The Standard Review

Disenfranchised in Public

It can be very threatening to be unable to provide for yourself (food/shelter) and be without any identified marketable skills. I spent my youth constantly disenfranchised and often in public settings (either homeless or in worse danger) without any way to explain anything about my experience. From my experience being unable to explain and unable to plan are the biggest threats to safety. Our society doesn't do much to accommodate vulnerable people.


There were people who knew about my situation and wanted to help but couldn't. Several of them have told me that many people who knew the situation were not expecting me to live to see my 20th birthday. I guess I didn't either but never really thought about it.

It wasn't until I was 25 years old and was accepted by public programs that I came to understand how being without the ability to plan (sometimes clinically referred to as executive functioning), for those of us who are already disenfranchised and unable to fit in, we will be exploited by the system by vultures in similar and sometimes in worse ways than being on the streets.

When people wrongly evaluate your approach to the environment as both uninterested in changing your situation and un-empathetic to others' emotions, not being able to explain your situation is only the beginning of the set of traps that are constantly facing you. My experience within the system is a constant reminder that our society is addicted to convenience and the consumption of impulse buys.

This makes it so that many people are in public (whether within the public system or outside of it), and yet don't know how to exchange a service to provide for their survival (which sometimes just means one they can physically or psychically survive). There will always be people who can find ways to exploit that vulnerability. Abuses outside the system are hardly given any attention at all and within the system, there is a great deal of effort that goes into preventing and silencing the reports of abuse.

As for those disenfranchised people who don't die without anyone (or many people) who will do much more than record the incident, many will be victims of various types of slavery, and others will be forced to submit their  minds and bodies for research that will give the more valued public more advantages and comfort.

Whether there are specific solutions to these issues or not, the problem itself, is very conveniently ignored. An example of how society treats the disenfranchised is in the following video which describes how the medical industry exploits disenfranchised children. I would hope that during this holiday season where people are involved with family and friends, that there would be more recognition of what happens in public to those who are not providing what society has considered a valuable resource. It's important to recognize that this convenience is not something we can continue to afford.

 

The Protected Community

Learning different perspectives of American history reminds me that much of the leadership problem in the past century resulted from a distorted view of community. The philosophy involved seems to liken a community to a chain and the metaphor that describes the philosophy is: "a chain is only as strong as the weakest link."

Such thought designs are contrary to creative and innovative thinking. In a chain, each link serves the same purpose and can therefor be appropriately judged by the standardized test for strength and ranked accordingly. However, it's not natural for people to provide this convenience, and it's dangerous to attempt to demand it.

Unfortunately, many aspects of society are influenced by this type of thinking.

When the goal of a community is for individuals to have no other value than the way they serve it, it will either seek to be efficient, which leads to extreme and unreasonable methods of exclusion, or it will seek to be inclusive in convienient/pitiful-based charity ways, which ultimately lead to the same conclusion.

If you give people something to do that is seen as having no particular value, that value judgment will ultimately extend to how people themselves are seen and societies exclusion and elimination of them, which will simply be more covert and nuanced. When the community doesn't recognize this exercise in futility it can be much worse than if they did, and were seeing the need to address it.

This thinking is particularly detrimental to the respect and dignity of persons with disabilities, and it lends itself very conveniently to unnecessary behavioral standards and their strict enforcement.

The absurdity is never so clear as when this affects advocacy related to autism. Some have even suggested that there is an autism community which of course is impossible. The way to ensure that negative stereotypes about autistics continue and that the political system remains unchallenged so that educational and vocational opportunities are unattainable to the majority is by keeping advocates involved in club activities and meaningless personality-based debates.

When one person exploits their advantage for deciding public policy by using the claim that whatever a publicly recognized authority presumes is someone's severity of symptoms (or lack of them) is the way to distinguish their right to voice their view rather than evaluate what the view is, and someone else argues, the environment is effectively stagnant and progress is impossible.

It's the same with someone who describes causation and another who refutes the scientific evidence or someone who suggests that regulating an abuse of persons with disabilities in jails, mental institutions, and schools with federally mandated behavioral programs is an appropriate compromise. There's no way to judge scientific evidence or the sincere concern for individual welfare of the people involved in policymaking if people are aware of the corruption that tends to rule how these systems operate. Even so, these personality/popularity contests are what often pass for Internet autism discussions.

I can't imagine how anyone could trust the compromises and incremental alterations that are made by policymakers with regard to the rights of persons with a disability when the negotiation chambers for policymakers are patterned identically to the way of our judicial system.

The two party system defines much of how people debate issues. It presupposes that compromise is imperative and limits our choices. As long as each idea can only be ranked by the narrow context of how it compares with another, which can be influenced in an unlimited number of unfair advantages which we're forbidden to discuss, we are hostage to the stagnation and exclusion that the leadership defines as progressive.

The idea that the United States operates with three separate branches of government is misleading. Our judicial system in all its forms is a futile exercise in a political debate, and it's rare that an idea which isn't presented by someone who has been identified as a player/compromiser within the system is ever considered.

Of course intelligence is judged by standardized test, which was designed by people who were mainly interested in population control/eugenics. Of course there is a streamlining of the labeled schoolchildren to expedite class divisions, institutionalization and disenfranchisement and prevent challenges to the top-down elitist control. Of course the US medical system is completely chaotic and harmful to most of the public. Of course that medical system is primarily funded by the sale and distribution of mind altering drugs that are introduced  to schoolchildren at an early age to provide teachers with more control.... we aren't taught that we can trust the average public citizen like we do the policymakers. Therefore, if we can't trust the public they will have to be controlled rather than risk any challenges to the status quo (which were taught is progressive).

We can't make all our decisions with convenience being the top priority and expect to maintain any type of security. People act more chaotically when they have less encouragement to think and when thinking is suppressed through intimidation, exclusion, and a constant barrage of images that encourage immediate gratification and hopelessness for the sake of community and solidarity, there will of course less trust and more attempts to regain a sense of control through violence.

People can't keep feeding the monster they want to destroy. Effective change requires that we radically broaden our acceptance of diversity in order to strengthen the community rather than continuing to be unfairly exclusive for the sake of protection and security. It's important that more people understand how few people are actually represented in the policy decisions that are made, which govern their lives and how wide the realm of disenfranchisement extends.

If people are thinking, they will find more ways to be compassionate and inclusive but if convenience and distrust are more important we will recognize more types of uselessness, and the only creative thinking will be used to find methods for exterminating the excess. These danger affects everyone and thinking for solutions is imperative.

Solving Jigsaw Puzzles with a Hammer

  http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/451513/451513,1250928967,26/stock-photo-united-states-on-puzzle-35680651.jpg

 

The current proposed methods for improved learning all seem to suggest that behavioral intervention cannot be separated from the process. This is in keeping with the very old myth that children are born broken and must be fixed.

This belief system is not being challenged, and yet it has developed from the aspirations of educators who are following the designs of government rulers and industry leaders. To these designers, thinking and creativity are a threat, and it is more important to them that behavior follows a particular pattern than for it to be healthy, ethical, or even individually productive.

The design does not encourage learning as secondary to the importance of arbitrary and fluctuating behavioral standards, but rather it suggests that, unless learning is nothing more than a byproduct of standardized behavior, it has no importance at all. The goal is to empower the collective rather than the individual and the regulations which are used to promote this goal would support a very small elite based on eliminating the majority of competitors.

The biggest obstacle in empowering citizens who are subjected to the abuses of these regulations and unreasonable standards is helping them to realize that they are not lacking in important skills or knowledge. They have been taught to believe this about themselves due to methods of mental conditioning, which are justified by the Royal label "education".

Our leaders are not superior thinkers at all. The harmful motivation behind their goals prevents the designers from thinking clearly and making rational decisions. If their agenda is not prevented, they will learn about the price after its too late. It reminds me of someone piecing together a jigsaw puzzle with a hammer. While it may provide a temporary convenience to believe that your efforts are progressive, once you're able to see what the combined efforts have produced, the mistake will become apparent.

The public education system in the United States has never been much more than an experiment in social engineering. Whomever doesn't fit and can't be forced to fit (like the inconvenient pieces of a jigsaw puzzle) will get discarded.

The engineers sought first to create a belief system that would serve the leadership based on the claim that it was best for everyone (the collective).

 
In Chapter 2 of The Underground History of American Education by John Taylor Gatto it says:

Participatory Democracy Put To The Sword

"Thirty-odd years later, between 1967 and 1974, teacher training in the United States was covertly revamped through coordinated efforts of a small number of private foundations, select universities, global corporations, think tanks, and government agencies, all coordinated through the U.S. Office of Education and through key state education departments like those in California, Texas, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and New York.

Important milestones of the transformation were: 1) an extensive government exercise in futurology called Designing Education for the Future, 2) the Behavioral Science Teacher Education Project, and 3) Benjamin Bloom’s multivolume Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, an enormous manual of over a thousand pages which, in time, impacted every school in America. While other documents exist, these three are appropriate touchstones of the whole, serving to make clear the nature of the project underway."

The second of these is:


"The second document, the gigantic Behavioral Science Teacher Education Project, outlined teaching reforms to be forced on the country after 1967. If you ever want to hunt this thing down, it bears the U.S. Office of Education Contract Number OEC-0-9-320424-4042 (B10). The document sets out clearly the intentions of its creators—nothing less than "impersonal manipulation" through schooling of a future America in which "few will be able to maintain control over their opinions," an America in which "each individual receives at birth a multi-purpose identification number" which enables employers and other controllers to keep track of underlings and to expose them to direct or subliminal influence when necessary. Readers learned that "chemical experimentation" on minors would be normal procedure in this post-1967 world, a pointed foreshadowing of the massive Ritalin interventions which now accompany the practice of forced schooling."

This means that what individuals think doesn't matter to the collective leadership. This would certainly mean that anyone receiving a diagnosis of learning disability or developmental disability (which describes behavioral deficits) such as autism is given the least amount of respect and the harshest form of punishment. Recently, the bill HR 4247 proposed that all teachers be trained in using restraint and seclusion. Such training would be taught in classes for Positive Behavioral Support. What is claimed was that the individual states were not using force appropriately and therefore, must be governed federally.

The corruption and abuse that American citizens now face at the hands of the medical industry are due to the funding of that industry primarily resulting from the sale and distribution of mind altering/compliance inducing drugs. The way this mass marketing campaign was successful began with using the Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM) to show how the least valued students were behaviorally impaired and learning disabled.

"The Behavioral Science Teacher Education Project identified the future as one "in which a small elite" will control all important matters, one where participatory democracy will largely disappear. Children are made to see, through school experiences, that their classmates are so cruel and irresponsible, so inadequate to the task of self-discipline, and so ignorant they need to be controlled and regulated for society’s good. Under such a logical regime, school terror can only be regarded as good advertising. It is sobering to think of mass schooling as a vast demonstration project of human inadequacy, but that is at least one of its functions."

I can't see how there could be any question that the regulations for behavioral modification would be set at the federal level of government.

"In a speech he gave before businessmen prior to the First World War, Woodrow Wilson made this unabashed disclosure:

   " We want one class to have a liberal education. We want another class, a very much larger class of necessity, to forgo the privilege of a liberal education and fit themselves to perform specific difficult manual tasks."

http://s3.images.com/huge.1.6001.JPG


Some of the ideas which led to Wilson's statements were:

"Occasional Letter Number One

"Between 1896 and 1920, a small group of industrialists and financiers, together with their private charitable foundations, subsidized university chairs, university researchers, and school administrators, spent more money on forced schooling than the government itself did. Carnegie and Rockefeller, as late as 1915, were spending more themselves. In this laissez-faire fashion a system of modern schooling was constructed without public participation. The motives for this are undoubtedly mixed, but it will be useful for you to hear a few excerpts from the first mission statement of Rockefeller’s General Education Board as they occur in a document called Occasional Letter Number One (1906):

    "In our dreams...people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present educational conventions [intellectual and character education] fade from our minds, and unhampered by tradition we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning or men of science. We have not to raise up from among them authors, educators, poets or men of letters. We shall not search for embryo great artists, painters, musicians, nor lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen, of whom we have ample supply. The task we set before ourselves is very simple...we will organize children...and teach them to do in a perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way.""

Recent events such as the Wikileaks and regulations that are now being encouraged to prevent citizens from using the Internet for questioning corporations serve as reminders that more than ever it is important to radically challenge governmental standards and the abuses of  corporations.

On the Wikileaks situation, it says here:

"What is really going on here is a war over control of the Internet, and whether or not the Internet can actually serve its ultimate purpose—which is to allow citizens to band together and democratize the checks on the world’s most powerful factions."

http://www.patriotprintshoppe.com/tjquote3.jpg

 

The idea that compromises must be made within the political realm are usually at this point a way of preventing democracy and the progress the democratic process encourages. It is impractical and even dangerous to believe that our public institutions will provide what they claim.

The first step to liberation is realizing that we have choices. Once we can accept the responsibility and the empowerment that comes with those choices we will have fewer reasons to fear those who govern us and our fear-driven emotions will have less control over our lives.

Competency on Trial

 

 

Societal arrogance, prejudice, and exploitation are never more evident than when a formal court trial is used to declare a person's competency. Judges who preside over these trials are in no way believing that the sentence they issue has anything whatsoever to do with the persons ability or lack of it, to act appropriately or provide for themselves. This process is strictly an extension of the psychiatric industry and the institutional mentality. It reflects how the corporations/insurance companies have been able to trade what is still described as the service they provide in exchange for these customer referrals.

It is practically impossible to dispute the corporate ties to governmental agency in these matters but no one directly involved ever tries. The way that society strictly enforces competency judgments in the informal ways dictates to the judicial system as well as the industry that there is no reason to be concerned that their deceit and miscarriage of justice will ever be challenged.

It really won't matter much if people who are more widely recognized  refrain from using terms such as retarded or even retard if we continue to recklessly toss about ridiculous and unfounded allegations of incompetence the way we do with terms such as idiot, moron, stupid, and uneducated. All of these terms were created to support the glorification of a very narrow standardized scholastic achievement test. This is a system of ranking and the goal of those who benefit from this is for people to take their focus away from what they are learning and what they don't know, and ignore the discouragement they get from trying to understand their environment in order to instead remain hostage to the social games for cutting each other down and tearing apart each other.


The earliest recorded use of the north American continent being used by Europeans for institutionalization date back to shortly after the invasion of 1492, which is flatteringly referred to as when the "settlers" first arrived. The plantations were set up to use slave labor, and the slaves were brought or natives were captured for that purpose. This was the beginning of a political and judicial system that depended on an institutional mentality.

One example of how this is continuing is by laws, which are made for status offense.

"Status offenses may include consumption of alcohol, tobacco smoking, truancy, and running away from home.

These acts may be illegal for persons under a certain age, while remaining legal for all others, which makes them status offenses.

Status offense may also apply to other classes, including laws forbidding ownership of firearms by felons, where such ownership is otherwise legal.

Laws that prohibit certain actions to certain persons based on their sex, race, nationality, religion, etc., are also status offenses. A law that prohibits men from using public toilets intended for women, or a law that prohibits the use of a drinking fountain by people of a given race, or a law that sets a curfew for people below a certain age, are examples of status offenses, although they are not always thought of as such."

In similar fashion:



"During the mid-1600's, the colonies began to pass laws called slave codes. In general, these codes prohibited slaves from owning weapons, receiving an education, meeting one another or moving about without the permission of their masters, and testifying against white people in court. Slaves received harsher punishments for some crimes than white people. A master usually received less punishment for killing a slave than for killing a free person for the same reason. Slaves on small farms probably had more freedom than plantation slaves, and slaves in urban areas had fewer restrictions in many cases than slaves in rural areas."

 

I see no indication that the laws in the United States are ever relaxed so that any person with any class distinction can be judged more fairly. Instead when there are nuances in the laws it typically indicates a contradiction and provides more authority to the law enforcement which supports oppression.

It says here of a formal competency evaluation:


"In the United States criminal justice system, a competency evaluation is an assessment of the ability of a defendant to understand and rationally participate in a court process.

Competency was originally established by the Supreme Court of the United States as the evaluation of a defendant's competence to proceed to trial.[1]

In a subsequent ruling, the Court held that that an prisoner facing the death penalty must be evaluated as competent to be executed, meaning that he must be
capable of understanding why he has received the death penalty and the effect that the penalty will have.[2] In further rulings, competence was also enlarged to include evaluation of the defendant's competence to plead guilty and competence to waive the right to counsel.[3]"

AND

"The American Bar Association's Criminal Justice Mental Health Standards stated in 1994 that the issue of a defendant's current mental incompetence is the single most important issue in the criminal mental health field, noting that an estimated 24,000 to 60,000 forensic evaluations of a criminal defendant's competency to stand trial were performed every year in the United States.[4] Although estimates vary, a 1973 estimate put the number of competence evaluations at 25,000 to 36,000 each year. There are indications that the number of evaluations of criminal defendants is rising. One comparison of estimates between 1983 and 2004 suggest the annual number rose from 50,000 to 60,000 criminal competency evaluations respectively.[5]" "

Mental health agencies in the United States worked very closely with drug enforcement agencies in order to justify the class war falsely labeled "the war on drugs". The newest agency being used to confuse the distinction between recreational drug use which is not sponsored by a government approved and subsidized pharmaceutical company and criminal activity is SAMHSA (The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration).


This agency has been used to promote the recovery model which blurs the line between self-improvement and the responsibility that accompanies being an individual and that of mandated responsibility from a judicial agency which is used to permit corporate irresponsibility. Although several recent court hearings have found compulsory attendance for Alcoholics Anonymous meetings as a condition of parole to be unconstitutional, this continues to be a typical practice for judges.

In the same way that Henry Ford used publications for spreading anti-Semitic propaganda and socialist values that aided his company, Randolph Hearst used similar means for settling labor issues by publishing false information about the dangers of marijuana use and its relation to racial minorities and crime.

That's described in this article:

A highly disproportionate number of black and Hispanic people in the United States are tried, convicted, and sentenced for drug charges and are similarly abused by the psychiatric system. The scholars in Europe such as Sir Francis Galton encouraged this miscarriage of justice.  Galton defined race purification and population control as eugenics based on the work of his cousin Charles Darwin. Drapetomania is the name of the psychological disorder which shows the intentions of the most revered American doctors such as Benjamin Rush. Samuel Cartwright, a student of Rush, established psychiatric label, Drapetomania:


"Cartwright described the disorder — which, he said, was "unknown to our medical authorities, although its diagnostic symptom, the absconding from service, is well known to our planters and overseers"[4] — in a paper delivered before the Medical Association of Louisiana[5] that was widely reprinted.

He stated that the malady was a consequence of masters who "made themselves too familiar with [slaves], treating them as equals."[6]

    "If any one or more of them, at any time, are inclined to raise their heads to a level with their master or overseer, humanity and their own good requires that they should be punished until they fall into that submissive state which was intended for them to occupy. They have only to be kept in that state, and treated like children to prevent and cure them from running away." [7]


Psychiatry evaluates the degree to which someone is behaving normally based on statistics from people who accept a list of character flaws that comes with a psychological label and enables them to receive medication and therapy.

This says of the classification of mental disorders:


"The widely used DSM and ICD classifications employ operational definitions.[1] There is a significant scientific debate about the relative validity of a "categorical" versus a "dimensional" system of classification, as well as significant controversy about the role of science and values in classification schemes and the professional, legal and social uses to which they are put."

To whatever degree, any of this is discussed within an academic environment, it does not change how the labeling of the persons intelligence quotient, psychological profile, and heritage are used to determine a person's human rights as well as their potential liberties.

Judge Rotenberg had a behavioral treatment research facility named after him based on his ability to use his position of court judge to show how autistics would seek aversive treatment to cure their malady if only they were competent enough to do so.

It says here:

"While this litigation was taking place, in late 1985 and early 1986, JRC brought one of its seriously self-abusive, autistic students before the Bristol County Probate Court for a substituted judgment hearing that was held by Chief Judge Ernest Rotenberg. After hearing testimony on both sides of the issue, Judge Rotenberg determined: (1) that the student was incompetent to make her own medical treatment decisions; and (2) that the child, if competent, would have chosen treatment that included the use of the aversives that JRC had been employing, prior to the decision by the administrative judge. This substituted judgment hearing was the same type of hearing that was required in Massachusetts for individuals for whom agencies wished to employ psychotropic medication (or other intrusive medical procedures) and who were incompetent to make their own treatment decisions."

What had to happen is that in order to sustain the belief that children are born broken and need fixing by state-sponsored institutions psychological labels need to be used in the same way that they had previously been used on slaves based on the claim that the means for their treatment was justified by the end result and that they were not competent enough to choose what was best for their own welfare.


When people today think of combating autism it would be helpful to remember that:

"In 1961, President John F. Kennedy created the President’s Panel on Mental Retardation and called upon America to address the significant needs of people with intellectual disabilities and their desire to be a part of everyday life in America. The Panel submitted its first report, “Combating Mental Retardation,” which led to Congressional action to establish new programs for people with intellectual disabilities, including hospital improvement programs."

This article decribes very well a trend that has occured since then:

New Down syndrome test could increase ‘eugenic’ abortions


"Studies in the United States and the United Kingdom have claimed that as many as 9 in 10 unborn children diagnosed with Down syndrome are aborted.

Carol Boys, chief executive of the Down’s Syndrome Association in Great Britain, recently told the BBC that the less invasive blood test will make pre-natal testing safer and more common."

AND

“In the 1960s, we were told that legal abortion would be a rare tragic act in cases of exceptional hardship. In the ‘70s abortion began to be both decried and accepted as birth control. In the ‘80s respected geneticists pointed out that it was cheaper to hunt for and abort Down’s babies than to raise them. By the ‘90s that observation had been widely put into action. Now we are refining and extending our eugenic vision, with new tests and abortion as our central tools.”

Surveys of primary care physicians indicate that very few doctors encourage women whose unborn babies are diagnosed with Down syndrome to continue their pregnancies."

When describing Autism Speaks Eugenic Agenda, ABFH wrote this:

"But for the most part, they've managed to put up a somewhat plausible pretense of being a mainstream charity that just wants to prevent suffering, and so forth. Most of the material on their website is carefully designed to keep the public unaware of their close ideological affinity with the white supremacist agenda of creating a master race through eugenics. A casual reader might not notice a page featuring the views of Dr. James Watson, with whom Bob and Suzanne Wright had a friendly chat regarding autism genetic research at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory:


autismspeaks.org/inthenews/wrights_cold_spring_harbor.php"

The Rottenburg center has aided other school's in providing them with the authority which encourages an atmosphere of abuse by being examples this kind of regulation manipulation:


"The Department of Education has the authority to approve private school programs for the purpose of providing special education to publicly funded school age students with disabilities.  Under this authority, the Department reviews the program’s educational components as well as its compliance with general health and safety standards.  Judge Rotenberg Education Center (“the program” or “JRC”) operates a program for students with significant disabilities in which it utilizes a behavioral modification program of rewards (positive reinforcers) and punishments (aversives).  The aversives used by JRC include restraint, electric skin shock (“GED”), and the delaying or withholding of food in order to decelerate problematic behaviors. 

Although JRC is licensed by two state agencies, the Department of Early Education and Care (EEC) and the Department of Mental Retardation (DMR), it is under DMR’s authority that JRC’s use of aversives is regulated.  In addition to DMR’s regulation of JRC in this regard, JRC’s use of aversives with an individual student must be authorized by the probate court under a “substituted judgment proceeding.”  This means that for each student for whom JRC wishes to use aversives, it must submit to the probate court a behavioral plan that the court must approve and annually review.  In addition, the court appoints an attorney to represent the student’s interests in the court proceeding and the student’s attorney may request an independent clinical review of the behavioral plan submitted by JRC regarding the student."

Behavioral programs such as Applied Behavioral Analysis would never be considered an educational approach if it weren't for the school system equating appropriate and sophisticated behavior as equal in importance to the acquisition of knowledge. Nothing is more relative and practically useless than the labels society uses to declare a person's competence.

However, JRC is not the exception to the rule (although more is known about their abuses). This behavioral treatment center/mental institution/juvinille punishment and rehabilitation center can't be
 penalized or effectively requested to change until we look at how their methods are in keeping with the goals that progressive education has always maintained.


This describes John Dewey's aspirations for
 compulsory schooling:

John Dewey: Education Was Never About Learning

"(Makow) – No one has had a more pernicious effect on American education, and by extension the corruption of American society today than John Dewey. Born in 1859, John Dewey turned historic American values and logic upside down.

In Dewey’s view, the individual existed only to serve society. “Socialization” (i.e., the individual’s conformity to a group) was seen as more important than factual learning. This twisted view of education infected all of his work, resulting in a century of ever diminishing American academic achievement, with the resultant corruption of American society."

AND

"Incredibly, Dewey ridiculed the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake, declaring that knowledge was only valid and worthwhile if “society” decided so.

If the Powers That Be (“society”) decided literature, or geometry, or chemistry is no longer a valid pursuit, but multicultural studies, minority oppression, and remedial basket weaving are, then the individual should have no alternative to that course of education.

Every virtue, including curiosity, resourcefulness, competitiveness, ethical conduct, right reasoning, rhetorical skills, logic and inventiveness — could be considered to be “vices” overnight if the Powers That Be (“Society”) decided they were no longer desirable."

 

I can only imagine that within a week of the introduction of compulsory schooling, parents began to compete with each other to show which of them, by producing offspring, had created a superior product. I'm sure that almost immediately one mother rushed out to put a bumper sticker on the rear of the horse that drew the family carriage which said," my kid made the honor roll." The neighboring parent chose to advertise, "my kids got autism, but I love them anyway." It must not have been long after that when some parent told the news reporter, "I would've driven my carriage off the side of a bridge if it weren't for my competent kids which would also be destroyed in the accident." It may have taken a little time, but I'll bet similar behavior began fairly soon after this age appropriate ranking system began.

People involved in progressive education politics often frame discussions in a way, which encourages the false belief that they are all looking for the best ways to include and provide for the majority of the public. It has never been this way and in the same way that the US political system is falsely defined by two parties in competition with each other, our involvement in these meaningless debates supports the myth of everyone being involved in a noble effort.

It's silly to consider someone to be superior (which is what positive labels of achievement or ability ultimately do) without considering the validity of the standard of measurement. If there is an agenda to provide some people with positive labels, they can then use to their advantage at the expense of most others that receive negative ones, then it's silly, arrogant, and a way to support and mimic corporate values to present your own label or that of someone close to you as being valid due to a fair standard of evaluation.

The people who are behind government decisions that use a person's success and achievement along with another person's lack of it as a means for keeping them hostage don't care about your abilities or your achievements and only present glorified labels to dissuade the public from looking too closely at the flaws in the system and challenging it.


The system can change. Diversity can be encouraged, and we can learn to empower each other. However, this will not happen pursuant to continuing to honor the system and its values which has been used to prevent our empowerment. The system itself was designed and is sustained as an end unto itself. Until we find an appropriate means to encourage our own individual creativity and redefine institutions as a means to our individual goals everyone (whether formally involved in the system or disenfranchised by it) will remain hostage to the inappropriate values it has taught us.

Abuse is the Standard Treatment, and Objections are Punished

What the young woman in the following video is reporting is typical and reflects the common standard. What is highly unusual as well as admirable is that this woman's personal standards are such that she sees the victim's welfare as top priority, and she's willing to act based on principal.

The school is acting on behalf of their reputation and willing to sacrifice anyone's welfare in order to preserve the system. This is how it got so bad in the first place. Until the entire system is seen as promoting an environment where abuse is inevitable and their deceit is questioned by more people who will face the consequences of reporting it, this will continue.

 

Abuse of Children With Autism in School

 

 

 

 

Pursuing Betterment

http://wpcontent.answcdn.com/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e2/Nelson_Rockefeller_HEW.jpg/220px-Nelson_Rockefeller_HEW.jpg

So many of the commercial messages which are designed to teach us a set of values are appealing to our sense of fear. People are aware that the chase for attainment is futile but will strive to prevent becoming "or appearing to be" an invalid or non-valid person. We are most afraid of our own inadequacies and exploiting that is a powerful and effective tool.

The very small portion of people who are capable of exploiting any type of government system have traditionally shown that without the public's objection, they will do just that.

There is nothing about the experience of any plant or animal that is complacent and accepting of their impending doom. Only humans would be so arrogant as to believe in the myth of laziness and fatality. Everything about life is an expression of someone's choices about what they want. The only practical way for government to operate effectively is to teach people to make wise choices and reward them for doing so in order for them to feel empowered by their ability.

There is no worse crime perpetrated against the planet than for people engaged in the practice of governing choosing to encourage the public to make unwise choices as well as intentionally creating unfairness, inequality, and exploiting people based on class distinctions.  When we choose to believe that our betterment will result from glorifying this system, we are involved in the very same crime.

Nothing has been more intimidating and exploitive of the human spirit than the glorification of scholastic pursuits. The myth involved in advertising this industry is that it is designed to encourage reason, and dignity as well as promote liberty. By accepting this and seeing that only a few of the people who are ranked by this standardization achieve a valid label we are participating in our own destruction. Of course people aren't doing this due to some type of lack of motivation. It is instead due to being impulsively motivated based on deception.

With the industrial revolution which encouraged a system of products and consumers, Western civilization adopted compulsory schooling as a supplementary method of ranking individuals. Psychology was not meant to empower the masses but rather to distract their attention. The labels used are not meant to give people an understanding, of how they learn, how they can be accommodated, or what areas of their health need to be addressed. Instead a medical model is used for stigmatization and marginalization.

It is impossible  for any living organism to lack self-awareness. The myth to the contrary, was taught so that a hierarchy of human worth could be sold to the public and families who have acquired resources (through whatever means just or corrupt) could protect the illusion of their superiority.

No one with the goal of empowering the public ever sat down, comprehensively analyzed all the most pertinent data, and created a system of labeling and treating the public for psychological disturbances. Believing that this happened is why we have the most corrupt system of medicine in the West, which was ever devised and why it works to prevent rather than promote the best healthcare.

http://library.uvm.edu/news/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/dewey_bigger.jpg

While it's important to recognize how our leadership's devotion to empirical goals has led to an exaggerated military industrial complex and how warfare experiments have been used on invalid or non-valid citizens, the belief in what has been called the Manchurian candidate is not empowering at all.

If we believe that the human mind is only valid due to the physical components called the brain and that every reaction can be predetermined by scientific tools of measurement, we are thereby subjecting ourselves to worse atrocities being committed due to the value this indicates humans as having.

At this point in history, we have adopted sophisticated technology at a rate which was never imagined. However, to believe that our current understanding of the physical world is so advanced that humans can be taught to behave with no more sophistication than any other animal is to submit to the pessimism that corporations can use to further demean and exploit us.

It is possible for the people who are involved in schools, medicine, and the politics that governs them to be involved in this system with the knowledge and understanding of how it is corrupt and also alter its course. We are also all existing in a symbiotic relationship where most of the people's efforts are not encouraged or even acknowledged. Our system of ranking and exploitation has considered most of the human population to be invalid and unnecessary. This is our greatest and most valuable resource and to concentrate on the importance of any other resource at their expense is the quickest way to pursue our own destruction. We have the capacity to do better.

An Outside Interest

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_jN9U8ZlQBVk/R_jzeLpqIqI/AAAAAAAAAtQ/HBq3AXeqz5E/S1600-R/Scales%2520of%2520Injustice1.gif

 

The power to changes trends, policy, and viewpoints for good also provides the people with it lots of opportunities to irresponsible and corrupt. The context in which something is said often frame alternatives in a strict contrast (good or bad, pro or con, for or against) so the logical alternatives which come from a different perspective and people with alternative thinking styles don't fit into a convenient category. They are therefore, dismissed as being completely impractical. This really isn't a healthy trend that promotes a more civilized society but the people who have power have traditionally neglected the responsibility that should accompany it. This history has had the biggest influence on the designs of our present system of government.

The more history can be described as some type of factual account the more deceit and the chaos that follows it influence society. A more comprehensive description of what is described as history is a set of viewpoints which someone with power has published about others with power so that tradition is protected and democracy is prevented.

Today what mostly is attributed with the honor of being called history is influenced most by commercial interest to protect their corruption by describing most of the public as ignorant, lazy, and uninterested in bettering their personal lives or contributing to a broader community.

People whose contributions are not seen as worthy of their prospective community or the broader society are unable or disabled. Some receive insurance benefits set up by the State which show that their family was at one point (or continues to be) accepted by the local or more centralized government. In the United States, the statistics would indicate that with or without what is considered insurance benefits in the way of financial subsidies the intention for how the public (as shown by what the voting public designs through policy) relates to those who are disenfranchised is to shame and/or exploit them for the personal and false sense of pride. This is the idolatry which leaves us spiritually and financially bankrupt.

Wherever there are walls that define a particular structure (be it, a house or some other institution) the people with an invested interest in its future must be responsible for its contents. Whatever you don't appreciate will own and consume you. It doesn't need your permission to do so.

We now have the technology that moves resources and power at such lighting speeds that our attitudes are becoming much more convenience based, and we are becoming much more unaware of human value. People are being described as more disposable than ever.

It's not practical to see the recording of history as following productive trends. Instead historical accounts are influenced mainly by the people with the resources to lie and cheat effectively and make the rest of the world carry the burden. They even have the power to convince people that the situation is completely opposite of that.


"For those looking for security, be forewarned that there's nothing more insecure than a political promise." -- Harry Browne


The images that are shown on television and the internet are controlled by commercial interest. They show restaurants where most people don't eat, clothes most people don't wear, and products most people don't use. Of course most people know this to be true, but the valued public who can afford some of these luxuries act irresponsibly as if they can consume without regard for the inappropriate and unfair values which are being taught them. When the people being hurt most by this are seen, others use the shame and blame techniques, they have learned to ease the appropriate experience of shame as well as further justify not altering their course.

With most people being excluded, exploited and otherwise hurt by all this having no voice in policies that concern them and no confidence (for good reason) to challenge oppression, it's no wonder that the valued public continues seeking answers in the traditional ways rather than confront the problem.


It's important that the people with the resources to change things begin to accept that their quality of life will continue to decrease not as the result of useless people but as the result of their arrogantly believing that they can continue to judge people and their qualities as inferior and/or obsolete so their appetites are conveniently fed.

People can't claim ownership of anything or justify their rights that come at the expense of others without eventually being confronted with the spoils of ill-gotten victory. Of course there are only a few people who are really evaluating policies with the goal of population control and other extreme and inhumane solutions but the rest can help matters by recognizing how their values are ultimately supporting the atrocious ideals.

Quote :: Ghandi

"I believe that no government can exist for a single moment without the co-operation of the people, willing or forced, and if people suddenly withdraw their co-operation in every detail, the government will come to a standstill."


Traditionally, the role of government has been to empower a particular system through the exploitation of the public they claim to serve. Whatever opportunities they provide cannot exceed a level that would give them less control. Aside from whatever personal compassion and concern that an individual working within that system can provide, the goal of the system is to serve itself.

The means by which mainstream autism advocacy operates does not challenge the values which have always opposed neurodiversity. A movement claiming to encourage this diversity must recognize which compromises are demanded of the them from the political realm where public policy is decided in order to challenge tradition.

The system isn't some combination of positive and negative strategy. It's not only that sometimes isn't the best. It must, due to its very nature, aid the elite at the expense of exploiting everyone else. Politics isn't just some life on life's terms, that "we" must accept. It's instead what a few with resources choose at the expense of the silenced and exploited rest that gives those few the privilege of that choice.

"Government is not compassion ... Government is nothing more than structured, widespread coercion ..." -- Glen Allport

http://images2.cpcache.com/product/yard+sign-when+injustice+becomes+law+resistance+becomes+duty-veterans+for+peace/268178022v24_225x225_Front.jpg

Politics is not a means for liberty. It's an end unto itself that opposes liberty by preventing democracy.

If the context where liberties are won from a government (who depends on controlling people and believes they can't afford to trust them) demands too much compromise from the politicians involved it is the duty of those who are truly dedicated to this cause and have the resources to do so to challenge those politicians as much as any other corruption or oppression.

Nothing will change until attitudes change and any provisions, which are accepted that only go to a few who can fit the model designed for the valued publics convenience is a threat to the individual liberties of most people rather than an aid.




"The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." -- Thomas Jefferson

"When all think alike, then no one is thinking." ~Walter Lippman

"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." -- Wendell Phillips


"The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes." -- Thomas Paine

"Noncooperation with evil is as much a duty as cooperation with good." -- Gandhi

"Tyranny is always better organized than freedom." -- Charles Peguy

Public Relations and Fractured Individuals

 

http://diversityrules.typepad.com/.a/6a01053625d752970c0115708274ff970b-800wi

The choices people make regarding which cause they champion and how they champion it are too often decided based on the appeal of having an influence that more of the public recognizes rather than on what is most important and what an individual is best suited to affect.

The biggest dangers that accompany hierarchical values (which affects who's advocacy is considered valid) come from how people are falsely taught about equal opportunities. The royal views of the "chosen" advocates and politicians are often used to discourage alternative ideas, and they can support the same oppression these people claim to be advocating against.

Advocates on the internet are often reminded of the narrowness of how oppression is described and how few expressions that oppose that narrowness are recognized as valid. The way that neurodiversity is important tends to be hidden by those who abuse the term. As a narrow political agenda it has practically no value at all.

The speed at which information can be transferred today by the increasingly larger number of people provides both for the opportunity of liberation as well as the ease for how those with the most resources can instead exploit more people.

The way that people strive today to find what is considered the best information and the most popular way to express it is very much entangled with the ways that the richest and powerful people control the media and promote a set of standard values, which encourages how the public is pathologized and shamed in the interest of population control.

 

http://images.popcontrol.multiply.com/image/1/photos/upload/300x300/SX4zrwoKCB8AACkpsQ41/overpopulation.gif?et=Aam0IfgRf7TP7yjGHyDoeA&nmid=0

The expectation of responsibility is placed on the people with the least resources. Since they can't express themselves in ways that public relations specialist teaches as being best, what they say and do is ranked accordingly.

Disenfranchisement is the key to exploitation. Once someone can be described by a popular resource as inconvenient and disconnected from what politicians have declared to be an appropriate society, they can be declared an enemy and abused in a way that is justified in society as well as in the legal system.

It says here of Horace Mann:

 
"Arguing that universal public education was the best way to turn the nation's unruly children into disciplined, judicious republican citizens, Mann won widespread approval from modernizers, especially in his Whig Party, for building public schools. Indeed, most states adopted one version or another of the system he established in Massachusetts, especially the program for "normal schools" to train professional teachers[1]. Mann has been credited by many educational historians as the "Father of the Common School Movement"[2]."

AND:

"Under the auspices of the board, but at his own expense, he went to Europe in 1843 to visit schools, especially in Prussia, and his seventh annual report, published after his return, embodied the results of his tour. Many editions of this report were printed, not only in Massachusetts, but in other states, in some cases by private individuals and in others by legislatures; several editions were issued in England. In 1852, he supported the decision to adopt the Prussian education system in Massachusetts. Shortly after Massachusetts adopted the Prussian system, the Governor of New York set up the same method in twelve different New York schools on a trial basis."

It says here of the Prussian education system:

History

During the 18th century, the Kingdom of Prussia was among the first countries in the world to introduce tax-funded and generally compulsory primary education, comprising an eight-year course of primary education, called Volksschule. It provided not only the skills needed in an early industrialized world (reading, writing and arithmetic), but also a strict education in ethics, duty, discipline and obedience. Affluent children often went on to attend preparatory private schools for an additional four years, but the general population had virtually no access to secondary education.

Lutheran influence

Historically, the Lutheran denomination had a strong influence on German culture, including its education. Martin Luther advocated compulsory schooling and this idea became a model for schools throughout Germany.

Pietist influence

Pietism, a reformist group within Lutheranism, forged a political alliance with the King of Prussia based on a mutual interest in breaking the dominance of the Lutheran state church. The Prussian Kings, Calvinists among Lutherans, feared the influence of the Lutheran state church and its close connections with the provincial nobility, while Pietists suffered from persecution by the Lutheran orthodoxy. Bolstered by royal patronage, Pietism replaced the Lutheran church as the effective state religion by the 1760s.

Pietist theology stressed the need for "inner spirituality", which can only come about through the reading of Scripture. Consequently, Pietists helped form the principles of the modern public school system, including the stress on literacy.


The political motivations of the King of Prussia

Seeking to replace the controlling functions of the local aristocracy, the Prussian court attempted to instill social obedience in the citizens through indoctrination. Every individual had to become convinced, in the core of his being, that the King was just, his decisions always right, and the need for obedience paramount.[citation needed]

The schools imposed an official language, to the prejudice of ethnic groups living in Prussia. The purpose of the system was to instill loyalty to the Crown and to train young men for the military and the bureaucracy. As the German philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte, a key influence on the system, said, "If you want to influence [the student] at all, you must do more than merely talk to him; you must fashion him, and fashion him in such a way that he simply cannot will otherwise than what you wish him to will." [1


John Taylor Gatto[1] (born December 15, 1935[2]) is an American retired school teacher of 29 years and 8 months experience in the classroom and author of several books on education. He is an activist critical of compulsory schooling and of what he characterizes as the hegemonic nature of discourse on education and the education professions.

He has many educational videos on this subject which can be found on YouTube. This is my favorite and I think a good introduction to understanding what he teaches:

John Taylor Gatto - State Controlled Consciousness


“The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house”

 Audre Lorde


Radical change needs to occur for anything similar to the ideal of neurodiversity to be respected in the United States. Our school systems as well as the political realm where decisions are made about how it is run are designed to discourage neurodiversity in every way. The way to encourage it is to face the oppressive nature of how our present system works to provide for the elite at the expense of the majority. It's important to not be used by the system in a way that promotes and protects its tradition of oppression.

Would-be Liberators Securing Oppressive Tradition

Too often the difference between nationalism and patriotism is not clearly understood.

Our political system in the United States is an exercise in nationalism and participation too often discourages people from being patriotic.

Today more than ever, a patriot is one who questions and challenges the system rather than applauds it.

For the average person in the US to become educated, it will be done despite the educational system rather than that being due to it's merit. In the same  fashion if the average person can  avoid the abuses of public policy, it is despite our political system rather than the result of how it supposedly functions.

From the public outcry for more humane treatment of persons with disabilities (including the mentally ill and those with developmental disabilities), came political solutions called Protection and Advocacy and Independent Living. Despite how they have been presented, they were designed to give the agencies which were already providing for this population the greatest latitude of continued decision-making power.

Had there been any sustaining empowerment intended to any from this category of the population, these agencies would have radically changed every few years. Instead what has happened is that with every effort to advance the cause of empowering more individuals, the politicians have chosen the most compromising and least affected by the policy decisions to silence the rest and aggressively guard against any threat (or perceived threat) to tradition.

The wider understanding and recognition of autism has promoted more demonizing stereotypes for autistics to contend with and therefore, more abusive situations that we face. Certainly, the term neurodiversity does provide an opportunity for individuals to describe the nature of this oppression as well as ideas for how to oppose it.

Unfortunately, those of us who were interested in promoting this type of advocacy were confronted with the political aspirations of a few in a traditional way that has always prevented effective change.

For those who have hijacked the term neurodiversity and promoted the idea that it represented how liberties could be won through the political process, it would be best that they attempt to preserve the ideals it has represented to so many people rather than subjecting us all to the traditional oppression of standard politics. Instead I see the opposite.

Because the United States is more of a corporation than a nation, it must be understood that pragmatism and objectifying people that are used in politics for the preservation of the oppressive system itself will include cult like intimidation.

One way of describing this type of security is by use of the term Fair Game:

"The term Fair Game is used to describe policies and practices carried out by the Church of Scientology towards people and groups it perceives as its enemies. Founder L. Ron Hubbard established the policy in the 1960s, in response to criticism both from within and outside his organization.[1][2] Individuals or groups who are "Fair Game" are judged to be a threat to the Church and, according to the policy, can be punished and harassed using any and all means possible.[1][2][3] In 1968, Hubbard officially cancelled use of the term "Fair Game" because of negative public relations it caused, although the Church's aggressive response to criticism continued."

An oppressive rather than a liberating agenda can be best be identified by how strictly those who advocate for it categorize everyone as either friend or foe. Individual and creative ideas will never survive this environment nor can the people presenting them be respected or empowered.

As I often write about on this blog, it's very important for representatives to remain open to questioning of their practices. Instead what I see within this movement is a very strict and aggressive approach to any alternative views or any ideas that are not in complete agreement with how they do things.

I often see opportunities for the leadership of the Autistic Self Advocacy Network and other similar organizations to show how they are truly advocating the ideal neurodiversity rather than being pawns instead being addressed a threat. Subsequently, people providing these opportunities are bullied and intimidated. This is very counterproductive and unwise.

The biggest threat to liberties is not a clearly identifiable oppressor but instead comes from those who have the opportunity to cause a change being labeled as liberators and betraying people's trust. They fill the positions that should be filled by those who are genuinely committed to the cause.

Most freedoms are not restricted using official force but instead by the underhanded and deceitful practices of public figures that betray our trust. For the sake of those who are committed to justice and are consistently oppressed, exploited, and intimidated by would-be liberators, I hope that more people with power will consider the responsibility that accompanies it.

Designing Disorder

 

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/hmd/diseases/images/rushchair.jpg

http://www.practiceofmadness.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/electroconvulsive-therapy.jpg

What threatens the continuation of the human species more than the ignorance of those who carry that label is the acceptance of wisdom and knowledge of those who do the labeling.  What gets declared modern culture, western civilization, and scientific knowledge, receives a great deal of unearned respect and praise due to the many myths, which are advertised by those who have the power and means to do so.  These are of course the people who benefit from such beliefs.

Compulsory education was never meant to be a liberator the way it's often claimed, and it was always understood by those who promoted this discipline that most people would be excluded by it.

By praising this institution, children were taught racism, consumerism, bullying, and many fantastic notions about the nature of humans.

The worst of what is promoted in schools is that leaders who are said to have earned that position are able to determine the nature of human thought patterns, promote particular public policy,advance warfare research using unwilling vulnerable subjects, harshly discriminate against diverse expression and alternatives to tradition in order to promote progress and a more civilized atmosphere.

 

http://coto2.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/dependence-on-prescription-drugs.jpg  

http://autismsummer2010.providence.wikispaces.net/file/view/judge-rotenberg-education.jpg1.jpg/148819671/judge-rotenberg-education.jpg1.jpg

Nothing has been used more to exploit people than the unrealistic hopes and expectations of modern medicine.  With so many willing to trust in the magic potions created in the royal name of science this industry naturally chose to diversify and work with government officials to establish law and order according to a new science/product called psychology.  This was added to the use of toxic potions meant to subdue and encourage compliance (called psychiatry)and the whole system works together to show how only a few elites are able to escape intellectual deficits and thinking disorders.

 

The one unique ability common to all creatures is that of cooperating with nature AND influencing their own future according to their understanding, of how they fit.  It's not natural for people to believe that they don't fit.  To encourage such myths require the aid of government, scholastic's, social engineers, and commercial advertising.

Nothing could help to discourage humans more than the belief that their ability to think and plan is disordered so that they feel vulnerable, dependent, and useless.

Communication disorders (also given the convenient title of thinking disorders) are due to diversity of the human species which influence how people think and express themselves in different ways.  Disorder comes from a lack of acceptance and an attempt to understand the difference and yet the different individual rather than the system which created this supposed order as the result of prejudice, receives the blame. 

We're configured in a variety of ways and have a multitude of experiences which science and medicine cannot track, study, or create statistics for.  We have a mind which no microscope or sophisticated scientific instrument can provide a better understanding of. 

If we're to maintain our dignity and encourage hope to fellow men and women, we must understand that it is the system which governs us that is incapable of determining a positive outcome for our future despite their attempts to do so.  Order will come from the creativity we command when we choose to question our oppressors and think outside of the narrow context we have been taught to worship by the name of science, medicine, and scholastic achievement.