 The
major media are buzzing again with concerns about the extent of
gambling addiction, especially among young people. Estimates are that
about 4% of gamblers (between 0.5 and 1.0% of the adult population) are
'addicted' to gambling, compulsive to the point at which it causes
significant social or financial harm.
What intrigues me is that these studies only involve games of chance – poker, bingo, casino games and lotteries. But the most serious gamblers I've met make a living
(or pretend to do so) gambling – day traders, stock brokers, currency
and commodity speculators, developers and real estate speculators, even
eBay vendors who work full time just buying and selling stuff they
don't produce. For some reason there is no stigma associated with such
gambling, though it is indistinguishable in nature from gambling on
games of chance. This is completely unproductive work, adding no value
to the economy, and it is in many cases very destructive work, since
there is a loser (and often many losers) for every 'winner'. Much of
this 'work' entails great temptation and opportunity (insider
information, bribes and payoffs, and outright fraud) enabling the
'players' to cheat, the only way to guarantee an edge over the losers.
This
is shabby business, transforming harmless fun into chronic, ruinous,
devastating compulsion, and too often, finally, pathological behaviour.
What is it that pushes some people off this edge, leading so
many do-gooders to demand a ban on the activity for everyone to save
the vulnerable few? It seems to be that addiction to gambling, in
whatever form, is really not that different from any other addiction:
to alcohol, tobacco or other drugs, to food and diets, to the Internet
and pornography, to exercise, self-mutilation or work. Even the experts
admit that separating the physical from the psychological aspects of
addiction is almost impossible. They tend to prescribe the same old
'interventions' that seem to work for some, but don't for many:
psychological counseling and therapy, notably the notorious and
grueling '12-step' programs and aversion therapies; and detox programs
involving sedation, substitution, and physical therapies like
acupuncture.
I have argued before that we are all addicted to
something, and that we cannot change who we are. I do know some people
who have beaten their addictions, but they have either had powerful
motivation to do so (we do what we must...)
or else were not really addicted at all. The people I know who are the
most obvious and troubled addicts tend to be multiple and serial
addicts -- their addictions often seem to be substitutes for some other
craving they can no longer satisfy, and tend to reinforce each other
(unhealthy diets and excessive exercise; tobacco and alcohol; work and
alcohol; gambling and porn).
I'm not a fan of banning
activities and substances that can be addictive. That's not libertarian
zeal, just an acknowledgement that making addictions illegal doesn't
work. The number of smokers has dropped mostly because it's become
socially seriously unacceptable, and because some older smokers have
suffered health complications that leave them no choice but to quit.
It's not because people know it's unhealthy, and not even because it's
expensive, and making it illegal would just drive it underground or
move the addicts to other drugs. And nearly all the serious ex-smokers
I know have acquired substitute addictions.
We do what we must, then we do what's easy, and then we do what's fun.
Addictions start as fun, which none of us has enough of, and, for some,
quickly progress to 'musts'. This terrible world has most of us
enslaved, giving up most of our lives, time, energy, and healthy years
to mind-numbing and/or exhausting work, anguished or unsatisfying
personal relationships, and endless chores we loathe. When that's done,
we want easy fun, and most of the addictive activities and substances
provide, or at least promise, easy fun, a rush, a high, a temporary
respite from too much boring work and too much depressing news. Who can
blame us, especially when commercial interests are all too willing to
pander to and profit from our addictions?
I don't intend to
minimize the anguish that addictions, and their darker side, can
inflict on addicts and their loved ones. If therapies and detox
programs work for them, that's great. I do suspect, however, that those
who are prone to addiction will, unless their lives are free from
stress, boredom and confinement, end up addicted to something.
Recent studies of mice have in fact shown that they are only prone to
addictions when they are stressed, bored and confined. In healthy
natural environments, addiction is virtually unknown. And our modern
world is so far from healthy and natural that we're not going to cure
addiction by transforming the environment that nurtures it.
The
best we can do, and should be trying harder to do, is to discover drugs
that are relatively harmless (and really cheap), and invent other
substitutions for our more dangerous and destructive addictions.
Something that gives the euphoria without the judgement impairment, the
fun without the social or financial cost. A challenge perhaps, but with
the shared creativity of open source and the technologies already
oriented towards entertainment without limit, not an impossible one.
Brave New World come true.
Full disclosure: While I have no financial interest in any aspect of the gambling industry, some members of my family do.
|
MADE IN CANADA
trust your
instincts 
