Many things are moralized in the United States: health, access to resources and attempts to exercise bodily autonomy, among others. Failure to adhere to or achieve specific standards is seen as a moral failing on behalf of the individual, not as a failure of the state to adequately provide oftentimes life-saving resources. As such, houselessness, an endemic that affected over half a million people in the United States in 2020, is seen as the fault of the individual experiencing it, rather than a result of inaccessible safe and equitable housing, fair job opportunities and strong support systems. 

Houselessness in New York City is nothing new. New Yorkers sleeping, working and living on the streets are treated as an eyesore instead of citizens who have been failed by their government. Recently, Mayor Eric Adams’ administration has taken action to emulate the legacy of former Mayor Bill de Blasio by making the situations of houseless individuals worse. Armed officers have gone into the communities these individuals have built and stolen or destroyed their belongings and shelters. 

When it comes to addressing houselessness, conversations are dominated by pearl-clutching sentiments that houseless people are violent criminals who pose a threat to society. But it seems these people only care about the theoretical violence that could be levied against them, rather than the ongoing systemic violence that forces their fellow citizens to brunt unjust antagonism from law enforcement. 

Even if you overlook the fact that unhoused people are more likely to experience violence than those who have access to housing, let’s clarify one thing: it is violence to turn a blind eye to your citizens’ suffering, to your citizens’ poverty and to your citizens’ lack of access to nutrition and safe housing. Thus, it is undeniably violent and immoral to actively encourage brutality and disrespect towards the unhoused for the sole reason their lack of housing makes others “uncomfortable.”

The fact is, even if houseless people are proponents of violent action as described – even if they are drug users, unemployed, mentally ill or “undesirable” opponents of community care and support – they do not deserve to be dehumanized and brutalized by the state. They do not deserve anything less than the most basic, human level of respect, as people and neighbors. 

Adams has said that sweeps will continue under the guise of promoting that the unhoused instead utilize services provided by the city government, a claim that has been disputed by Jacquelyn Simone, the policy director of the Coalition for the Homeless, a nonprofit advocacy group that has published fact checks regarding the supposed effectiveness of proposed legislation and anti-houseless action.

“The sweeps are really counterproductive in that sense, because they can push people further away from services when those safe indoor options are [opened],” Simone said in a statement. “Imagine if you were trying to survive on the streets and dozens of police officers and other city workers showed up and threw out your few belongings — would you want to engage in city services? Would you trust when they said that they’re trying to help you, or would you be more skeptical of engaging with them in the future?”

“That trauma of having things taken from you and thrown away is not going to drive you into service,” said former City Council speaker Christine Quinn in a New York Times interview. “It’s going to frighten you.”

“The mayor has been clear from the beginning that every New Yorker deserves dignity, and there is no dignity in living on the street,” said a City Hall spokesperson in a statement to CBS News. “We will not be dissuaded from offering those on the streets the support they deserve, while ensuring that our public spaces remain clean for all New Yorkers.”

If looting through people’s belongings and destroying the few comforts they have is treating them with dignity and respect, it’s unsurprising that unhoused New Yorkers and their advocates feel abandoned and unheard by Adams’ administration, which has chosen to allocate funds towards these brutal and inhumane measures rather than funneling the energy and resources into building effective welfare. 

Not only is the act of chasing houseless communities out of safe areas, but it’s also expensive – twice as expensive as actually providing housing. Further, insinuating that these individuals should “just go to a shelter” fails to consider what many houseless people have been saying for ages: living in shelters exposes them to theft, threats of physical violence and assault, the possibility of being separated from loved ones and harsh treatment from staff. Many shelters have also disregarded recent health concerns posed by the ongoing pandemic. 

In an April 6, statement, New York Civil Liberties Union executive director Donna Lieberman said, “The Mayor’s attempt to police away homelessness and sweep individuals out of sight is a page from the failed Giuliani playbook. With no real plan for housing, services or supports, the administration is choosing handcuffs.”

When it comes to combating houselessness, the only way forward is through compassion, understanding and community support. The solution to this crisis will never be enabled by violence and shows of force – not in forcing people into unsafe shelters, not in destroying their belongings and not in treating them as subhuman. By extension, you shouldn’t be moved to compassion or action out of the fearful understanding that you could become houseless at any time: it should be enough that you are seeing your fellow citizens be treated without respect or care by those who claim to uphold common dignity.  It should be infuriating.