There is no valuable sustenance in crack or cocaine, and is used mainly as a recreational drug by many. This, in some ways, leaves the inner cities and crime and moves to the wealthier middle and upper middle classes who use the cocaine and not the crack version for recreation. This is the society of Jay McInerney's seminal 1980s fictional tale of New York 20-something lives, "Bright Lights, Big City."
Cocaine users have and have had their "scene" for quite some time, and for the, the currency is still money, rather than the drug itself. That is how recreational cocaine users differ from the crime-influenced hunger satisfier described in the proletariat hunger killer definition. There is not the sense of urgent necessity outside of the biological influence of the drug itself, of course.
In other words, recreational cocaine users may indeed get addicted and the drug may indeed replace their hunger, but it is from the biological nature of the drug. In the proletariat hunger killers model, the users get addicted to the lifestyle bore than the biological and chemical reactions implicit in taking cocaine or crack for recreational uses and in social settings.
In the proletariat hunger killers model, the drugs physically replace food. Take the rapper Ol' Dirty Bastard, for instance. Having grown up in the projects in Staten Island, he was very exposed to crack use, both as a sustenance drug and as a currency. However, after reaching financial and career success, one would assume that - if he continued to use cocaine or crack - would move towards the genussmittels model instead, since he was successfully removed himself from crime-ridden streets.
But we find that even as a 35-year-old millionaire, Ol' Dirty Bastard overdosed and died with crack in his system, while he was at work in the studio. This is clear proof that the genussmittels model does not necessary apply: Those who are exposed to crack or cocaine in the proletariat hunger killers form never are able to truly abandon that path. They treat the drugs as food: Note that the rapper went to work while on the drugs, as one would go to work after eating breakfast.
That is why the proletariat hunger killers model is more powerful, and perhaps more persuasive and dangerous: The drugs effectively replace food, making other sustenance factors moot and rendering other interests unimportant. The drug is the only goal, and the drug is the only currency. It is all-consuming. All this, of course, follows the biological and chemical harm that the drugs do, of course.
In the end, that is why the proletariat hunger killers model is more useful: More people in crime-infested areas are affected by cocaine and crack as life substitutes. They lose interest in all else, whether family, job or friends, and they focus only the drug. In fact, they care not about the recreational aspect, as per the genussmittels model either: The highs garnered from the drug take a backseat to the fuel the drugs act as for the livelihood of the users.
That is probably the closest analogy under the proletariat hunger killers model: Cocaine and crack are fuel, not really consumed for the quality, but simply because it is needed to go on, to survive. In that respect, the drugs are entirely like food, and they do replace sustenance.
The genussmittels model explains only the usage for those users who have always been in higher socio-economic classes, and then again, not all of them. It is quite easy for a genussmittels user to turn into a proletariat hunger killers user, but the opposite is quite impossible. Once cocaine replaces food, there is no going back, if usage is to continue. However, a user can easily go from using cocaine for recreational purposes for the particular highs it generates, to using it uncontrollably for fuel, or food.
Policy should focus, therefore, first on the proletariat hunger killers model, to nip drug use in its most harmful bud.