for the validation of the likes, for an internet support system when sometimes these people don't have real-life support systems. It becomes just as obsessive as a drug addict wanting to make sure they have enough drugs for later, or an alcoholic being first in line at the liquor store when it opens. With both types of addictions, though, these addicts need and crave a support system, whether they're aware of it or not.

The Spiral of Silence and Voting

Reading the chapter on the spiral of silence immediately reminded me of Bernie Sanders' campaign. In short, the amount of mass media coverage for the Hillary Clinton campaign surpassed that of the Bernie Sanders campaign, even when the Sanders campaign was winning states and had Bernie and Hillary neck and neck in the polls. It could be argued that we might have had a different Democratic candidate had the major news networks treated both candidates equally. It's unfortunate that the Sanders campaign had to run against the Clinton campaign as well, because many people had been expecting Hillary Clinton to run for president for years. Because this idea was in the minds of the majority of the American electorate, many felt that 'it was her time' even if their beliefs aligned with those of the Sanders campaign. I know that my own mother felt this way, but felt her vote was wasted if she voted for Bernie in the primaries because 'he had no chance of winning against Clinton.' If all of the people who had this opinion had voted for who they actually politically aligned with, things could have turned out differently.

The reading is absolutely correct when it says that "individuals who notice that their opinions are losing ground, will be inclined to adopt a more reserved attitude." In my mother's instance, this meant not voting during the Texas primary even when she was registered to vote. I'm positive that she was not the only voter to act this way. Primaries are especially important in swing states, but when you have many voters that simply don't turn up because they believe that their vote won't matter, you end up with a Donald Trump VS Hillary Clinton situation that we're currently deeply embedded in.