This is where cold hard facts give way to the hottest of takes, mostly mine I suppose. I’m the editor, Marshall Jones.

Want to include yours? Listen, this isn’t the comment section, this isn’t social media. Discussion and debate requires context and a wee bit of bravery — we need your name and where you’re writing from. Include it in your account or email me anytime.

‘The beacons of what (America) stood for are unlit’

I have no special insight into 9/11. Of course, I remember where I was 25 years ago, how it unfolded in slow detail. Like everyone else.

What strikes me now is just how much has changed since then, not necessarily because of a bunch of hijacked planes and downed buildings but its place in the timeline of history.

The twin towers are like double exclamation points on the end of a North American Golden Age.

It’s hard to overstate America’s place on the world stage to that point. Art, music, science, athletics, academics, business, it dominated in almost everything, including actual leadership on the world stage.

Twenty-five years later, that’s now hollowed out like the empty space of where those towers once stood. The beacons of what it stood for are unlit.

Gone now is American cultural hegemony, American exceptionalism. American business has enshitified everything from social media to subscriptions to data centres. It’s known more for obesity than athletics, lies over truths, corruption over virtue, foolishness over wisdom. Their most vaunted leaders fight like children on social media and build technology they can’t control for reasons they don’t understand.

If you were around to witness the international hug America got 25 years ago, like me you must be astonished at how quickly she has wasted and lost all that good will.

We wondered for a time if we were all going to war for them. Would I? My response to that thought in the immediate aftermath surprised me, such was my anger.

Now I struggle to muster much sympathy at all on these hallmark occasions, just a tsk — what a shame.

Too harsh? Perhaps betrayal has coloured my view of history. Correct me if I’m wrong. Email me at mjones@infonews.ca.

Marshall Jones

Managing Editor

‘(Involuntary care) isn’t what they’re talking about, is it?’

So a bunch of Okanagan mayors and politicians think BC should ramp up ‘involuntary care’.

I suppose we all have our ideas of what involuntary care is or is supposed to look like. Mostly I think the combination of words provides convenient cover for politicians who actually want to just get some ne’er-do-wells off the streets.

Technically these mayors and their councils are responsible for our safety, insofar as they fund police forces they have no control over.

They are raising their frustrations with unsafe streets and general street crime but this is a very complex subject generally, involving multiple disciplines across society in law and medicine.

I can see why ‘involuntary care’ shouldn’t be rushed.

But that’s not what they’re talking about, is it? They’re talking about people who have committed multiple crimes, convicted, sentenced, served. We send them onto the street, give them a special name like ‘chronic’ offenders, poke them and study them and debate and wonder why people with mental health and addictions can’t keep themselves and others safe and what about their rights — all while they continue to exist by taking from others as they must without other options.

I, for one, have little problem saying a lot of these people simply shouldn’t be allowed to commit more crimes. What kind of society allows itself to be injured by the same person dozens of times? To my eye, one that builds a cynical and dangerous response from a mob, that’s what.

I don’t know what involuntary care really is, I think we are still figuring that out. How about we just call it actual ‘prison’ for actual offenders and change our ideas of what that is and could be.

There already is plenty of health care and treatment options behind that sentencing screen for people with complex issues like mental health combined with addictions problems. I think the solution is finding ways to keep them there longer, not this deeply unserious need to keep letting them out under some flawed twists of compassion and human rights.

That’s just my view, how about you? Email me at mjones@infonews.ca.

Marshall Jones

Managing Editor

iN RESPONSE

iN RESPONSE to Friday’s newsletter opinion-editorial on America since 9/11

I think your opinion on the state of America at this point in time is right on point.

The US has steadily being steered backwards and is making horrifying decisions that affect the whole world. Almost all the countries in South and Central American are leaning right wing even after seeing the US performance as a disastrous administration! Brazil’s Bolsonero is tied with left leader Lula! If Lula loses that leaves only Mexico left leaning.

In Europe the same thing is happening with Penn and Germany’s right wing Nationalist parties recent victory. The world is in trouble!

I don’t understand when it is so obvious that the US is borderline fascist and the world continues to bury its intellectual head in the sand. The masses are duped and blindly follow the 1% of the most wealthy to their doom!

Diane Courneyeur, via email

iN RESPONSE to Wednesday’s newsletter opinion-editorial on street disorder

“Technically these mayors and their councils are responsible for our safety, insofar as they fund police forces they have no control over.”

You perhaps forget the fact that “our” includes everyone in this country. Mayors are not just responsible to people with means, but to everyone who lives in their jurisdiction. Maybe looking at it from that angle would help in finding answers?

— Jane Duber via email

Another one of those intractable situations that has been on going for many years, if not decades, so I don’t pretend to have the answer(s). What stands out for me in your article is “without other options” which is quite obviously the case for a good portion of these people. The ones that do make it back from the brink likely have much support and outside resources if not just sheer determination and strength of character. My question would be, do we keep on paying the cost of putting these people back on the street to reoffend or do we pay for the cost of personal support as well as their livelihood? Is it a whichever is less question or which option garners more votes? Or both?

Warren Caruk, Lake Country, via email

I could not agree with you more. It is time society took a stand and fixes this problem once and for all, as it once was dealt with, before the government got involved and closed all the facilities down. We need our streets and neighborhoods to be a safe place as they once were, and let police do what they are hired to do, instead of wasting their time and effort on what is seemingly an endless problem.

Ted Guthrie, via email

Disclaimer: Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed on this page are solely those of the writer and does not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the editor, iNFOnews.ca, iNFOTEL MULTIMEDIA, its partners, principals or advertisers.