Why pick college admissions specifically? What about the non-college bound? Why not have a lottery for everyone? Perhaps, we could parcel out some all-purpose resource, like money, and give it away to winners?
Perhaps, there should be punishments.
“Like all men of Babylon, I have been proconsul; like them all, a slave; I have also known omnipotence, opprobrium, incarceration. Look: on my right hand is missing my index finger. Look: through this rent cape can be seen on my stomach a ruddy tattoo — it is the second symbol, Beth. On nights when the moon is full, this symbol confers unto me power over the men whose mark is Ghimel while rendering me subject to the men of Aleph, who on moonless nights must obey the men of Ghimel. In a cellar in the half-light of dawn, I have slit before a black altar the throats of sacred bulls. For an entire lunar year, I have been declared invisible: I would cry out and no one would respond, I would steal bread and I was not beheaded. I have known what the Greeks knew not: uncertainty.” Jorge Luis Borges/”The Lottery in Babylon” 

“Addicts are the people who are marked out for oppression in specific ways by the social, political, and economic forces that regulate, incentivize, and criminalize the pursuit and possession of controlled substances and processes.” I think that sentence (especially the first or main clause) is nonsense, unless perhaps, one is a pure-bred “situationist” and more interested in excusing and rationalizing addiction than strategies to overcome it. There are of course myriad problems and contradictions with the way we deal with—“incentivize and criminalize”—drugs, both legal and illegal and, like everything else in this country, the treatment of addicts has to a large extent become a profit-making enterprise (and non-profit institutions can have the flavor of an ‘addiction bureaucracy’), at least for those who can afford it. And no one should deny that socio-economic circumstances can be conducive to those looking for escape or relief from their suffering in routine drug use (bored rich people can become addicts as well), or they are comparatively punished for drug use all out of proportion to their counterparts in the middle and upper classes or who are white.
 
I have personally known different kinds of addicts, and am well acquainted with alcoholism, which is an insidious addiction (and thus not a ‘disease’ as some still argue). I have been studying addiction for many years (and have a bibliography on same) and addicts are often in fact part of or deeply involved in the various treatment strategies, be they institutional, therapeutic, or personal, and I do not believe either addicts or those who “treat” or help them should always and everywhere have epistemic privilege (as for the ‘testimony’ of addicts, it is not hard to find should one look for it), but those with the requisite knowledge, experience, and expertise are capable of providing epistemic, psychological, and ethical perspectives and insights not typically found among addicts, at least in the earliest and most arduous stages of treatment. I thus cringe when reading that we should be “celebrating addict experience and identity, and generally describing things from the addict standpoint.” Let’s not forget that more than a few people involved in the treatment of addiction have themselves been addicts or intimately know family members or friends who have struggled or died from addiction. Addicts alone, at least in many cases, should not be “in charge” of their treatment regimen any more than psychotics or schizophrenics should be in charge of attempts to transcend their mental illness. This in no way precludes recognition of the moral and political agency of addicts, or acknowledgment and affirmation of their dignity, or the necessity of efforts to facilitate or encourage their individuation and self-realization. It seems this “collective” and its blog have or entertain objectives, aims, and strategies that will be inclined (if not designed) to attract those with social and political views and backgrounds identical or similar to the two persons who wrote this manifesto-like introduction (please don’t infer from this that I am opposed to manifestos!). Perhaps I am mistaken. I wish the authors well.