Humans are often strange, and sometimes really horrifying. For the last 17 years, Sally has maintained and monitored a group of bluebird houses on a local golf course. She’s learned and taught me about the bluebirds, including the threats they’ve faced from habitat loss and the wooden houses that have helped them recover in recent decades.
Each spring, bluebird pairs build nests in the houses, lay eggs, tend the nestlings, and teach them to fly and find food. In each house, they have two and sometimes three broods.
Earlier this week Sally visited the golf course to check on the recent eggs and nestlings, and found that 9 of the 20 bluebird houses had been vandalized. Someone had opened the doors, pulled out the nests, and flung them on the ground. There were three chicks still alive and a few eggs unbroken. Sally replaced what was left of the nests, resituating the survivors and the unbroken eggs, in hopes that the parents could manage to reconstruct and nurse the young.
Back home, Sally cried for a long time, and asked, who would do such a thing? My first thought was, a person who would circle a golf course destroying bird homes and killing baby birds must be severely mentally disturbed.
But on reflection, I realized, it could as easily be an ordinary novelty-seeking adolescent who, like many other humans, doesn’t view the birds’ lives as having value. Viewing them as having no role in the human world and far inferior, he might have seen no reason not to torture and kill them for fun.
Most people, I think, have some empathy for other animals, even when they view them as inferior. As with racism and other failures of compassion, there are varying degrees of blindness. Perhaps the person who killed the baby birds was having a difficult personal crisis, and later realized with sadness and shame what he had done. I hope so. It’s disturbing to think it could be otherwise.
On a more cheering note, we learned this week that the Biden administration has set a September deadline for ending the US’s Afghanistan war. As a few (including me) recognized at the start 20 years ago, this was a war with almost no chance of a good outcome. Has it taught us anything about the limitations of militarism? It’s possible, but the idea that we can resolve our problems with war is still deep in our bones.
We’re still fighting the war on drugs, at great human cost. The Times reported this week that opioid fatalities were significantly up since the start of the pandemic. With more than a third of states legalizing marijuana, there could be a growing realization that the entire prohibition regime has been a massive disaster.
People could be starting to realize that criminalizing drugs seeds criminal enterprises, and jailing people for ordinary human pleasure-seeking mainly benefits organized crime and the prison-industrial complex. Hundreds of thousands of deaths from overdoses are a product of this disastrous system, along with millions of people arrested and incarcerated. But current mainstream journalism (including the Times) still usually presents recreational drugs as an enemy that must be defeated, by medical treatment if not by law.
One strong voice dissenting from this mainstream view is Professor Carl Hart, a neuroscientist at Columbia University. Hart’s research has focused on the use of street drugs, and debunked some of the strong myths about such use. In an interview in the TImes this week, he explained that most people that use illegal drugs enjoy them responsibly and do not become zombie addicts. His research suggests that the small minority with addiction and related problems start with additional psychiatric conditions, and that these should be treated medically as individual human problems.
If Hart is anywhere close to right, the war on drugs, which has lasted far longer and cost even more than the war in Afghanistan, should be ended. As with the end of alcohol prohibition, the problems of substance abuse won’t disappear, but they can be managed. And the far bigger problems of organized crime and organized state violence against millions of ordinary people would get a lot smaller.