The Standard Review

The People's Choice

 

Of course bussiness as usual in the U.S. must be disrupted because it's corrupted and the stagnation that has resulted is stinking.

The folks at Pennsylvania Ave. don't need to hear more from U.S. citizens or from more of U.S. citizens in order for needed change to happen. We can't make them care. Our society is trapped by some kind of pathological belief that we can and should change politicians, and that is accompanied by a co-dependent slave mentality that makes us fear challenging the status quo.

This combination glorifies bullies and gang wars, which are politely described in terms of identity politics. It encourages everyone to micro manage each other based on standards dictated to us by corporations (mainly the psychiatric industry which coordinates efforts with our judicial system) and be disgusted by the diversity we're taught is a weakness while apathetically awaiting a miraculous savior to grace the oval office.

The method of operation in our current government is such that the corporations in command of our political system have a responsibility to their stock holders to  oppose caring when it interferes with profits.

The people who care are the people who can change things, and they don't have those financial and political limitations. They are the ones that need to hear our voice and the disenfranchised need to be empowered with something as old-fashioned and trite as kindness at every opportunity. That kind of change doesn't come from Washington.

If you don't see how you've been held hostage, pimped out, or otherwise exploited by the Democratic party based on Republicans being worse then you are either part of the problem, or you aren't paying close attention.

Change happens in the minds and hearts of people. When people are empowered to think they change what they believe, how they feel, and ultimately how they act. When enough of that happens the government will have no choice  but listen but until then they have nothing to listen to.

A Shopper's State of Mind

http://www.photographytips.com.au/userimages/user1833_1157039308.JPG

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_c4lzk84-Q5U/Sx7IuprXiiI/AAAAAAAAAMs/IUU73r7-lpY/s400/CrowdedMall.jpg

The positive effects to the economy that results from the sale of merchandise is dependent, mainly on the later part of the year. Most of that is done in December, and that's when the mental state of shoppers is so intense and clearly identified.

More than any other time of the year it seems that during the holidays people's mindset is generally chaotic. I can't imagine that it would be any other way when you're shopping. Shopping is all about comparisons (and comparisons are traps) and this behavior affects people's clarity and vision. A clear and accurate perspective is difficult when someone is lost amid a sea of adjectives.

When everything becomes relative in value to everything else, it's difficult for this state of mind not to affect how we view people as well. Every aspect of someone's personality and each behavior becomes grist for the critical evaluation mill. It would seem to me that after being involved with this pressured, reactionary, aggressive state of criticism it would be the most inappropriate time to plan a reunion with friends and family. However, this is exactly the sequence of events that many people follow during the holiday season.

Our societal values are never more intense and in a hyper-raw state of exposure than when people apply those values to a season when commercially manufactured happiness is a prerequisite for interacting with the valued public. This is what creates our disenfranchised population and subjects them to all types of injustice.

Just as our Royals are praised during this time of the year, the people who are considered the least valued members of our society (or are even considered burdens) are more exposed than ever to images and overwhelmingly blunt messages that remind them of how the people whom they are taught are educated, knowledgeable and have a valid opinion, view their worth.

http://www.intmensorg.info/images/homeless.jpg

Modern society defines its sophistication and progressive attitude by the advancements it makes in people's comfort and convenience. However, only a few people are viewed as worthy of these advantages. The society planners are effectively working to eliminate the people in the world they see as (or can define as) excess baggage and useless eaters.

At this time of the year in the United States, more crimes from the less valued public and the disenfranchised is perpetrated against similarly low ranked citizens than any other. There are also more suicides than any other time of the year. At a time when hyper-ranking is the most respected activity (and this respect is provided and taught by the corporations which profit from it) those with the least valued rank treat each other accordingly.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/43/79381011_1ea3193930_z.jpg?zz=1

It's more than irresponsible to believe that joy and peace can be shared with loved ones while ignoring how this population of people is treated in ways that are directly related to that comfort. The attempt to block it from our consciousness is an aggressive act and there are consequences.

I hope that everyone will have a joyful holiday. Contrary to a popular belief, peace and joy can't afford the convenience of ignoring anything. If joy is to be found, it will be in a state of consciousness where nothing needs to be ignored, and value can be seen in people without comparisons, which are degrading and confusing.

Wishing you all a joyous holiday season. :)

Newsworthy Assessments

http://quezi.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/wig-shop-window.jpg

Choosing entertainment and sources of information is an informal way of voting. By either purchasing or tuning in to a commercial network or public resource you confirm their value and reliability. What corporations that provide these would like for the public to choose is within a narrow focus.

It is a means for teaching buying habits to consumers who will enable an industry to better mass market their products. This can teach people to want the best in a way that goes beyond their financial means, but also it encourages people to believe in and even praise a mystical and unattainable ideal of what is normal. By doing so what becomes popular is reflective of an unhealthy set of values.

Such sources have determined what is important in a way that has had the biggest influence on what we consider historical events. This also continues to influence the more formal methods of voting for public policy. While it may seem that today we have more choices and diversified sources many of the big corporations own those sources and will limit what is expressed there to a narrow set of values reflective of their goals.

People who are tuning in are often ashamed of their achievements, what they look like, what they are able to purchase, and how their lifestyle compares to what the mass media claims are normal. The more these corporations have power over how we feel about ourselves the more ability they will have to dictate different aspects, of how we live and how susceptible we are to their suggestion. Shame is a powerful weapon and even more so when it can't be understood because it is unreasonable and therefor unhealthy.

 

http://www.jobhustle.com/images/worker-legs-in-chains.jpg

http://consumerist.com/images/resources/2007/06/Freegans%20All%20About.jpg

The different belief systems and cultures don't have nearly such a broad spectrum of morality as is often described in the media. The things that have sustained the human race reflect a sense of morality and that primarily is responsible for our survival. Compassion is a choice but not a difficult one to make. Honesty has only become seen as less important and a more difficult decision due to the ethics which are taught by industry.

People will express themselves in a multitude of ways and some will take longer to develop standard behaviors. Popular media sources would describe such expressions as the reflection of an inferior person and the expense to accommodate such differences will be exaggerated so that mass production of products and services can be streamlined and therefor more profitable. The lower prices provided to mainstream consumers provide incentives but by accepting such advantages, we sell the values which have sustained us. As a result our neighbors are often persecuted and starved of what is essential for survival.

It is arrogant, unreasonable, and completely impractical to believe that mainstream ethics which have been taught by corporations will not lead to unjust laws  and conviction without trial as well as the most extreme methods of population control. Encouraging the dignity of fellow humans is not an opportunity we can afford to miss. None of our performance ability or the materials we have attained will ever be of equal importance to the compassion we feel for others.

The lack of human compassion and empathy is our most important deficit, and it is a learned response. Too often this deficit is ignored even though correcting it requires the least effort and produces the best results.

Much of what gets described as "the way things are" isn't the way things need to remain at all. When people describe an end which justifies a means it often reflects an attitude of convenience and the justification for a few to have privileges at the expense of rights for many others.

The solutions offered for human betterment and even some, which are described as environmentally responsible often come at the expense of many lives and more importantly they come at the expense, of how we feel and therefor treat other people. This has a great impact on how we see ourselves as individuals and how we appreciate the human race.

Our top priority must be the appreciation of humanity beyond what commercial standards teach. That is the hope for the future that will sustain us through the difficult times we face.

Republican Economics as Social Darwinism

Sharron Angle Mocks Insurance for Autism; The Fight to Save Food Stamps

Mike Huckabee Says Folks with Pre-existing Conditions are Uninsurable Just Like a Burned-Out House

Disgusting, outrageous, personally irresponsible, socially irresponsible, terribly offensive, inappropriate in so many ways, despicable, etc.

I understand that many ugly prejudices about autistics have been ingrained in the consciousness of our culture and that this affects the attitudes of many parents who are raising autistic kids. I understand that many parents are unaware or are new to understanding the struggles faced by disabled people in broader society. I understand that the incredibly inappropriate and false supports provided by government agency are not readily understood by many people. I understand they are not pursuing the knowledge of disability advocates and survivors of what was been unjustly defined as therapy in honor of the royal name of psychiatry. I understand that this knowledge does not seem important to many of them and their current situation.... However, the following article and video about a mother who recently murdered her children are just WRONG!

It's absolutely OUTRAGEOUS and DISGUSTING that other parents would exploit this as an opportunity to report their struggles and the need for more and better services!!!! It is totally irresponsible and
sick for these other parents to act this way!! This makes me very angry.

What has happened to these children is a terrible tragedy! Please don't exploit their memory with crass commercialism and political nonsense.

ARTICLE AND VIDEO

The Prohibition of Autistics in Public

Recently, I've seen where autistics have been abused by police, and it has been reported and even published in newspapers and magazines. As much as the stories themselves are horrible to think about I'm encouraged by the exposure since reports of abuse are almost nonexistent.

In a recent Facebook discussion, the topic was the importance of helping the police to become more aware and educated about autism. While I believe this is important, the tragedy is that the police are only doing something illegal based on disability law. The laws which have been made so that a person with a disability is not exploited by law enforcement and the legal system has been of little value to the majority of people.

At this point, I believe that asking the police to handle such situations differently is  contradictory to many of the public views and trends, which are mainly affecting how they do their job. They are, after all, considered servants of the people(although the people they serve are in the elite minority) and can only be expected to follow the guidelines the public (the voting and vocal public) provides.

This is some of what I believe influences this problem:

#1 The history of psychiatry and it's affect on cultural values



Benjamin Rush, one of the signers of the Declaration of

Independence is considered the "Father of American

Psychiatry", published the first textbook on the subject

in the United States, Medical Inquiries and Observations

upon the Diseases of the Mind (1812).

Wikipedia says this about him:


"In 1792 Dr Benjamin Rush, one of the 'Founding Fathers' of

the USA, presented a paper before the American

Philosophical Society which argued that the 'color' and

'figure' of blacks were derived from a form of leprosy. He

was convinced that with proper treatment, blacks could be

cured (i.e. become white) and eventually... assimilated

into the general population" (Omi & Winant 1986: 148). Omi,

M. and H. Winant (1986). Racial formation in the United

States : from the 1960s to the 1980s. New York ; London,

Routledge & Kegan Paul."

AND:

"He proposed that being black was a hereditary skin disease,

which he called "negroidism," and that it might be cured.

Rush drew the conclusion that "Whites should not tyrannize

over [blacks], for their disease should entitle them to a

double portion of humanity. However, by the same token,

whites should not intermarry with them, for this would tend

to infect posterity with the 'disorder'... attempts must be

made to cure the disease."

One of the men who studied under Dr. Rush was Dr.Samuel Cartwright.

His contribution to psychiatry was, drapetomania,

a mental disorder akin to alienation. He  said that slaves should

be kept in a submissive state and treated like children, with

"care, kindness, attention, and humanity to prevent and cure

them from running away." If they nonetheless became dissatisfied

with their condition,they should be whipped as a prevention

against running away.[2] In describing his theory and cure for

drapetomania, Cartwright relied on passages of scripture

dealing with slavery.

Cartwright also described another disorder, "Dysaethesia

aethiopica", a disease "affecting both mind and body."

Cartwright used his theory to explain the apparent lack of

work ethic among slaves.[3] Dysaethesia aethiopica, "called

by overseers 'rascality'," was characterized by partial

insensitivity of the skin and "so great a hebetude of the

intellectual faculties, as to be like a person half

asleep." Other symptoms included "lesions of the body

discoverable to the medical observer, which are always

present and sufficient to account for the symptoms."[4][5]

According to Cartwright, dysaethesia aethiopica was "much

more prevalent among free negroes living in clusters by

themselves, than among slaves on our plantations, and

attacks only such slaves as live like free negroes in

regard to diet, drinks, exercise, etc." — indeed, according

to Cartwright, "nearly all [free negroes] are more or less

afflicted with it, that have not got some white person to

direct and to take care of them."

This leads me to reason that from the beginning when

the United States became established as an independent

and supposedly free nation, industry, politics, and psychiatry

formed a partnership that encouraged the legal means for

abuse against the majority who made up the lower class.

#2 The effect the eugenics movement has had on how our

current laws are structured.

This says of the eugenics movement:

Eugenics: Semester Research Project -Spring,2002 By Lora Judge



"The Eugenics movement won substantial recognition in early

20th century America. By 1941, 33 US states had endorsed

sterilization policies. The movement was social, political,

and scientific. It reflected the fears of many whites that

their once-great nation was threatened by demographic and

economic change. Their understanding of the principles of

genetic inheritance led eugenicists to conclude that

genetically defective members of society were rapidly out-

reproducing the "normal" members of society at an alarming

rate.  These defectives included the "feeble-minded,"

criminals, the sexually wanton, epileptics, the insane, and

non-white races,  and they were passing on their

"deleterious" genes at the expense of the "normal." The

social cost of such a situation, they feared, would be

devastating."

AND:

"Using the argument for national efficiency, eugenicists

successfully lobbied for the passage of a number of state

eugenical sterilization   laws in the 1920s and 1930s.

Eugenical sterilization was aimed specifically at those

individuals in mental or penal institutions who, from

family-pedigree analysis, were considered likely to give

birth to socially defective children. Sterilization could

be ordered any time after  a patient had been examined by a

eugenics committee that was composed of a lawyer or family

member representing the individual, a judge, and a doctor

or other eugenic "expert."   More than 30 states had

enacted such compulsory sterilization laws by 1940. Indiana

was the first with a eugenical sterilization and it went

into effect in 1907. By 1941, more than 60,000 eugenical

sterilizations were performed in the United States. Most

state sterilization laws were not repealed until after the

1960s."

In this:The Fascist Origins of the SAT Test by Rich Gibson,

San Diego State University, April 2001, it says:

"The frantic rush to high-stakes standardized testing in the

US costs one-half billion dollars annually in direct

expenditures, probably double that in indirect costs. The

chief fetish of the testing movement is the SAT, long known

as the Scholastic Aptitude Test but now known, on the

insistence of the test's owners, the Educational Testing

Service, as just "The SAT."

The SAT measures, above all else, class, sex, and race.

(Fairtest, Roney). The SAT, like every similar test, is

designed to divide people with razor sharp precision, to

enumerate human value and to track people's futures under a

veil of objective science. The SAT is a commodity itself,

for sale to every student, school, and college in the

world. It also commodifies people, attaching worth to

individuals, but more pointedly drawing the lines of what

can only be called class warfare. The impact of the SAT is

to create the logic for a more deeply stratified society,

divided primarily by issues of inherited income, sexism,

and racism. The fraudulent claims of the SAT to promote a

more equitable and meritorious society have been thoroughly

revealed elsewhere. (Lemann, Fairtest, Roney). This

analysis is a brief history of the SAT, unmasking the

politics of the people who designed it, and those who

promote the SAT and similar exams today .

The genealogy of the SAT is far more authentic than the

importance attached to the test's scores. The SAT was born

from the initial IQ tests, written by French psychologist

Alfred Binet. In the US, Lewis Terman and Robert Yerkes

promoted the IQ test and made it a popular instrument to

determine who should be an officer, in a segregated

military, during WWI . Their IQ test was designed to prove

the genetic advantage of races they had already identified

as superior. Terman and Yerkes were executives in the

American Eugenics Society (Mehler)."

 

The standardized test which is used in accordance

with the No Child Left Behind act promote what the ACLU

calls the school to prison pipeline. This article explains:

"The school-to-prison pipeline is one of the most important

civil rights challenges facing our nation today.

• The school-to-prison pipeline refers to the national

trend of criminalizing, rather than educating, our nation’s

children.

• The pipeline encompasses the growing use of zero-

tolerance discipline, school-based arrests, disciplinary

alternative schools, and secured detention to marginalize

our most at-risk youth and deny them access to education.

Zero-tolerance disciplinary policies are often the first

step in a child’s journey through the pipeline.

• Zero-tolerance policies impose severe discipline on

students without regard to individual circumstances.  Under

these policies, children have been expelled for giving

Midol to a classmate, bringing household goods (including a

kitchen knife) to school to donate to Goodwill, and

bring¬ing scissors to class for an art project." 


#3 The laws which provide comfort for elite criminals


Today we have white-collar prisons. Wikipedia describes

white-collar crimes and the idea behind them like this:

"The term white-collar crime only dates back to 1939.

Professor Edwin Hardin Sutherland was the first to coin the

term, and hypothesize white-collar criminals attributed

different characteristics and motives than typical street

criminals. Mr. Sutherland originally presented his theory

in an address to the American Sociological Society in

attempt to study two fields, crime and high society, which

had no previous empirical correlation. He defined his idea

as "crime committed by a person of respectability and high

social status in the course of his occupation" (Sutherland,

1939). Many denote the invention of Sutherland's idiom to

the explosion of U.S business in the years following the

Great Depression. Sutherland noted that in his time, "less

than two percent of the persons committed to prisons in a

year belong to the upper-class." His goal was to prove a

relation between money, social status, and likelihood of

going to jail for a white-collar crime, compared to more

visible, typical crimes."

#4 The industry of juvenile detention

One example of how disenfranchised youths are being

mistreated by our justice system is evident in this

story Pa. judges jail youths for profit 

"A case of judicial

corruption in Pennsylvania has once again exposed the

true nature of the profit-driven prison industrial complex

and the warehousing of poor youth.

Two Pennsylvania judges, Mark A. Ciavarella Jr. and his

predecessor, Michael T. Conahan, received $2.67 million

over the last seven years from a private juvenile detention

center. In exchange, federal prosecutors allege, the two

helped the center secure lucrative contracts from Lucerne

County, then sentenced youth to detention for the mildest

of infractions.

For participation in this scheme—which damaged the hopes,

expectations and futures of hundreds and perhaps thousands

of youth—the two judges were given a plea agreement that

will see them serving a modest 87 months in federal prison.

In addition, the owners of the detention facilities have

not yet been charged with any crime."


The article also points out:

"The New York Times described Luzerne County as “an area in

northeastern Pennsylvania that has been battered by a loss

of industrial jobs and the closing of most of its

anthracite coal mines.” (Feb. 12)

As unemployment increases because of the global economic

and financial crises, it can be expected that more youth

across the country will be thrown into juvenile detention

facilities for petty crimes of survival. Made to pay for

the crimes of capitalism that they did not create, these

youth will face increased hardship in the future."

#5 The defense of bigotry and strict class division

known as the drug wars

Today's law enforcement is heavily dependent on the

prohibition of marijuana. Here's something that points out the

history of the prohibition:

HOW DID "REEFER MADNESS" GET STARTED?

"During Prohibition - an era also referred to as

The Roaring Twenties - government corruption was rampant and

police - a huge portion of them on "the take"--had no desire to see

Prohibition end. The booze ran free at speakeasies, morals were

loose, and jazz was the music of choice, performed predominantly

by African-American musicians who also had a

penchant for marijuana.

As the 1920’s moved into the 1930’s with gang wars becoming

commonplace and public dissatisfaction with Prohibition at it’s

peak, it became clear to even the most corrupt government officials

and even organized crime that the Volstead Act had to go. But it

would not go quietly, and something had to be created to take it’s

place to keep law enforcement funds rolling in and organized crime

in business.

Local and federal policing agencies had grown fat during

Prohibition, and a repeal would put many of them flat out of work.

At the same time, the tyrannical William Randolph Hearst, the most

powerful newspaper owner in America, began printing falsified and

exaggerated stories about the "evils of marijuana". A blatant racist

who despised Hispanics and Blacks, Hearst used his vast newspaper

empire to create hysteria among white parents, alleging that

"pushers" - most of them from the lowly ethnic minority class

that Hearst despised-- would be dealing marijuana to high school

kids, turning them into addicts who would quit school, commit

violent crimes like murder and rape as depicted in the laughable

film "Reefer Madness", produced in 1936."

#6 Autism awareness campaigns

What is considered mainstream autism awareness campaigning is being defined by the fear-mongering of groups like Autism Speaks who are mainly interested in eradicating autistics.

Among other myths the so-called awareness campaigns perpetuate is the idea that autistics are lacking in empathy and compassion.

#7 Identity politics

There are Aspie supremacists tearing apart the ideals of the disability community which has made progress in teaching people how supremacy values, bigotry, and the unwillingness of our society to accommodate those who are considered invalid is responsible for the problems we face.

In conclusion:

In such a society as this, how can we expect law enforcement to have a better understanding of what autism is in relation to how an autistic person may present in public?

Stopping the abuse of law enforcement against autistics will require a radical approach, and it needs to include some understanding on our part of the mindset behind how officers are encouraged to do their work. Without that we won't have the necessary tools to adequately describe what the abuse is and the necessary approach for stopping it.

The Indifferent

In an ideal society, a person would have value based on how they are accepted by their family and their community. The more that immediate behaviors are separated from someone's individuality and character and are seen as temporary and unrelated expression which needs either reward or punishment, the more behavior is reduced to its most common denominator and there is a risk that everyone participating in the stern evaluation process will be defined by how what they do relates to the common standard.

People who are strictly evaluated may find their only liberation by understanding how they are being oppressed. Knowing what is expected of you is certainly the first step in knowing how to achieve your goals. However, the more that the individual's goals can be uniquely explored and encouraged, the less chance that the leadership has of being corrupted by the demands they feel are necessary for control rather than the encouragement they see as necessary for individual expression.

Many of the ways the United States has defined their freedoms are now in jeopardy in part due to the lack of restrictions for opulence and greed. I don't hear anyone doubting that more restrictions need to be made but the current decisions that are made as to which groups will be more restricted and how will have a great deal of influence on the nation's future.

When those with the most resources are given fewer restrictions based on the claim that their limited resources will trickle down to those with fewer resources they would need to first show a pattern or how that power they have will be used in ways that are empowering rather than oppressive. Without such an indication of empowerment, oppression will be the result of complacency.

The nation's pattern for warehousing is one of the clearest indications for how the ideal of inclusion and subcategories has led to focus more on people defects in learning and personality which then led to the exclusion of invalids. The inclusive category of invalids is growing larger by the inclusion of subcategories and the methods of treatment for this growing population of invalids is becoming more restrictive and severity based as the opposite population is becoming more corrupt by prejudicially and expediently reducing each invalid person or category to be judged by the sum total of their individual, invalid expressions.

In the same way that people have been supposedly empowered by separating emotions and behavior from the individual, individuality is stolen in order to disempower the group which is considered the most vulnerable and the most in need.

Immediate reward has historically been used at many times and in many places to justify immediate punishment without considering the motivation of the individual.This can potentially control larger groups of people with fewer leaders and fewer restrictions on those leaders.

Challenging  corrupt authority is discouraged with being labeled a conspiracy theorist or an irresponsible, lazy, discontented and manipulative, complainer who selfishly upsets infrastructure due to their unwillingness to cooperate.

Any corporate entity that has the potential for creating a monopoly within what is a free enterprise system also needs some type of independent investigation. Government mandates for behavior modification should always be the most strictly evaluated.

It's not enough to claim that because medical corporations have worked to design human characteristics with extremely corrupt methods, that a social program created and controlled by monopolies and government contracts which focus the more on accommodations based industries, won't be as equally corrupt.

It also must be understood that although family members may be more affectionate and protective of children and elderly who are more vulnerable, all children and elderly people don't have that kind of family support. The more this population of vulnerable people is denied true empowerment and protection the less respect large corporations and the large government will respect their individual worth and will treat them in the same manner as they do criminals and those who are seen as insane.

If  ALL of our vulnerable people are not protected, the majority of the vulnerable population will be seen as misbehaving, uncooperative, and ultimately expendable and the weakest among them will be treated in the harshest ways by exclusive demands which are disguised and marketed as incentive programs.

The Autistic Liberation Catagory

Denial, disrespect, and abuse (or the denial and disrespect which leads to abuse) is best attained and then maintained through categorization.

There are societal barriers which often prevent people with disabilities from recognizing what freedoms they have. With autistic people in particular, the barriers are made even stronger by how the label of autism is now based the current claim of an autism epidemic.

The rigid category of this "charitable" view for autistic people is one which expects us to be either accepting of the pity we are thereby seen to deserve or willing to provide pity for those who are thereby needing it due to how we fail to meet the expectations of the standard makers.

Even claiming that autism is treatable rather than curable, opens the door for many already firmly established prejudices to be held when creating treatments if the goals of treatment are not clearly understood by everyone.Temporary solutions for permanent problems often ends in disaster. If autistic people are going to be here for a while, more of the responsibility needs to be established with how society views autism so that the goals of integration are more practical.

When stereotypes about a population are predominantly negative and the treatments have been shown to appeal more to the opportunistic rather than the practical (along with resulting in horrible and even fatal outcomes), patience and practical pursuit of a more inclusive and humane approach seems necessary.

Without knowing where you are and where you want to go, it's difficult to have much influence over where you will arrive and how you will know you have arrived when you get there.

The two most dangerous and flawed descriptions of autistic behavior are the ones which claim that an autistic person lacks empathy, and that comorbidities are natural occurrences as the result of the unnatural configuration which has also contributed to autism.

No one's behavior occurs without influence from the treatment they receive or the views they assimilate from the views of those around them. To claim that anyones biology occurs without sociological influence is an attack on the entire civilization.

To instead claim that regardless of the origin of what seems to be a similar behavior or who is displaying it that there can be a strict standard set of responses demanded or prescribed to all individuals, leads to the same trap by using different bait. You can target a larger group with such an approach but the results are ultimately never favorable.

Once a global problem has been presented, a global fix may seem practical. However, diversity is a problem for people who aren't willing to learn from their environment instead of quickly, and judiciously attempting to control it. Ultimately, people can't relate to what they don't understand, and they can't influence what they aren't willing or able (due to their lack of willingness) to relate to.

Empathy is a learned response. Learning empathy is never simply stifled by someone's biological makeup. Empathy and compassion are the result of an emotion which is based on a belief. The belief that biology is the reason for someone lacking in the ability to feel such emotions, creates less empathy and compassion FOR the people who demand such standards due to those demands.

People who think in different ways will present needed questions for society or those needed questions will often be ignored, ignorance will be promoted, and the civilization that people claim to be seeking by demanding such exclusion, will be unattainable.

Before asking how much changes in behavior are necessary for a category of people to integrate with others who think differently, it's practical to see how many of those behaviors are responses to an environment which can and needs to be altered and which behaviors have the majority of dominant thinkers established as necessary for survival.

When a particular few types of intellect or behavior are glorified as ideal, only the idealistic and those who encourage their pride (which encourages their ignorance) will continue to make the decisions about what ideals need to be. Those who aren't in one of those categories will be encouraged (if not forced) to remain silent, in order to ensure them from "interfering" with such decisions.

To claim that a civilized society requires that all the adjustments be made of the fewest people, will result in their adjustment ultimately not being smooth or voluntary. If society can't learn from difference, the result will be that the strict set of boundaries for approaching difference will become more and more narrow, society will need to make more rigid methods for approaching what they can't understand or aren't willing to include, and this will ultimately create a small rigid group of uncivilized, malcontents who can't see anything good about each other.

Liberty and Justice within Reason

A claim that I have often seen used to derail an argument centered around liberation is that true and complete liberation would include the liberty of those who have unjustly (and within an unjust incentive program) bought, traded, or were born into an advantageous position to begin with.

To assert such a thing with the claim that "this is democracy" is ridiculous. However, it is seen as having merit and often is used effectively.

Our ability to reason is directly influenced by the price we must pay to assert our beliefs. This is in no way pulling down the top or redistributing resources or advantage. The reason it's not doing those things is because the justification for this claim is based on the false premise that incentive programs are either simply less than being accessible to everyone or that there aren't enough people taking advantage of the incentives that are available to them.

As long as the system isn't working for the majority of people, those in positions of advantage have no truly justified claim that anyone would choose to include themselves to an oppressed minority category with more status than the one they're in or because they are at the bottom of the status ladder with in their current categorization and another would serve them better. Also, no truly justified claim can be made that one minority is attaining more resources than another until the scarcity that is claimed as the reason for all categories not being provided for has been proven. Besides that and more importantly if people truly have faith in humanity, they wouldn't be claiming that the current opportunities given to the majority of people are adequate and that this large population of people are a necessary evil that should be left alone to annihilate their own kind and decrease the surplus population.

If the ideal of fairness is allowed to cross the boundary where giving people the right to speak and having their views acknowledged and validated is then only evaluated by how much acceptance the view generates among those who are already in positions of power and advantage, that ideal of fairness has crossed into the zone of not only being less fair, but is being completely unfair.

No one is chasing a label that has been excluded in an effort to then become in some way included. Instead it is the exclusion that blinds the exclusionary groups to any kinds of pure and honorable motivations and causes that those whom they exclude may secure for themselves.

The truth is that such ideals have gone beyond this level of lacking inclusion to that of being exclusive and actually creating disincentives for people to move beyond their (what is often a well guarded and predetermined) station in life rather than being simply ideals that are expressed randomly and thoughtlessly.

Due to the way the label of autism is being used at this point in time, people are more aware of how such traits and disabilities are viewed within our culture. At times, and in certain circumstances people have been quite blatant and open about what they intensely disliked about autistic characteristics, and they have callously expressed this view among their common unified platform to belittle and bully the autistic population by using other terms than autistic to describe us.

Our difficulty with communicating in a world that has been designed without our many of assets and deficits being considered is now being used as a catalyst for dangerous therapies and treatments that are very abusive. Speaking out against these therapies cannot be limited to those who have typical and standard methods of doing so. This cycle defies logic and reason. For lack of a better word, I would call this quackery.

For those autistics who can and do back up their reasoning by typical standards, I see them as being attacked sometimes and those attacks have been justified by the "fair treatment" claim that critical judgment must be given to all so that the best for all autistics can be identified and used. For those who do this important research with autistics well being as the priority, I applaud their efforts and will support them anyway that I can. I will not however have their reputation tarnished by the fact that my claims are supported with less scientific evidence and acceptable standards of research.

All research is NOT conducted with honorable goals and those goals need to be clear so the outcomes can be judged accordingly. Those with honorable motivations are due their voice and they often find themselves as having to defend that right with more vigor among those that (to me) seem more interested in the argument itself and in their own self interest than in how the evidence can be used in the most ethical way. However, this is just a view from when and where it doesn't count . My support will also be tempered so that I won't have them be resented by my description of justice in a way that (in the eyes of others) makes the rewards they deservedly earned, less valued.

My assertions do not come from someone who is professional or even educated. What I present is nothing more than the chaotic ramblings that could be told to you by anyone who has been in the system of "treatment" I've described for the thinking impaired. That system I'm referring to is the one that treats autistics, the learning disabled, the behaviorally impaired, and those who are considered psychological and psychiatric invalids. The truth of the matter is, as a group (and as individuals generally) we don't talk or express ourselves openly.

There are those among us who are illiterate, those of us who have extreme communication difficulties, those of us who have no access to asserting our views, and many of us have no incentives in place for those views to be heard. However, the number one reason I believe that we aren't talking is because no one is interested in listening. Maybe that needs to change. Maybe it's reasonable to believe that it should change.

Health and Human Resources

The worth of an American citizen is seen by many as being based on what we consume that is said to create economic stimulation, what we create for others to consume, or how what we provide to others with our support and service is decided by its worth. The value of those things is based on a system that is dominated by the view that value is decided by whatever the market will bear.

Taking away restrictions of how wealth is obtained can create an empire based on consumption. It can also create a value system whereby wars become a necessity because the limits of logic create panic as well as attacks rather than the compassion that results from patient and active listening .

The way I see capitalism and consumerism glorified includes the restrictions it places on our ability to care for and understand people .We are not in need of raising those who are not valued for their contribution and considered disabled to the status of being a valued commodity such as someone seen as a worker nor do we need to bring the status of the so-called working class down to the level of others who are considered more disposable. You can't justify a question with an answer that sounds so good that people forget the validity of the question in the first place(though politicians DO try.)

Instead the issue has to do with people who are seen as disabled or non-contributors being a product of the glaring blindness of greed. What you attain or consume cannot be appropriately valued without taking into account what you waste. Unfortunately, the leaders of the United States have found that to be a difficult lesson to learn and to continue to suffer the consequences as a result.

Having autism seen as a composite of deficits would seem to me to be a natural progression of an increasingly strict and brutal demand for excellence within narrowing perimeters of diversity and the autistic community that focuses on liberation and empowerment is the natural progression of what happens when a population of people is oppressed and shows the best of their humanity by refusing to give up and accept unreasonable and unjust treatment.

Sometimes I hear the argument that because we are less competitive in the global marketplace, the dumbing down of our school systems needs to be revised and made more strict. Our schools certainly do need to be revised in ways that help us ALL (not just the elite few) to be the best we can be but our lack of humanity and the inappropriate and hurtful value system that too often results with this narrow view of excellence that defines all environments as needing to be ruthlessly competitive is causing problems rather than solving them.

The places that we need to be more strict are where the unlimited power is given to our president, our lack of judgment is leading to wars, our lack of true opportunities that are denied within what are considered minimum wage and entry-level jobs, and improving our view of the people who are receiving subsidies and finding more creative ways to empower rather than blame them for problems that society isn't actively and aggressively seeking solutions to.

Once the solutions to these problems are more actively sought, we won't have the same outlook of scarcity that includes and results from over consumption and wastefulness.

Capitalism isn't the answer to communism unless the values are continually scrutinized and researched in order to evaluate our system as it relates to humanity that is in keeping with the products and services we choose to be considered valuable. You can't take the restrictions off how stock is bought, sold, and traded and think that it will not also create more lack of restrictions for just and fair treatment of people.

No person with a disability can take away resources from someone else unless or until the true "lack" or "scarcity" of resources has been accurately determined. No one with a need of any kind necessarily needs to be a victim of social Darwinism if people's strengths are seen as something that needs to be encouraged rather than what an individual or collective group needs to compete with.

If insurance is no longer seen as "real" insurance when it a product of the government and it is also not seen as being provided as temporary aid, the potential for corruption is endless. A cycle of people not being provided with real opportunities causes them to be seen as nothing more than a problem and a worthless product that is thereby disposable.

By teaching consumerism, are we teaching that the worth of people can't be more important that we produce?

Any person that is physically handicapped is likely to have an different neurology and likely to learn in different ways as well as different speeds. Elevators, ramps, braille, and visual aids for the deaf will not continue to be recognized as necessary at all (though hardly recognized now) if the diversity of how everyone's brain works or even how they solve problems (social or academic) are not given more understanding.

If attributes are going to continue to be labeled, then differences (along with even subcategories or composites of differences) must also be labeled or they will instead be only seen as deficits and too often deficited people who have them. Hierarchy of disability and severity of symptoms has long been a tool for the division of people asking for accommodation.

All aspects of the "each according to their need" politics as well as social norms and social reform with that ideal in mind, would do well to work on recognizing more of how we are all being disabled by so many inappropriate dehumanizing values so that more people are provided the opportunity to accept and provide all that we can.

Jokers and Acrobats

Consistency is often sacrificed for the sake of persistence. In the middle of battle, people seem to act based on the belief of being able to fix their mistakes later because instant success is more important.

Unfortunately for them, that doesn't last and expediency will eventually have to contend with the truth that time always reveals.

This is part of what makes politics such a cutthroat business. Once a political leader plays an integral interdependent role in the success of their party, they carry their own personal baggage and mistakes along with those made by the leaders they are following.

The Republican Party has a difficult job right now, and I think it's about time they were facing the difficulty associated with selling inappropriate services and agendas to people. Not having to face the people that you hurt can create very ugly monsters.

Still, once people have needed to practice their art of persuasion in order to overcome the overwhelming glare of the problems their mistakes have caused for a long period of time they can become quite skilled at doing that.

Selling a candidate or even a political system when the majority of voters were having their perspectives molded by three major television stations and there were no satellites that would reach across oceans and shows so much of the world what that perspective was and allow them to critique it must have been less challenging.

While I can only guess what the majority of non voters in the US might want, and whatever they may have learned from their environment that may be a critical piece of the puzzle that isn't being recognized and factored in, it's important to me to remember what would cause the most immediate reaction (for good or bad) among this group. I think it's also important to remember which agendas have been carried out that have caused them the most difficulty.

Among the complaints that I often hear regarding the least recognized Americans, who are often referred to as a product of society's ills is that due to their lack of formal education and so-called "appropriate" training and refinement, they should not be trusted.

If this lack of training, education, and refinement is what creates this type of less than honorable power wielding monsters, would that mean that the people who don't have training, education, and refinement need to learn how important these things are and what integrity  accompanies having attained these things from people who have attained them?