There's a perspective I feel is sorely missing in this otherwise great piece and the discussion around it: the larger social and even political perspective. We treat it as an individual problem. What could Jack, as an individual, do? In truth, not much. What could the patents do? In truth, not much.

But maybe we can change things on a larger level. Create a society where heroin isn't as appealing by comparison. Where there are spaces for socializing that aren't about social competition, or at least one where there are more distinct and equally good ways to "win". Maybe one where, if you fall, you don't have to carry the guilt that your family will be dragged down with you.

I was lucky enough to grow up with the historical teetotaller community, since my grandfather was a leader of sorts in it. They used to be very adamant on seeing alcohol use (and of course drug use) as a social problem, not an individual one born out of "weakness of will" or genetic factors. They quite deliberately tried to create new social arenas without alcohol, and cultivate a sense of community and common purpose which could make it more than yet another arena for social competition. But they quite literally couldn't keep up with the times. The social venues they made were of types that were extremely popular in their day, but are exotic at best today (e.g. lodges). And along with the rest of society, they gradually embraced AA's medicalized, individualized understanding of alcoholism, turning the message from one of collective self-defense ("we're building this to defend ourselves as a community from the scourge of alcohol") to one of sympathy with the medicalized Other ("We're abstaining out of solidarity with those individuals who will become alcoholics if they touch alcohol").

>What could Jack, as an individual, do? In truth, not much. What could the patents do? In truth, not much.

This is bullshit. People who want to beat their addiction and have the support from their immediate family are the demographic that most readily beats addiction.

When it comes to beating addiction, losing weight and all sorts of other things that require a lot of willpower having some personal motivation to do whatever it is plus a support network who can help you and encourage you is just about the most effective strategy. People care a lot more about doing hard things if they feel their family has a stake in it.

I said not much, not "nothing". It's AFAIK true involving family is one of the most effective things you can do in rehab.

But it can be very costly on a human level, and there's still depressing outcomes.

It's not easy to run such family intervention initiatives. An old friend in my teetotaller org did it for a while, starting up family clubs after the design of a little known Yugoslav/Italian academic, Vladimir Hudolin.

There are things you can do, but they're not very effective and at best they help you and the ones closest to you. I'm saying, I think we should see it as a social problem more than an individual problem, and try to address it at the social level first and foremost. We'll likely always need rehab in some form, for humane reasons, but it's not possible to use it to paper over the deeper problems surrounding drug use. That's like replacing traffic safety with emergency medicine.

> What could Jack, as an individual, do? In truth, not much.

Literally every step of the way he could have done something. This is an unusually clear cut case of someone's actions leading to the outcome that they experienced.

There are attitudes that a community can express which will help or hinder, but there is no escaping that in this specific situation, to get a different outcome Jack had to make different choices.

I'm relatively neutral on drug addictions as a character flaw, it is very easy for me to believe there are people out there who would be making a logical choice to turn to a few moments of reliable pleasure in an otherwise miserable existence. I wouldn't touch hard drugs myself for fear that I would enjoy them. But, nevertheless, the only person who was in control of the outcomes here is Jack.

You're doing what I wanted to warn against, individualizing something that is at heart a social problem. If there are all these better options to choose on every step of the way, why are there so many Jacks who don't choose them?

But what's the alternative? Coerce Jack and his ilk into rehab, effectively institutionalizing them? That doesn't work either, in the long run, and restricting people's freedom is a heavy thing to do.

What you would call an NGO today, or a civil society organization. It's still around as one of the many national teetotaller organizations today organized under Movendi international, but it's got a tiny fraction of its original membership numbers.

I stopped drinking because I realized it kept me from accomplishing things I wanted to accomplish. I think (based on my experience, can't speak for others) it's relatively easy to quit once you know why you want to quit.

I don't much regret my drinking days because I had fun and met many people. But then I realized I want to do other things than just get drunk and get a hangover.

I think, based on my experience again, that AA with its confess your sins and label yourself an alcoholic may help some people. But I think it's best to think what you want to do and accomplish, in life. Then do that. No need to keep on repeating you are an alcoholic. You're no more alcoholic than anybody else I would say. It's just that you have decided to drink and keep on drinking. It's your choice.

I appreciate your comment. And I found a similar experience in my life quitting smoking: once the decision was firm, and an understanding of the barriers it was erecting between myself and my goals, my resolve was total and quitting was easy. But you're a tad flippant about AA so let me share my thoughts as I have attended it many times - not for myself, but in support of an old school friend who was drinking himself to death some 10 years after we graduated. When he told me about his struggles in recovery I offered some assistance.

The people at AA are by and large deeply broken, and trying to slowly reassemble their lives without crumbling under the weight of the knowledge - largely gained in sobriety - of the massive damage they have done to themselves and others, and returning to hide in addiction. This harm often includes the repeated abuse of their loved ones throughout their addiction, and their guilt is enormous. If they appear stuck, consider that at least they are stuck in a place where they are not drinking, which in most cases is an enormous improvement.

If you do not prefer the religious component what I would say to you depends on whether you are an addict or not. If you are an addict I would say you are in dire need of a serious dose of humility: admitting you are powerless and that you need the help of a higher being fits that requirement. If you are not an addict, you should really not attack an institution whose sole purpose is to help addicts. Just smile and nod.

> and that you need the help of a higher being

For that to work, you have to suspend your critical faculties. There are no telepathic aliens. Angels don't exist.

…which by the way is also an approach Richard Feynman took: He basically stopped drinking because he liked thinking itself way too much to ever let something impair that.

I‘m fortunate enough to be able to keep my drinking level at a point that helps me socialize and enhance enjoyment (the occasional bottle of wine with friends and peers), but not above.

I‘ve also experimented with drugs in the past because I was just too curious, but in the end, I was lucky to not end up some place I didn‘t want to.

By now I’ve experienced that ability wasn‘t just personal strength, but also my predisposition and experiences.

That does‘t excuse anyone from not trying harder, but it was a sober reminder for me to see that addiction is a way steeper slope for some of us.

> It's just that you have decided to drink and keep on drinking. It's your choice.

That's kind of the dividing line, though, isn't it? If it's your choice and you could choose otherwise, then you're not an alcoholic. Some people don't feel like it's a choice.

I can see one could be in a situation where doing cold turkey might be dangerous so in that situation it might be dangerous to stop. But isn't it still their choice? I know this might get easily into deep thinking of whether we have free will or not, so I'm gonna stop

Hearing alcohol addiction, it seems so "unreal" in the sense that, I can see it as a problem but I always feel it can't be that hard.

I think alcohol, tastes disgusting in general. It's fun to mix with other things to have a stronger effect, but I've always enjoyed everclear to accomplish that, which basically is just pure ethanol.

I never understood alcohol culture, bars, going out, etc.

And I always related that to not being "popular" or feeling calm in a new city or such. I think it's so strange to go to a place, have to wait in line, pay admission/cover, to talk to a bar tender that expects tips, and then pay extravagant costs for something that can be purchased cheaply anywhere else (yes, I understand the transaction/food/beverage/hospitality.)

Never will get it.

You're not alone, I never got bar/drinking culture either. What was always really weird to me was how homogenous it actually is, like how the nightlife in a city is more or less interchangeable, you just swap out the music and the clothes people wear, but otherwise its the same set of interactions every time. How this was settled upon as THE way to socialize is utterly baffling to me.

I understand not wanting to be apart of it, but it seems silly to say you literally can't understand why others do it.

It is very obvious. It lowers inhibitions, causes euphoria, thus increasing the enjoyment of social interactions for many many people.

I think this is really socialization, surroundings and trivial occasions. My family drinks alcohol, but very rarely so. I studied in another city where alcohol consumption is far more common and I was drunk nearly every weekend (didn't have much training). Now I am back to a beer every two weeks and I don't miss drinking more. I don't consider that self-improvement though, that would be a bit much, although it probably is far more healthy to not regularly intoxicate yourself. I also don't think most people were addicts, at least not yet.

Good on you. I think it's important for people to understand their own susceptibilities and react according. Interestingly enough, the boomers are the highest drug using generation by far (1) in the US. I wonder what impact this has on society at large. I would guess not a good one.

(1) https://drugabuse.com/featured/drug-and-alcohol-abuse-across...