It seems to bother people a great deal to hear that science is closely connected to politics but each day I see evidence that the two are inseparable. Unfortunately, the advocates of neither one are describing what they know in a way that is empowering.
The U.S. is currently involved in a year of presidential politics, which indicates like never before that "we the people" have no influence is in federal policy beyond the allegiance we pay to one political party or another. None of these parties can financially afford to alter policy in ways that jeopardize the corporations from which they receive their funding. In similar fashion, how could psychology or any ideas that align with current psych science research challenge the system of western medicine or the political machine which dictates every aspect of its operation?
Since behaviorists have been able to identify particular traits by the assigned name of autistic traits (when to do so was profitable), autistics have been targeted in the worst ways for experimentation and other forms of exploitation. While it would be wonderful for schools or any other system preparing children for a trade to capitalize on strengths and provide additional support for weaknesses, the system was never designed for anything with such noble aspirations.
Since the earliest Prussion model of compulsory education, exclusion has always played a vital role in the agenda. (The Principles of Secondary Education (1918)
By Alexander Inglis )
Science (or so it's called) has validated the pharmaceutical industry so that students with learning difficulties and behaviors, which were considered abhorrent could be sedated, ignored, AND exploited in every way possible.
Intelligence standards have been designed by groups of people with agendas for exploiting the largest number of people and eliminating the rest in many covenient ways. Aside from a few efforts being made to explore alternative approaches to integrate autistics to more suited occupations, autism awareness campaigns are geared toward eliminating any ideas that come from autistics whenever they can be categorized as too competent to maintain the required standard label.
The best any politician (or political instrument with science accreditation) could do, is rely on the expert opinion of lawyers, doctors, and scholars of what autism is and what it isn't. What all these experts lack is a current understanding of what it means to be an autistic with no accredited experience whatsoever. Most of the autistics which need the most support are the ones never consulted. Therefore, most environments where autism is discussed are bound by someone's or some group's narrow political agenda.
It's important to remember that in politics, nothing is true or false but ranking (by those with the power to rank) makes it so. This was never truer than in the politics of ranking ability, along with the people who process that ability, in an ablest culture.
The void in the current understanding of autism is directly related to our relentless cycle of demanding the answers from the same sources. Those sources will continue to yield false information due to their funding sources and political ties.
The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master's House ~ Audre Lorde
If I wanted to learn chemistry and the reactions of combining particular chemical elements, I would not only seek the teaching of a professor who knew the established language; I would listen to someone at a similar stage in the process of learning as myself. The word autism, however, can only be a way to describe commonalities of those who have received the label. Wikipedia says this about the word psyche (despite the corporate goals of those who abuse the term) : Etymology
The basic meaning of the Greek word ψυχή (psūchê) was "life". Derived meanings included "spirit", "ghost", and ultimately "self", "conscious personality".
No one could possibly define autism better than autistics. After all, the most anyone else could even attempt to do is translate what they saw into a language that experts use to describe what they see. There are plenty of ways to dismiss autistics (mysterious, the victim of an epidemic, the victim environmental toxins, a product of societal ills, a child only a mother could know, a child only a mother could love, too low functioning to communicate or contribute something worthwhile, too high functioning to understand the tragedy and misfortunes that accompany parenting a disabled child, etc.) but most truths are unknown due to the enormous effort people use to ignore them rather than what's difficult to attain.
To understand autism; listen to an autistic. The practice of agenda-free listening will always yield better results than consulting an expert. The expert would never have become an expert without supporting someone's political agenda, and that agenda will always severely limit their understanding.
Recent Comments