How about people like Bill Gates or Warren Buffet, who've pledged a lot of their time, money, and effort into "charitable" causes? Obscene wealth, but I guess they're doing something that can lift the material conditions or standard of living for people across the world.
Who is further redeemable between a methhead mugging a stranger on the street to get their next fix or some Wall Street banker who plays the game but also makes sure to acknowledge or give cash to the homeless people he passes on his way to work? No one's perfect, of course, but are we drawing lines in the sand in a future society?
I know, I know, I'm turning in my Lib card. :liberalism: .
Why does the "methhead" have to mug someone? It's because of the capitalists
I wish having a methhead as a neighbor radicalize more people. The drugs are so rampant and damaging and bring out peoples' worst side, and I wish more libs would realize that by signing off on these increasingly neoliberal and fascist politicians as the "lesser evil", they're validating the cartels and war machine that is so many layers of suits and bureaucracy removed from the people getting their hands dirty. It needs to go.
I have no problem with someone wanting to use meth but the reason most people use meth is as an escape from their world as it crumbles around them. Will people still do drugs in a socialist society? Definitely, but the systemic issues that lead people towards drugs as a self destructive form of escapism should hopefully decrease.