Cruelty: a "failed social experiment"

In Sacramento, a groundbreaking approach to homelessness initially showed promise, but ultimately fell victim to the same right-wing rhetoric that has taken hold across California. Camp Resolution, an encampment created by and for senior unhoused women, secured a historic lease agreement with the city, allowing them to remain on-site while working toward permanent housing solutions. However, as reactionary narratives gained traction, fueled by fear-mongering politicians, the initiative unraveled. This serves as a warning for Angelenos about the encroachment of this backwards thinking in our city.

Instead of forcibly removing residents from public spaces without offering real alternatives, Sacramento’s model initially recognized the fundamental truth that people need stability to rebuild their lives. By providing a sanctioned space and legal recognition, Camp Resolution offered a path forward that prioritized dignity and long-term solutions over temporary optics. Yet, the insidious spread of right-wing narratives, including use of the term "failed social experiment" to attack humane housing policies, ultimately contributed to the initiative’s downfall. The term "failed social experiment" has been strategically deployed throughout history to attack civil rights, social welfare, housing, and healthcare initiatives. Understanding its history helps us recognize and resist attempts to use it against humane, evidence-based policies today.

CD11 Councilmember Traci Park is bringing this dangerous rhetoric to Los Angeles. She consistently opposes affordable housing initiatives and weaponizes fear-based rhetoric to justify continuous encampment sweeps, increased policing, and surveillance measures. Her resistance to converting city-owned properties into housing, her opposition to key tenant protections, and her alignment with enforcement-first policies reflect a broader right-wing strategy that frames homelessness as a criminal issue rather than a systemic failure of housing policy.

The phrase "failed social experiment" has long been used as a right-wing rhetorical device to discredit progressive policies, particularly those aimed at addressing social inequalities. It frames policies as reckless experiments gone wrong rather than serious, evidence-based efforts to improve people's lives. This framing is often used to erode public trust in government-led social programs and justify punitive, market-driven, or enforcement-based alternatives.  

Historic Uses of "Failed Social Experiment"
 

1. Desegregation and Civil Rights Policies (1950s–1970s): During the Civil Rights Movement and the push for school desegregation, opponents of racial integration often referred to these efforts as a "failed social experiment." Segregationists claimed that integrating schools and neighborhoods would lead to social chaos, crime, and declining education standards, despite extensive evidence proving the opposite.  
2. The War on Poverty and Great Society Programs (1960s–1970s): President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society programs, which expanded social welfare, education funding, and civil rights protections, were attacked by conservatives as utopian experiments doomed to failure. Opponents labeled welfare programs and public housing as "failed social experiments" that supposedly created dependency and weakened traditional social structures.
3. Criminal Justice Reform and the War on Drugs (1980s–1990s): As the U.S. ramped up mass incarceration during the Reagan and Clinton years, critics of criminal justice reform used the phrase to argue against rehabilitation-focused policies like parole, community policing, and drug decriminalization. Right-wing politicians claimed that progressive sentencing reforms were a "failed social experiment" that led to rising crime rates, despite data showing that tough-on-crime policies did far more harm.
4. Universal Healthcare and Social Safety Net Programs (Ongoing): The phrase is frequently used to attack Medicare-for-All, expanded unemployment benefits, and universal basic income (UBI). Right-wing critics argue that such policies "disincentivize work" and create government dependency, despite evidence from countries with universal healthcare showing better outcomes and lower costs. 
5. Housing First and Homelessness Policy (2000s–Present): In recent years, conservative politicians and law enforcement advocates have increasingly used the term to attack Housing First policies, which prioritize stable housing over punitive measures like criminalization and sweeps.

Councilmember Traci Park have adopted this rhetoric to justify encampment sweeps and opposition to affordable housing projects. The LA Times recently highlighted how Park used “failed social experiment” to dismiss progressive housing policies in Venice, reinforcing the narrative that social services and housing-based solutions are ineffective. In reality, evidence overwhelmingly supports Housing First approaches as the most effective way to reduce homelessness. However, calling these efforts "failed social experiments" helps justify increased policing and displacement of unhoused people.  

Why This Rhetoric is Dangerous

By branding progressive policies as "failed social experiments," opponents aim to create public skepticism about reforms before they are fully implemented. They also seek to shift the blame for systemic issues away from structural causes (like wealth inequality or underfunded social programs) and onto the policies meant to address them. The rhetoric is intended to justify punitive alternatives, such as criminalization of homelessness, privatization of social services, or austerity measures. But these alternative measures have led to utter failures, such as mass incarceration, austerity and aggressive policing, all of which have caused more harm. It is essential that we remember where this language comes from, and that it has historically been used to block necessary social progress.  

The true failure is the refusal to invest in housing, mental health services, and economic support systems that prevent homelessness in the first place. Sweeps and criminalization not only fail to reduce homelessness but actively make it worse by pushing people further into instability.

The downfall of Camp Resolution proves that even well-intentioned solutions are vulnerable to right-wing fear campaigns. Los Angeles must learn from this failure and resist the spread of reactionary policies. Elected officials like Traci Park continue to prioritize wealthy homeowners' concerns over the basic human rights of unhoused residents, and Angelenos must remain vigilant in pushing back against this dangerous ideology. To truly address the crisis, we must reject the failed policies of displacement and criminalization and instead invest in real housing solutions that prioritize people over politics.