

“Collaborative” is the watchword here.
Why would this authoritarian agree to this when they could clearly just force it through? Because they want the locals to collaborate with them willingly. If you get the locals to feel like it’s a good thing, or at least better than the alternative, that they’re doing the illegal homeless crackdown, then suddenly it’s not as morally bad. “at least we’re preventing trump’s goons from cracking down. we can be terrorists more gently than they can.”
I need you to explain why you think it’s bad. What is the harm you’re perceiving. that other person explained why they think it works. you haven’t explained why you think it doesn’t, you just say “it’s not a good thing.” that’s not good enough. clearly i either don’t agree with whatever morality you’re waving at or i dont see its application to the situation. dont be lazy, defend yourself. what if you’re right and all i see is that guy attempting a point and you being like, ‘nuh-uh.’ what am i supposed to think.
edit: downvote and ignore not the clap-back you think it is