Addendum: Addicted to Homelessness and Their Addicted Service Providers

My experiences in the fight against homelessness, has taught I and others like me, that it is in fact true that neither you nor any other institution could pry an outdoor citizen addict away from the outdoor life, in order to live permanently in a building, apartment, house or a trailer … no matter how hard you tried.

You would not succeed in getting them to move inside, in some instances, even if you were to provide them with free services or housing.  Keep this in mind, neither their spouses nor siblings could convince 'them to remain inside for any length of time. Why? Because the drug that they are addicted to is 'the drug of living outdoors', typically with their compatriots in a type of counter-culture setting, albeit there are exceptions to the rule.  But the truth is, other outdoor citizens are their families now.

Many in this segmented demographic, simply prefer being left alone to enjoy a solitary lifestyle, or to live as hermits in isolation or occasionally with a pet or solitary partner.  Their relatives, family and friends simply cannot understand the  Perhaps this behavior is primordial, and a part of the human  significant historical past.  This was the time apparently, when primitive men and women lived outdoors, in caves, hunted, fished and were basic food gatherers.

This ill make more sense if you were to view homelessness phenomenologically, and could be the explanation for why there are so many homeless individuals, who have willfully chosen homelessness as a lifestyle, when in fact they have and have had the opportunity to move indoors, but refuse to.  Some of the unattached 'outdoor addicts',  have lived indoors in short sports, periodically in an area motel or hotel for a night or two. And soon thereafter they return to their preferred lifestyles of living outdoors. And in case you are unaware, some in the 'addicted to homelessness group', have jobs, receive SSD, SSI , other legitimate retirement funds or own or rent property.

I am certain that some bright 'cultural anthropologist' or anthropology student has already researched and written on this subject, phenomenon or, typology. And even though most American, who are accustomed to living indoors, cannot fathom the idea of someone, intentionally, wanting to  live outside, for example in a park or park setting, near a ravine, in a debris box, behind or inside of an abandoned building (without shower facilities or a boob tube) stove or sweetie, there are individuals on the outside who actually prefer it that way. The rest of us will simply have to, get in the real world and accept people living outdoors and wandering the streets, day and night.

But just in case you are wondering, I AM NOT ONE OF THE ONE's who prefer living outdoors.  I have, inexplicably, been invited to join a few camps behind Berryessa Park or on Oakland Road and elsewhere, however. I declined!  The last thing that I remember saying in response to the last invitation was, 'go to the bathroom in a grocery store bag', eek!

On occasion, veterans of foreign wars, after returning home to the states, discovered that they preferred living in the great outdoors or the wild. Living in the wild apparently reminds them of how they lived when they were in Vietnam for example, outdoors. Already, some veterans of more recent wars, prefer America's parks and forests, to the chagrin of most Americans. I give it to these 'Rambo types', they are real men and women!

And as mentioned before, many native Americans', still prefer living outdoors (on reservations for example), and it neither shocks their nor our sensibilities for them to habituate in the great outdoors.  They neither consider themselves to be 'homeless',  nor should we see it that way.  If a person elects to live outside in a forest setting for example, , as far as I am concerned (and within a certain context and I will talk about that later, it is just fine with me). Again, I have only one caveat, they must be independent and not be a burden on society.

In other words, they can't have it both ways, that is to claim to be living independently while in actuality, they are relying you and me, to go to work and provide for them. I wouldn't want anyone to say to me that I am free, but can I live in your backyard.

When ET, in the hit movie ET The Extraterrestrial, wanted to return home, terrestrial meaning other land, he was referring to his native Etilean planet. And likewise, the Earth itself, with the sky looming over it, is home to many outdoor citizens, as long as they are living under the stars on planet Earth, they are fine. For to put it another way, living outside does not make one homeless, for home is where the heart is.

What truly matters in the whole scheme of themes is how one feels about living outside, their feeling about it, determines whether or not one believes that they are homeless or not. In fact, you can live indoors, and feel or believe that you are homeless (if where you reside doesn't feel like home). Isn't that the reason why so many people, adults and youth, run away from home?

The psychological implications of being homeless, or for being an outdoor citizen addict, is something that everyone who is involved in the fight against homelessness, faith-based, governmental groups… ought to learn more about.  Shouldn't we, the housed, allow for the fact that some of the individuals that so much effort has or is being put into, to rescue them from homeless, prefer it that way? When will we learn that some outdoor citizens have zero intentions of ever living indoors again.

I suspect that we need to adjust our ways of thinking, stop forcing our ideas on other Americans, vicariously living our lives through other people or pushing our values onto other people. Personally, I believe that we ought to adjust social and public policy to conform to what is natural. A realistic policy, will allow for individuals to live outdoors again, minus any stigma, or being harassed by indoor citizens. In just a few months, many Americans, will be headed to America's outback, in order to spend a week or two in the wild. Think about it! Me too, for I am going to Tahoe to stay in a motel!.

What should also be included in the aforementioned proposition is this, outdoor citizen-addicts, will have the right to find a reserve or preserve, in which they can, along with their loved ones, homestead.

That's right, outdoor citizen addicts, can have a grubstake, which will become their property, there they can dig down to the waterline, create a well grow some vegetables, raise some chickens, set up a tent, construct a lean to or cabin … and join a militia group if they want to. Lord knows, that California has plenty of frontier and open space between Californian's northern and southern borders, and then there is Nevada, Montana, Arizona .., can you say open spaces?

In a Christian nation that believes that the earth belongs to the Lord, who are we to tell someone that they cannot enjoy the earth, stay warm, dig a well? Someone might want to head to the open spaces to past Mt. Shasta and Redding.

Who can deprive an individual of his right to return to the womb (the Mother Earth, where most people end up anyway. According to the poetic book of Job in the Christian Canon, the earth is the womb. We must allow for adaptation and understand the natural propensity for man and the not man to get back together. Most humans love being outside, and in many other nations of the world, living outdoors is considered to be, normal. Wagon's ho, I say!

As for me, I nearly froze outside one night, having been caught outside, completely under-dressed: I missed I missed getting back to the storage unit in time to retrieve some heavier garments. Thank God for the guard at Kaiser Hospital in South San Jose, for permitting me sit in the Emergency waiting room so that I could thaw out while waiting for the Lite-Rail system to begin running again (at 4:00am). I also fell asleep, missed by stop and had to disembark during the wee hours of the morning.

Question:  Should the dominant in-door culture force the outdoor addict or members of the outdoor culture, to adapt to societal standards and cultural norms?

We have had individuals come to our program at HOP, who were in part unsuccessful, because they loved outdoor living, to the extent that they refused to adapt to schedules, structured hours or being told what to do by me.  Many of them were hardened and had adapted to what I will refer to as  'outdoor citizens or outdoor people's time, (OCT or OPT).  This non-adaptive behavior was challenging to deal with, even though we tried!

The latter, happens to be something that is common within my own black culture that is often referred to as (CPT) or 'colored people's time'.  Some of our colored outdoor citizens clients, had a double whammy in that case, a combination of both CPT & OPT.  The face on their wrist watches apparently read, outdoor-colored people's time.

In other words, their attitudes were, I will arrive when I arrive, and what's your problem?  I loved the ones who would arrive not only an hour late, but a day or a week late and wonder, what is he getting upset about? Get that man or woman a sundial, I thought, and place it in the park near his or her encampment!

Some of our clients/partners refused to be rehabilitated or to change their maladaptive behavior, that is to work within a prescribed framework.  They carried on in the same manner when inside, at HOP,,  that they were accustomed to doing when outdoors, or at other programs. There was a difference at HOP however, I confronted the behaviorist and the behavior. I did not accept the manipulation that was practiced, some I witnessed firsthand at several institutions in the county.

One expunged member of the BEU, indicated that he could not tolerate the environment. One day, I left to attend a pastor's meeting, and 5 or 6 of the grown children, closed up the office and played chess

instead of working. And, they wandered why I was upset when I heard about it. I didn't yell at anyone,, I simply asked for my keys back. Yes, as a part of our training outdoor children to be responsible again, they were also provided with keys to the office, individual desks, phones, file cabinets, facsimile, printer and scanning machine, food everyday … And still, they tried to take advantage of the situation and to get something for doing nothing.

Now, even though they found out that I was not a patsy, and that I would confront them, face to face – males need that. Remember, that is why many males have to be dispatched to para-military schools, to the military or disciplinary camps. Some of our ex-HOP BEU members, need to be sent away to paramilitary school. Otherwise, they will be playing the 'give me something for nothing into perpetuity. I was saddened to learn that they had they had venal supporters on the outside who agreed with them, as opposed to supporting the steps taken to help them to cover, some from years of doing nothing.

Of late, I have heard one of my major critics at FCC, say, Solomon is mean, and that he should pay everyone who was and is at HOP. To him, I say, we accept donations. And by the way, pay individuals for doing what, watching TV, going to porn sites when they were suppose to be researching, failing to complete their assignments, using our phones for personal business or how about for all of the free meals and libations that were provided for them for doing nothing.

Should we have paid the ones, who often played hooky for a week or two? Can anyone see how pervasive the negative re-enforcement is in this area, and the efforts by some to hinder progress?

I taught individuals at People's Park in Berkeley, to imagine that where they were, was the Garden of Eden, a starting place, and that right where they were, they could begin building their own functioning societies. It was one thing, I said, to be a part of a counterculture, and that where they were failing (like the shiftless on this side of the Bay was), that they weren't doing a thing to build their own self-sustaining society and to support themselves. Many churches …, brought food daily to the park. .

I could have gotten our babies on this side of the Bay to grow up, I planned to teach and show them how to build their societies within a society. I asked one prison lawyer, over a year ago, to o some research and to provide us with us legal information for the 1868 Homesteading Act. Unfortunately, I never got the depth of information that I was looking for. Homesteading means work. Santa Clara County's outdoor citizens don't want to work. And why should they, when they get everything for free and they have supporters, who support them and their plans to do nothing, or to point out that the bad guys are the ones who insist that they man up and do their parts.

It is not too late for the more savvy outdoor citizens to begin constructing their own self-supporting society subsets while living among the dominant culture, and afterward to either move south, or retain their exclusivity within a self-sustaining area alongside the indoor culture.

Many of the individuals who visited HOP, or were a part of Hop’s BEU were in fact hypocritical weaklings. They were individuals who actually wanted to have it both ways, to include living off of others while pretending to be outdoorsmen.   In my mind, and to my way of thinking a choice needs to be made.  If someone wants to get up and to get going, we should help, however, we should help within limits - there must be a partnership. We have too many outdoor citizens in this area who have been living on the dole, and off of the largesse of other people. Some of these homeless addicts, began their slide, when the valley was in the midst of its golden age. Others have been living outdoors, starting with the recession of 2001-2, and others since the beginning of the recent economic downturn.

Too many outdoor citizens pretend to believe in rugged individualism, when in fact all that they are doing is sleeping outside, or walking around for most of the night, while depending on the 'indoor people', to provide all of their needs for them. And sadly, as I close, too many of the 'enabler indoor citizen suppliers and suppliers organizations in the area were and are eager to be pawns in their manipulative games. Why?  Because, they were and are just as addicted, as are the ones that they purport to serve.

Outdoor citizens do not consider every other outdoor citizen to be a friend, just as you and I do not consider everyone living indoors to be a friend. But still, they recognize that each of them has something in common, and is that they are a part of a 'outdoor citizens cultural group' (last reported to be approximately 7,000 in Santa Clara County). They know of other individuals like them that live or spend the majority of their time outdoor.

There are some that they trust and some they don't. Jesus, was born 'outside', and during portions of his adult life, he lived outdoors too.  Remember, foxes have holes and birds have nests but the Son of Man, no place to lay his head.  He should live in Silicon Valley where our 'addict helpers' would give him a nest, food , housing or whatever else he wanted.  I remind Christians, that both Paul and Jesus had customary occupations, apparently.

In Part 2 of this series, I explained how and why Jesus canceled his 'On the Road Feeding & Miracle Crusade”, given that people were following the crusades for the wrong reasons, much like the majority of our outdoor citizens are doing in Silicon Valley.  Most of them simply want food and a miracle gift of some kind from service provider agencies and do-gooders.  In Part 2, I also referred to what the Apostle Paul had to say about individuals who refused  to work, like the Cretans who he referred to as being 'lazy and slow-bellies'.

We have a lot of those  'Cretans', around here. You don't have to have a job at Cisco or Adobe to be able to work.  You can get up and work everyday to feed and care for yourself.  For example, many of our outdoor addicts could go and work in community gardens.   Now get this, some of them are already growing marijuana plants by stealth, so how about  growing food?   On the other hand, why should they when they can get all of the food that they want for free?

Remember, foxes have holes and birds have nests but the Son of Man, no place to lay his head.  He should live in Silicon Valley where our 'addict helpers' would give him a nest, food , housing or whatever else he wanted.  I remind Christians, that both Paul and Jesus had customary occupations, apparently.

Growing marijuana plants by stealth is what some outdoor citizens want to do, so how about  growing planting and growing some food?   On the other hand, why should they when they can get all of the food that they want for free?

The question that needs to be answered, in the final analysis is, who is enabling who?