The method by which something is done doesn't seem much better than the motivation behind why it's done. Expediency in a world where the market is King presents the opportunity for a number of flaws to be added to a plan as an expedient means toward an end without realizing or accepting that the end will not only look different by the time you get to it but that means will change the view of the end and ultimately the end itself so that it's not at all the end that was originally intended.
Plans to liberate people are often subjected to compromises that defeat that plan.
When the science of behavior is available to ruthless opportunist that will sell their views about that science by their claim that the objectivity to understand it requires a lack of emotion (and compassion), they will only view human behavior as being without compassion and their product becomes a method of escapism that will infect and corrupt the result of their scientific ventures.
Not that long ago, there were more people who were involved with donating their time and money to worthy liberating causes who understood that to really bring about liberation would require them to be this closely involved also with the follow through also in order to influence the result.
However, marketed plans and marketed science can and do make the need for a financial means to reach a noble goal vulnerable to the corruption that accompany such a means. In other words, throwing money at a goal to create liberation may be only as free as the source intends.
To not look at the potential corruption that accompanies any method that is designed to bring about liberation is more than irresponsible. With the corrupt motives, and the corruption that can accompany the means to attaining that goal (including such things as politics and financial resources) , many noble causes become noble only in how they were described to their unsuspecting and vulnerable supporters.
People can and do sell the justification of the wars by not acknowledging the military industrial complex that depends on wars, preventing the marketing of technological advances for products that would make them less dependent on what they purchase from the people they are at war with, and by shifting the attention away from how those they now call evil were recently called friends when it served their purpose to do so. The decision to do this is expedient and convenient but not at all practical and certainly not noble.
The nation who does that also warehouses a larger percentage of people in mental institutions, rest homes, and jails than any other and claims that there is no other choice for those people due to their inability or unwillingness to be productive.
At the same time they use their resources to house the people rather than provide opportunities for them to prove to the contrary.... That they actually are capable of producing and serving, and they want and need to do so.
How can a nation that doesn't invest in their own citizens encourage families to invest in their children?
One of the ways that I find people are identified and thereby treated in the United States by how they may fit into three categories.
The first category is the most visible. Evidence of their lifestyle is publicized on billboards, television, and the Internet. They are channeled through a government-sponsored program that regards them as valuable members of society. Their difficulties are described as news. When they are hurt or offended they are provided with health care, the police and courts respond, and suspicion of wrongful deaths are treated with autopsies, investigations, and a justice system that finds in their favor.
The second category are seen as dependents. Their link to having their name counted as a member of the population is accompanied by shame, abuse, and ultimately they are warehoused in places where few people besides themselves care about the conditions.
The third group may very well be the largest. If not I think it's appropriate to view things in such a way because until they are counted, all other statistics that claim to include them have no value. Whatever windfalls of finance or temporary comfort that may be bestowed upon them in no way make up for all the shame that gets dumped on them. They are blamed for either not being able or willing to take advantage of opportunities they are seen to have but never have. They are the unseen and uncounted.
Several years ago the Katrina storm that hit New Orleans Louisiana said a lot about how our nation responds to people in need. Look at how national response teams dealt with the crisis. The violence that occurred as a result allowed for martial law that can now be used in many situations that may not be naturally caused.
Many of the victims of that storm were sent to an arena where they were blamed for the filth and violence that occurred there. Many of the children who may have been in some sort of school before are no longer in any school system. Many did not transition into any place or situation where there is any public knowledge of whether they are dead or alive or even what they do.
There are NO statistics that could provide any kind of reasonable understanding of this reality.
Formal standardized education can provide liberation and democracy but not if the methods for securing such an educational system are contrary to those goals. If the hierarchy within the educational system is exclusive and oppressive then exclusivity and oppression is what will be fostered in the minds and hearts of the students.
In order for public education (or a more easily accessible and less exclusive private school system) to be a true liberator it needs to include two major components.
One is channeling people toward a suitable job starting at earlier age or grade and being more practical about that.
The second is being more inclusive of the different ways that we know of for different types of learners to learn and researching how many ways there may actually be.
We also don't need to enforce keeping up with where people are, and what they're doing as much as we need to allow people an opportunity to be publicly counted due to the opportunities that it creates. For that to happen, we need to make what we call opportunities be real opportunities.
There is much more to being autistic than the diagnosis. The diagnosis can also be liberating but not without a fairer and more practical way for how autistics are treated after that diagnosis that provides more opportunities for them.
Furthermore, if the glory of our achievers are where we place our entire focus in order to appear justified with in the eyes of the system that ultimately will turn its back on us all if given the opportunity, we are cheating ourselves.
There's more than one way to overcome how society sees autism in discouraging ways than to show that, contrary to their beliefs, we are all instead exactly who they claim are worthy of attention and respect.
This is one the core reasons I think advocacy is so important.
I believe that it is every bit as important to show what autistics can do, what we have done, and what we are doing in order to defy the negative stereotypes that encourage people to believe that we can't achieve anything.
However, it's also important to acknowledge where some people are due to how things are screwed up and need to change as far as offering autistic people more opportunities.
An oppressed group won't overcome their stereotypes of inadequacy or their oppression as a group with out all parts of that group being recognized, accounted for, and offered more opportunities from the resource groups or agencies that the oppressed group is appealing to for assistance.
Being able to trust in authority and government is best and some do better with little of either. However, buying your own liberty at the price of someone else's is not a purchase. It's actually a trade that is more corrupt than the one that sold you into the enslaved situation you are already in.