The Standard Review

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.

Accurate Speech versus Effective Communication

http://www.sinj.com/the-moon-tarot/images/standard-oil-logo.gif

The ways similar subjects relate to one another can be difficult to understand due to how morality and ethics, separate from other subjects, are typically decided individually based more on emotion than practicality. Collective mentality is how governments contradict the emotions and mental process of the individual and teach them to de-value themselves and their creative spirit. When people describe all things being relative without considering this, discussion becomes chaotic.

Despite the goal of creating appropriate and accurate standards of speech being impossible, people tend to argue as if one person's ability to meet the standards can be measured as greater than another. In the same way, that information is given a royal endorsement with only a few options being explored (and a few royals allowed to express different ideas) variations of verbal expression are used to determine people's ability and the value of their ideas. In the world of academics the silliness of this standard judgment seems less understood by those involved in the process.

The goal of scientific research is mainly to encourage the validity of science and protect what has been described as knowledge by a scientist. The definition given by Wikipedia for science is here.

We have no way of knowing who were the best thinkers in ancient Greece because the standard of measurement excluded most people from even being considered. The thoughts they described were within a narrow realm of the beliefs and ideas that questioned the superiority of the empire's methods were never considered valid. Long before eugenics was a word used for the elimination of invalids Aristotle and Plato published these views: (note this site is described as a Nazi fan site)

These so called superior thinkers showed contempt for independent decisions and variety of ideas. They wrote rule books for others that were considered the best humans to follow so that the State would always be honored and would make decisions about whose life was valuable and whose was not. This was, and still is, considered by the most valued members of society who mainly influence decisions about public policy, to be the best way to preserve what is considered civilization.

In several hundred years, the philosophy that protected this empire has changed very little because those who have had power have used it to eliminate diversity, promote slavery, and discourage all types of independence and democracy.

For example, the empirical ambitions of the United States are promoted in very similar ways to that of ancient Greece. Only a very few of the considered elite are even included as being valuable citizens who achieve a high school education.

It says here:

"This report finds that only about half of all students served by the main school systems in the nation's 50 largest cities graduate from high school."

Part of the myth that sustains poverty and oppression in the United States is that we have a continuum of opportunity rather than dividing spectrums according to class and economic distinction. This supports the myth that our political system is a democracy and that opportunities for economic success (and sometimes even survival) is not predetermined.

In this article by John Taylor Gatto, he describes how the leadership in the United States set up the compulsory education program we have today based on the success of a similar model used in Prussia to discourage democracy and free thought in favor of a powerful military. Those targeted for this type of education were not those who were thought to be the future leaders but instead were expected to be soldiers or exploited factory workers who would do well at following orders.

On the other hand, the leadership of the United States, is provided a very different type of education where their esteem and the validity of their ideas are encouraged.

In this interview Gatto explains more about the validity of the standardized tests given to US public school students. Here is an excerpt from the interview: (JTG is an abbreviation for John Taylor Gatto)


"MP: That's exactly the problem. See, if your kid is already scoring 95 percent on the standardized tests, you think, "Boy, this is great, right?"

JTG: No! The tests don't measure what they purport to measure. I guarantee you they don't do that. Let me give you an experiment you could run anywhere in this country and it will work. I used to take the kids who scored the very highest on the standardized tests. I would say, "I will demonstrate to you that you don't know how to read, even though your test score says that you know how to read better than anybody in the school." So I'd get these groups together, I mean, I'd do this year after year, and I would give them an extremely simple classic book to read, Erich Maria Remarque's All Quiet on the Western Front. It's still in print, sells more copies in the year 2000 than it ever sold in 1928 when it was printed. It's a story of teenagers in the first world war. It's written in teenage language, with teenage concepts, and there are hardly any three-syllable words in the book, I mean it's mostly one- or two-syllable words, so it's extremely simple to read. I said, "I will give you an open book test on the first 20 pages of that book, and I will be very surprised if anyone in here passes the test.

See, standardized tests, even though all the questions look different, really arrange themselves in six, seven, or eight different patterns of extracting information from the reading selection. In actual fact there are about 168 separate ways to extract information from a reading selection. Most people who read a lot learn those things automatically; they don't have to be taught them. But when you're taught reading, and when you think the prize is getting a high score on a standardized test, what happens inside your mind (this is really diabolical) is, if you're efficient, you tend to concentrate harder on the things that you recognize will show up as questions and answers on the test. You may not be aware you're doing that, but it will happen inevitably. As a consequence, out of the 168, you miss about 160 types of information that are in the reading selection."

 

http://static.funnyjunk.com/pictures/0138.jpg

Here Gatto explains:




"The Fear Of Common Intelligence

The fear of common people learning too much is a recurrent theme in state records around the world. The founder of the Chinese state, the Emperor Ts’in She Hwang-ti, burned the work of the philosophers for fear their ideas would poison his own plans. The Caliph Ùmar of Syria wrote instructions to destroy the perhaps apocryphal library at Alexandria, using this airtight syllogism:

If these writings of the Greeks agree with the Book of God they are useless and need not be preserved; if they disagree they are pernicious and ought to be destroyed.2

Literary bonfires in Nazi Germany are often invoked as a vivid symbol of the deepest barbarism of the twentieth century, but extensive press coverage ended the book burning by stirring public uneasiness worldwide. Much more effective have been those silent blast furnaces used by public library systems and great American universities to dispose of 3 million excess books annually because of a shortage of shelf space. Why aren’t they given to schools?

There are other ways to burn books without matches. Consider the great leap forward undertaken in the modern Turkish state under Kemal Ataturk. Unlike Hitler, who burned only some of the past, Ataturk burned it all without fire by radically changing the Turkish national alphabet so that all the vital writings of the past were entombed in an obsolete symbol system. Not a single Turk voted to have this done, yet all accepted it.

From 1929 on, all books and newspapers were printed in the new alphabet. All documents were composed in it. All schoolchildren were instructed in it and no other. The classics of Persia, Arabia, and Turkey vanished without a trace for the next generation. Obliterate the national memory bound up in history and literature, sift carefully what can be translated, and you open a gulf between old and young, past and present, which can’t be bridged, rendering children vulnerable to any form of synthetic lore authorities deem advisable.

 
Turkish experimentation is echoed today in mainland China where a fifth of the population of the planet is cut off from the long past of Chinese literature and philosophy, one of the very few significant bodies of thought on the human record. The method being used is a radical simplification of the characters of the language which will have, in the fullness of time, the same effect as burning books, putting them effectively out of reach. Lord Lindsay of Birker, a professor at Yenching University outside Beijing where I recently went to see for myself the effects of Westernization on the young Chinese elite, says the generation educated entirely in simplified characters will have difficulty reading anything published in China before the late 1950s.

First, said Plato, wipe the slate clean.

There are many ways to burn books without a match. You can order the reading of childish books to be substituted for serious ones, as we have done. You can simplify the language you allow in school books to the point that students become disgusted with reading because it demeans them, being thinner gruel than their spoken speech. We have done that, too. One subtle and very effective strategy is to fill books with pictures and lively graphics so they trivialize words in the same fashion the worst tabloid newspapers do – forcing pictures and graphs into space where readers should be building pictures of their own, preempting space into which personal intellect should be expanding. In this we are the world’s master.

Samuel Johnson entered a note into his diary several hundred years ago about the powerful effect reading Hamlet was having upon him. He was nine at the time. Abraham Cowley wrote of his "infinite delight" with Spenser’s Faerie Queen – an epic poem that treats moral values allegorically in nine-line stanzas that never existed before Spenser (and hardly since). He spoke of his pleasure with its "Stories of Knights and Giants and Monsters and Brave Houses." Cowley was twelve at the time. It couldn’t have been an easy read in 1630 for anyone, and it’s beyond the reach of many elite college graduates today. What happened? The answer is that Dick and Jane happened. "Frank had a dog. His name was Spot." That happened."

 

 

http://www.innervisionz.com/images/Normal_Pill.png

 

So the goal of standard education is to standardize people and standardize their behavior. This is consistent with encouraging Applied Behavior Analysis in schools and more specifically Statewide Positive Behavioral Support. If all people can be seen as being motivated by the same things, they can be ranked accordingly. This ranking is how individuals and individualistic views are discouraged.

People who communicate differently and may be more prone to different views and alternatives to tradition are a threat to polite society. Neurological differences (including autism) are not and cannot be respected while at the same time respecting tradition, scholastics, and politics. This realm is opposed to all types of diversity and all types of creative thinking.

The Internet is not inclusive of people with neurological differences. The exclusion of autistic people is supported by advocates who are interested more in a convenient tradition and showing how several autistics are already meeting the standards rather than revealing the contradiction and broadening those standards with a new way of looking at communication which traditional leaders have not yet explored.

If there is to be a change in how autistic people are treated it will come from listening to autistic people rather than continuing to honor the ongoing traditional attitude of ambitious scientists and politicians who demean and exclude us.

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.

The Significance of the Walls (changes in the institutionalization practices of the United States)

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_IKL005tzBsU/SVT7HL1p89I/AAAAAAAAADw/MMkv74Jp-cc/S1600-R/unheard.JPG

It seems that political advocacy groups have been successful in persuading President Obama to follow the proposed practice of closing more mental institutions.

This article describes how this is occurring in the state of Georgia. The first thing that I recognize about this article is the terms that are used, which provide the reader with an understanding of how advocates traditionally explain public policy.

Unfortunately, the terms are very narrow and appeal, mainly to those who are involved in the political process. Among the population of persons diagnosed with mental illness and developmental disabilities those who have an interest in politics make up the smallest population of people whom the policies affect worst. This is truer of this group than any other discriminated group that has some type of political representation.

 

http://www.yorku.ca/ycpe/images/free_speech.jpg 

What the efforts of deinstitutionalization will do within the current political environment is tagging and parole a much larger group of people and at the same time provide fewer opportunities for people who need the basic essentials to survive and put them in more situations where abuse is likely.

The people who are affected worst by these policies and laws have practically no interest in politics, don't vote, have a great deal of difficulty with managing their finances, and are blamed and bullied more than anyone else in our culture.

This group is seen as irresponsible, blaming them is very comfortable, and public policy makes this convenient.

Advocate groups which encourage what is described as "the recovery model"  (and often disability advocates as well) has no time or interest in this group and will not take them into consideration when accepting the compromises the political system demands.

The truth of this matter will never be heard. Nothing has changed in the way this group is treated. Restraint and seclusion are encouraged within the very policies which claim to discourage them, and there are fewer opportunities for reporting abuse than ever before.

In a very practical sense mental institutions are haunted by the generations of souls that have perished (sentenced to a life without hope) pursuant to the common attitudes behind these walls. Unfortunately, those ghosts are not confined and the current efforts for decreasing institutionalization will encourage more places where the cursed attitudes promote abuse.

http://www.contrastcreative.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/unheard-voices_t1.jpg

As with most policies the way this promotes supposed liberties  for one group of people will be advertised and the group affected worst by it, which is traditionally forgotten will not be heard from or considered. The only reason that such compromises are seen as necessary is due to the way that some victims in our society are seen as the necessary waste.

Quotes such as these;

"When the people fear the government there is tyranny, when the government fears the people there is liberty."
— Thomas Jefferson

"Tyranny anywhere is a threat to freedom everywhere."
— Alex Storozynski (The Peasant Prince: Thaddeus Kosciuszko and the Age of Revolution)

 are now being used more for promoting the sustainability of the United States' mythical middle class. The rest of the public with fewer resources is seen as disposable. Many people who think they have escaped being part of this population will eventually discover otherwise.

Eliminating the Jukes (crime, disability, and eugenics)

In order to understand the historical events which have influenced current efforts to control the population it's important to look at how propaganda has been used to shape modern mainstream attitudes. It's convenient to claim that science is the alternative to propaganda but to do so can be misleading.

In the United States(which has a corporate-run government) corporations have had increasingly greater control over public policy and laws and scientific findings, which is not only the way to encourage scholastics rather than common sense but also to praise the enterprises of psychology and governmental evaluations of humans.

Because the law discriminates against people with disabilities it's seeming fair to say that having a disability is practically against the law. This means that poverty and disability (of course the disabled are often sentenced to a life of poverty) a disabled person is subjected to the same character evaluation as that of a criminal.

Many of those studied as being part of Juke family described by the Dugdale findings was originally described as a group of cement miners for Rosendale Cement, who were driven out of business by the introduction an inferior product which was quicker drying. The economic hardship made them vulnerable to being seen as a burden and therefore, propaganda was used to show their character as being undesirable.

It says here:

The Jukes in 1915

"In 1875 Richard L. Dugdale made the first public announcement of his study of the Juke family in the annual report of the Prison Association of New York, of whose executive committee he was a member."

Dugdale's findings indicated:

"The total cost to the State of New York of this one group of mental and social degenerates was estimated, for a period of 75 years beginning in 1800, at $1,308,000."

Here it says:    

Article: Eugenics Past and Present

"Although Dugdale's study stressed that the Jukes's misfortune could be blamed as much on environmental factors as on heredity, it facilitated inaccurate beliefs that behaviors are genetically inherited. Many people concluded that crime, poverty, and disease were both innate and closely associated with sexual promiscuity, mental illness, and idiocy.(3) At the time, scholars overlooked the fact that Dugdale's findings included only one case of mental retardation out of 709 subjects.

During the years following the study, eugenicists offered a variety of solutions for what they saw as the problems of inherited criminality, harlotry, mental retardation, and feeblemindedness. One solution was the institutional internment and segregation of people with cognitive or emotional impairments. Another was the prohibition of marriage between people with developmental delays or social maladjustments. In 1895, Connecticut became the first state to ban marriage between "defective" persons. Eventually, forty-one other states ratified comparable legislation. But the marriage laws proved difficult to enforce, and eugenicists turned to other, more drastic measures.(4)

The medical profession introduced new possibilities for eradicating "the problem." Eugenicists had already touted castration as a means of protecting institutionalized patients from the evils of sexual promiscuity and ensuring that they had no offspring.(5) In 1897, the first reported vasectomy in the United States offered a seemingly less extreme method of sterilization."

It appealed to the pride of valued American voters to be afraid of and therefor prejudiced against the mixing of what was described race. The Jukes were shown to have interracial marriages and handicapped children.

The word Juke used in the term Juke box has this origin:


"REGIONAL NOTE   Gullah, the English-based Creole language spoken by people of African ancestry off the coast of Georgia and South Carolina, retains a number of words from the West African languages brought over by slaves. One such word is juke, "bad, wicked, disorderly," the probable source of the English word juke. Used originally in Florida and then chiefly in the Southeastern states, juke (also appearing in the compound juke joint) was an African-American word meaning a roadside drinking establishment that offers cheap drinks, food, and music for dancing and often doubles as a brothel. "To juke" is to dance, particularly at a juke joint or to the music of a jukebox whose name, no longer regional and having lost the connotation of sleaziness, contains the same word."


The measuring of intelligence and the measuring of disability is a numbers game used for objectifying humans for the purposes of governmental control/population control. Intelligence is still evaluated by test created by eugenist.

The founder of eugenics ( Sir Francis Galton)  found ways to evaluate beauty/ability based on how closely someone resembled a Scottish person (the Scottish were terby targeted as being infereior/ugly).

We use these numbers today to evaluate everything from severity of depression 1-10 to super models 1-10.

Second generation eugenist Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.:

"in Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), where he found no constitutional bar to state-ordered compulsory sterilization of an institutionalized, allegedly "feeble-minded" woman. Holmes wrote, "We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. ... three generations of imbeciles are enough." 

 The way autistics are treated is shown clearly by the abuse at the Judge Rotenburg Center described by some as the "School of Shock".

 

In the   History of JRC

by Matthew L. Israel

1971-1985: Beginnings, Philosophy and Early Growth

it says:

"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"

The United States has contributed greatly to how the praise of Western civilization (which is evaluated by Scholastic achievement among the elite) leads to an evaluation of humans and discrimination against the less valued human characteristics. These evaluations include race (as it was defined by Darwin and other scholars), ability (based on industries need to mass market products), and character (which is often determined by conveniently defining behavior in order to control it rather than taking the time to develop trusting relationships).

Industry leaders and politicians have abused the public's false sense of pride to campaign for discriminatory laws and to encourage competition between workers. While it may seem more rational to promote unity it's important to remember that politics and corporate control are not influenced to promote unity but instead to create division and conflict.

The goal of those who promote population control (now mainly advertised as environmental purity and even disguised as pollution control for industries) is to make life more difficult for particular types of people, so they can be seen as inferior and thus eliminated.

For autistics, it's important and crucial to be included in education, job training, etc. and the system which provides those opportunities will have to change in a radical way for that to happen. For radical change people who are not involved in the system must challenge the system rather than agree to the compromises which are advertised as incremental alterations, which make things better.

Much of what the Nazis designed was claimed to be for purity by government control (in other words, using socialism to objectify humans by using numbers). The designers expanded on the ideas of the eugenics movement in the United States.

After the war "studies" were conducted by scholars and medical professionals in places such as the National Institute of Health in order to find ways to manipulate the human thought process by manipulating animalistic responses.  Animal and plant breeders played a crucial role in the creation of the eugenics movement.

This was based on the theories of behaviorism.


Darwin and Galton's research were enabled by Pavlov, who studied animal behavior. The MK ultra project conducted by Dr. Cameron was described by Naomi Klein in this way:

"Naomi Klein states in her book "The Shock Doctrine" that Dr Cameron's research and his contribution to the MKUltra project was actually not about mind control and brainwashing, but about "to design a scientifically based system for extracting information from 'resistant sources.' In other words, torture."


Science and art work together in the industry of psychology/psychiatry to promote the idea that autism is the expression similar to that of other sentient beings/animals so that behavioral therapies can be used to fix autistic people. This has led to some of the worst atrocities disguised as treatments for autistics.

Other sentient beings don't have the same need for identity, and identity is what provides humans with the distinction from other animals, which encourages our confidence and self-respect. The distinction between the two is not the provision for other animals to be mistreated but polarizing the debate in that way often gives animal rights advocates a platform for justifying something, which doesn't require it.

Autistics are described as not having empathy in a similar way that a predator animal does have emotions about its prey. Our emotions are presumed by behaviorists to be displaying primal behavior and therefor horrific "treatments" have been conveniently justified as the need for control. An environment of trust takes more effort but the results don't require fixing the way the results of control do.

It's very important to remember that encouraging dignity and respect for autistic people should be more important than anything. If you don't listen to autistic people and allow them to express themselves and accept the diverse ways we do that, you are not only describing what people have that should be fixed, but also you are describing who people are and why they need to be eliminated from our culture and what is described as our "gene pool."

This is very important to remember when evaluating what disability is in today's culture and the role that developmental disabilities such as autism have on the decisions of government in terms of accommodation. It's important to realize that in order for persons with disabilities to be accommodated this has traditionally meant sacrificing the dignity and respect that others are privileged to receive as an aspect of being human.




US Farmers are encouraged to buy seed, which can only be used along with a fertilizer the same company also provides. The farmers who do this are provided subsidies from the government and would not be able to run their farms otherwise. In a similar way, the school system excludes people with particular types of learning disabilities, and then subsidized professionals who sell the solution. However, the subsidies for autism are mainly focused on how to eliminate autistic people and therefor much of the therapy and accommodation claims are misleading.

Autistics began "having autism" based on unsubstantiated claims that it could be fixed. This "having" something is NOT revolutionary but is instead the opposite. It is a mystical notion which has been used to justify exorcisms, lobotomies, etc.Once people have something for which there is no cure, getting rid of the people based on propaganda and the discrimination which results is a much easier task.

We can't depend on politics to change people because the majority of people are not included in politics and the corporations are not interested in empowerment. People, however, can influence politics but only if the approach is sufficiently radical.

Varieties of Eugenics Experience in the 21st Century - Part 1

Varieties of Eugenics Experience in the 21st Century - Part 2

Varieties of Eugenics Experience in the 21st Century - Part 3

Varieties of Eugenics Experience in the 21st Century - Part 4

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

The Creation of Public Enemies and Medical Models

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39723000/jpg/_39723849_slaves_story_ap.jpg

The behavior modification specialists who design mainstream education do so in a similar (if not same) way as the ones who design marketing campaigns. This makes education be based more on art than on science with the goal of all practical decisions affecting how it's run being based on the appeal of the  designer's artistic expression rather than the reflection of logical conclusions. Little effort goes into understanding how people in the general population think and what creative ability they have and a great deal goes into teaching conformity. This conformity of course aids the designers rather than the people being educated.

I'm not describing so much a conspiracy as I am a system of government where the corporations that fund it are protected by unearned power. In the U.S., the resource used is still called capitol but in as much as that even exists I doubt it will still be being called that for much longer.

This chart shows:

"Almost half the world — over three billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day."

I don't believe the fraudulent description of the US dollar's worth will be necessary to promote much longer as the means for determining what people are entitled to.

This shows:

"About 250,000 - 300,000 people die per day."


This says:

"On World Population Day, take note: population isn’t the

problem Half the world now has fewer than the "replacement level" of children. That includes Europe, North America, and the Caribbean, most of the Far East from Japan to Thailand, and much of the Middle East from Algeria to Iran." 

He goes on to say:

"The granddaddy of demographic doomsters was Bob Malthus, an English clergyman who got famous by warning 200 years ago about population growth. He believed that the world's

population would keep increasing till it was cut down by

disease or famine. Back in the ferment of the Industrial

Revolution, he was a favorite of the evil mill owners and a

scourge on anyone with a social conscience.

Malthus hated Victorian charities because he said they were

keeping poor people alive to breed. Better that they die,

he said. He believed the workhouses, where the destitute

ended up, were too lenient, and he successfully campaigned

for a get-tough law known at the time as Malthus's Law. 

The novelist Charles Dickens, a social reformer, attacked

Malthus in several of his books. When Oliver Twist asked

for more gruel in the workhouse, that was a satire on

Malthus's Law. In A Christmas Carol, Ebenezer Scrooge was a

caricature of Malthus. In Hard Times, Thomas Gradgrind, the

unfeeling headmaster of Coketown, had a son called Malthus."



The U.S. has always based its laws and social agenda on the encouragement of racial segregation.

Wikipedia says of Racial segregation in the United States:

"Racialism was also fueled by the ideology of Social

Darwinism, which broadly asserted that because of a natural

competition among humans and the social evolution driven by

the survival of the fittest, the white man not only should

but deserved to retain political and economic power. Thus

the behavior exhibited towards Negros was not perceived as

racism but rather action that was sanctioned by the

‘science’ of Euro-centric racialism.[5]:118"

http://shakashawshow.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/nm_lincoln_slavery_081103_ssv.jpg

and it says here:  THE INHERENT RACISM OF POPULATION CONTROL

 Malthus said:

"We should facilitate, instead of foolishly and vainly endeavoring to impede the operations of nature in producing this mortality; and if we dread the too frequent visitation of the horrid form of famine, we should sedulously encourage the other forms of destruction, which we compel nature to use. Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague. In the country, we should build our villages near stagnant pools, and particularly encourage settlements in all marshy and unwholesome situations. But, above all, we should reprobate specific remedies for ravaging diseases; and those benevolent, but much mistaken men, who have thought they were doing a service to mankind by projecting schemes for the total extirpation of particular disorders.30"

so:

"Remarkably, Malthus was encouraging an active repression and abuse of the poor based on what he believed was their natural inferiority. In doing so he essentially had created and was advocating a new type of racism, a “scientific” racism by which whole segments of the population were to be discriminated against based on their socioeconomic status. The term “pauperism” came to mean a racial classification of those who were “naturally” and incurably poor. Allan Chase explains the outlook of the new “scientific” racism created by Malthus saying:

"The poor and the near poor of all nations were–and still are–held to be a race apart, ‘a definite race of pauper stocks.’ In the countinghouse philosophy of scientific racism, the physiological, cultural, and economic woes of the poor and the nonaffluent ‘middling classes’ were scientifically ordained by Nature, and therefore neither preventable nor reversible.31"

According to this view the poor owned nothing–not even the right to live. If a man is born poor, explained Malthus, “and if the society does not want his labour, [he] has no claim of right to the smallest portion of food, and, in fact, has no business to be where he is. At nature’s mighty feast there is no cover for him.” (Emphasis added).32 Thus, Malthus became the father of a “scientific” racism much more encompassing and more dangerous than the ethnic racisms of the past."

As this shows :

Eugenics and Environmentalism: From quality control to quantity control

Racial hygiene is now being disguised, promoted, and funded, with the idea that we are preserving our planet.

http://pollypartisan.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/global-warming-myth_65.jpg

What Malthus was saying is that not only do we need to get rid of inferior races, but we need to expose their bad habits and even encourage those habits so that the superior humans will have all the resources they need and a "clean" environment.

He claims that one of the ways to encourage this hygiene (as it's so ruthlessly described) is to promote the good and best humans and advertise how the worst deserve to be eliminated.

One of the ways I see this most often used in today's society is by claiming that economics is the scale by which to judge a persons character.

The way that law enforcement and the judicial system does this is by encouraging violence within communities that are more economically depressed, preventing these people from having a legal defense, and encouraging the media to cover stories, which claim economic challenges and the defects of the economically challenged are the reason for their violent acts.

The way they sell this as a humanitarian act is by claiming that this will encourage more aid to these groups. However, those that fund the lawmakers, the enforcers, the judicial system, AND mainstream journalism are more interested in the elimination of people than they are in their empowerment.

As we saw in the Katrina storm response, there is an overwhelming attitude that directs many law enforcers to believe that if they leave the impoverished alone they will kill each other and eliminate "their kind". When law enforcement officials do show when violence has been committed within an unpopular region, their actions are more offensive because the few people who even feel empowered enough to speak up about how they were abused don't have enough money to defend themselves in a court of law.

As I explained earlier this week, the response from the mainstream media (which was  also shown on some of the Internet sites I've visited) to the recent story of a mother who had murdered her children was socially irresponsible. The claim was that this murder was indicative of the needs for more and better supports for both autistic children and the mentally ill (based on the mother's state of mind).

Both groups have been unjustly described as violent with little or no evidence to substantiate the claim. Traditionally, if people are interested in getting support for either of these groups,  they are more inclined to be successful with legislation that provides evidence that the aid which the law provides them will reduce their violent actions. Unfortunately, too many in the general public have accepted the false claim that these groups are violent and denied the inherent problem that these claims have traditionally caused.

The small portion of people who have the resources to be seen as proper citizens get drunk, abuse drugs, get diagnosed with mental illness, take pharmaceuticals, and are violent. While these things may influence a state that statistics show is associated with violence, their resources will protect their class from being seen as violent. The rest of the population must be much more careful. We should never fool ourselves into believing we have this luxury.

We are given more subtle messages that our lives are worth less and that violence against ourselves is a natural product of the lack of self-respect we deserve. We must never accept this false projection.

Violence is an evil act. It is an act of will. However uncontrollable the state of the persons brain and central nervous system may be, we as a part of the population which is meant to be eliminated for our bad habits cannot afford to excuse being violent under any circumstance.

The popular theories of Malthus and Darwin which have been used to promote the agenda of population control are directed towards eliminating people who are thought to be from inferior races and creating the illusion that an inferior and disabled race has been created from our own ignorance and unwillingness to be civil.

It's important for understanding the point I'm trying to make to remember two things about American history:

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

1.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."

Mad-In-AmericaJun03c[1]


2. 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."

3.  In this article :Will Obama End 'War on Drugs'?

Sherwood Ross says:

"Drug offenses account for about half the 200,000 Federal prison inmates behind bars, compared to just 15 percent of prisoners convicted of violent crimes involving weapons, explosives, or arson. If America leads the world with 2.3 million prisoners in all its prisons, jails, and assorted lock-ups, it is largely because we have criminalized drug addiction, not treated it." 

I see the obvious intent here as being not only to provide certain portions of the population with drugs that kill them but also to use this as a source for encouraging violence within this group (much the way identity politics does), incarcerating them, and attacking their character.

Attacking the character of minorities is always sensationally used by the mainstream media. As much as it is wrong to claim that people with economic challenges are more prone to violence due to any genetic flaw or ingested substance it's much more important to realize that the victims of this violence are not outside this group but are instead in it.

They are the women and children who were less likely to be able to  defend themselves. They are all the most vulnerable people within our own community. Their attackers have been oppressed and learned to oppress and be violent from how they've been treated rather than seeing how they can act more civilly than those who are automatically claimed to be better due to their social status. The violence unfortunately aids in our own destruction.

We need to teach people within our own communities not to follow in the footsteps of our oppressors and not to accept the degrading evaluation of our worth, which is falsely advertised in all our media and entertainment. We need to teach the more dominant and resourceful groups in our society that we are peacefully resisting injustice rather than looking for ways to excuse it when it's done to us or when we do it to each other.
 

Is Autonomous Thinking Threatening or Liberating?

People who are inclined to think in alternative ways challenge the standardized tests (and the commercial interest that created them) to be more accepting of diversity. These social challenges too often negatively affect us individually in our personal relationships. We feel the burden of society's need to exclude us in order to preserve their false sense of pride even more intensely on a personal level, and it affects how we relate to our immediate environment. However, targeting the broader unfair social designs is where our efforts will affect the most needed change. This solidifies our efforts and discourages bickering (which encourages harmony) in personal relationships.

People involved in designing social control often base their self worth on their social status and only see that developing from the popularity of their ideas.It's a fragile basis for self-esteem and the rest of us (the "othered" part of the population) would do well not to follow their example or trust their projected view of us.

Solidarity comes from an agreement but the agreement is weak and fragile if it hasn't been tested and explored. That exploration requires trust and courage.

Once people are aware of how we are encouraging our own oppression, we can work boldly and compassionately as a solidified team against the nature of oppression which we feel in many daily interactions. Once we face the destructive force with courage we will feel empowered to combat it.

Neurological difference presents a threat to both people who are pathologically inclined to need personal control as well as those who are involved in designing control-based, normalizing behavioral systems that will ultimately support a larger political goal.

The ultimate goal of incarceration for unfounded allegations, the increasing focus on "needing" to use physical restraints, the broadening of the diagnostic statistical manual (DSM), and the overwhelming increase in medicating younger and more children, is based on the idea that people need to be controlled because they can't be trusted.

The United States has always encouraged the overly strict style of thinking, which create division and work to promote government oppression of the public it claims to serve. The evidence for this is shown by black versus white thinking that supports racial discrimination, being guilty due to being competent enough to recognize our crime versus those who are ignorant of their sin due to neurological defect and therefore innocent, and the intelligent versus unintelligent (educated versus non-educated) with regards to functioning labels. This is also shown by the way the term nationalism is promoted in a way which confuses it with patriotism. The two terms mean very different things.

At the core of these anti-diversity social designs are the fear of losing control and the need to transfer that fear back to the public by teaching them not to trust each other.

A functioning label is a political tool and nothing more. It's important to remember the few who are making the biggest decisions about how our government is run (and are using the mainstream media to promote their designs) only believe that a very few people are fit and therefore, worthy of respect and consideration.

Dividing the rest into categories promotes identity politics and some to have a sense of superiority due to being normal and only expressing views that are average. This leads everyone in thinking that anyone who presents as struggling for justice must be seeking dominance over others or attempting to position themselves as a leader. Anything that can be used to discourage autonomy will be.

This is a very effective tool for discouraging new ideas and preserving the ruling class of the minority elite. This doesn't serve to provide the majority with protecting rights, liberties, and the pursuit of justice.

Most people are aware of oppression by their government and how it affects so much of their life, and they feel powerless to affect change. Their suppressed emotions over this too often creates distrust, which gets directed toward their family and friends. This creates a division and encourages the feeling of powerlessness for everyone involved.

Family and friends must be unburdened from the fear taught by our government and the mainstream media. We must empower ourselves and those around us by learning to discuss ideas and opinions in healthy ways. We need to trust that this will strengthen and maintain our relationships rather than dividing us and making us even more vulnerable to the unfair yet unified control.

Diversity can mean an opportunity to examine the uniqueness of the human race and the infinite possibilities that provides, or it can represent more competition to what the normals and their leadership claim to deserve (based on scarcity myth). Governmental leadership doesn't need to be the deciders of our worth. We can reject their evaluations and promote an expanded set of values that will be undeniable to everyone. The only thing that separates a weed from a flower is our ability to find its value.

We can't fight for neurodiversity by using the political strategies which are taught us by the mainstream media. Fostering trust is not their goal. We won't overcome injustice, unless we are encouraging openness and honesty from all the vulnerable parts of the population. We won't establish trusting relationships with other oppressed people by using the mainstream mindset that has created our divisions in the first place. Basically, "The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house."

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.

Take, for Example, The Judge Rotenberg Center

The government of the United States began with a mindset which strictly divided classes of people and made extreme demands of the lower class. Governing and ruling meant demanding obedience at the expense of trust and no one cared to be creative about how to motivate people beyond the use of punishment.

Unfortunately, people who are driven by ego in a place where the laws favor only those who have power often use what gets labeled as punishment for nothing more than the self gratification and the delusion that they are in control. This pathological need to believe that you are in control will continue to be the driving force of people in positions of power, until or, unless there are regulations to stop them, or they choose to find a more productive and fair means to motivate others.

The first corporations which used U.S.labor were slave owners who used punishment as a means of humiliation and control rather than any type of quest for justice. Today we continue to abuse our legal system and discourage citizen's from taking pride in where they live in very similar ways.

When people take the time to be creative and inspiring they will naturally want to understand others and will find gratification in their success.

Since punishment is unimaginative and ultimately unproductive purposed initiatives within such an environment will only lead to more punishment than reward, unless the entire mindset changes. It is the presumption that everyone is inspired in the same way that allows for and even encourages punishment as a convenient alternative to creative thinking.

Applied behaviorism became a popular treatment for autistic people in the US when many parents were offered no hope by the government and were therefore, willing to institutionalize their autistic children. As the institutionalization in America has continued to increase over the years' institutions that were originally considered to offer some sort of therapy and those which are simply punitive have become less distinguishable.

Recently, as reported by ABC news, the United Nations has declared the adversives being used at the Judge Rotenberg Center as torture and have asked our government to investigate. Now that behaviorists are attempting to present a more friendly image by renaming Applied Behavioral Analysis as Positive Behavioral Support and have all schoolteachers trained by that model the Judge Rotenberg Center may be a political hot potato that behaviorist want to disassociate from.


The problem is that the Judge Rotenberg Center is a symptom of a much bigger problem. While it absolutely should be used as an example of what the public will not tolerate in terms of abuse, and it should be shut down, the political environment that continues to encourage the thinking that has allowed for the abuses at JRC for so long needs to be investigated.

Statewide Positive Behavioral Support is part of an effort to more clearly define the merging of the school system and the judicial system. The agency that certifies people who are trained in Applied Behavioral Analysis have worked for many years to have ABA used to train teachers and students in all schools.

The DSM does not distinguish between behaviors that are done in private at no risk to another's safety and those that are done in public that do risk someone's safety. Furthermore, the police and the courts are allowed to use a formal diagnosis from the DSM to help or to hurt the accused.

The nicer sounding form of Applied Behavioral Analysis known as Positive Behavioral Support was recently falsely advertised as the answer to harmful restraints and seclusion in order to pass the bill HR 4247. I have even seen where people are describing Statewide Positive Behavioral Support as the solution to problems such as those which have been exposed at JRC. These claims are very misleading.

It's typical of such policies as incorporating statewide PBS in all schools that those who are worst affected are the most disenfranchised, so they will question it the least. The school systems are mainly exclusive so the vocal voting public (which is the minority of the population) will have their way. However, if the object of the school systems is to make the schools safer for those children who are valued (which is the minority who doesn't complain) the majority who is meant to be excluded will sacrifice their safety in order to provide it for them.

In order to present ABA in a better more appealing way(which the name Positive Behavioral Support so obviously is trying to accomplish), those who wouldn't have protested JRC in the past will now. It would serve their agenda of creating a new image to abandon those who have received a bad reputation.

James A. Mulick (supporter of JRC) and Erik M. Butter from The Ohio State University and the Columbus Children's Hospital wrote this paper called Positive Behavioral Support: A Paternalistic Utopian Delusion.


One of the points they make is that the popularity of PBS has grown partially due to the misrepresentation of the civil rights group known as TASH. If PBS had been held to scientific standards rather than resting on its political appeal the views held by PBS advocates as well as the program itself would be continually altering due to the ongoing questions which would naturally occur. It not being that way makes it anti-scientific, which is in total contrast of how it is advertised.

Whether or not the Judge Rotenberg Center is in keeping with the more prevalent standards of behaviorists or not isn't as important as whether or not the more prevalent standards are also allowed to be questioned.

In this post 9/11 age, the psychiatric industry is growing much faster than the questions about their practices can be addressed. Freedoms are being taken away at an alarming rate and our tradition of placing the burden on the weakest and the most vulnerable part of the population is naturally repeating since such little effort has been made to change our system of government.

The United States relies more on institutionalization than ever and the jails, mental institutions, and schools are creating more standards, which are interchangeable. Therefore, the people who fill these institutions are being recognized by government officials in more similar ways.

The Judge Rotenberg Center uses an uncommon form of punishment but the thinking behind it will encourage more of the same if not worse, unless more people are questioning the standards of behavioral authorities.

Allowing for a standardized method of behavior control/modification is not an area that any community should vote in solidarity for, unless or until it has been thoroughly scrutinized. Even then it must continue to be questioned and reviewed to prevent the kind of corruption that is traditional in our society.