Militant, much?

Post Reply New Topic

You are right and notice how when people nit pick that there is always a flaw somewheres in the sentince (winks)

Perfection, while idealized, is also boring; give me the blemishes to relish any day.


M.

Some of the more extreme superiority theories I see around here do scare me some.

However...

I don't doubt the possibility of a cure that would be forced, and which would eventually lead to the nonexistence of most if not all people who were autistic or otherwise "not good enough." I know this because I dealt with the same thing, more or less, for other, even less severe issues in my life. Thankfully, I managed to stay who I was rather than be made into what others were comfortable with, but just barely.

I can tell you that a drop in the number of autistic and otherwise "disabled" people, both of the mental and physical sorts, will not happen in a dramatic fashion a la X-Men or some cliche dystopia novel. It will be so entirely banal that it will hardly disturb almost anyone. It will happen at the hands of generally well-meaning parents, educators and medical practitioners. The parents will want a kid who will be more like them and therefore, as they understand things, happier; the teachers will want one less "problem child" so that their classes will be more orderly and they'll get to spend more time on everyone rather than focusing on the special needs kids; and the medical practitioners will be so blinded by a black and white system of "cures" and "diseases" that they won't stop to consider the consequences, both human and general, of getting rid of a certain kind of the latter. I wouldn't call it a "genocide," as it will not be deliberate on the parts of many. It won't be out of malice or hatred so much as laziness - people would much rather get rid of something or someone than understand them enough to incorporate them into the existing system. While I don't subscribe so much to a conspiracy theory, I have too much personal experience to doubt that, if there was a cure, many if not all people on the spectrum of a certain age or who were otherwise dependent would not have much choice in the matter, because after all, it's For Their Own Good.

On the issue of superiority... I do not think that we are inherently superior to them, but nor do I think that they are right and we are less, with no reason to be happy with ourselves as we are, just because there are more NTs. And - while there are many good NTs, and I know that from a personal as well as theoretical standpoint - that is, in the end, what many tell us, sometimes directly or sometimes just through how they treat us. I have experienced that, as have, as I've read, many people on this board. Therefore, it is not wrong to feel rather put-upon, when most of the world sees you as being in the way and purposely being difficult or daft, and get defensive when people try to make you be otherwise than you know how to be. It may not be your response, but so long as no one acts violently on it, what's wrong with having pride in what one is to counter everyone else looking down on you?

Finally - though, as I have said, I don't think all autistics are superior to all NTs, I do look at my own ways of thinking and approaching a situation, and then look at those of most of the world, and I find the latter to not make sense in comparison. Even to be silly or unfitting. It's not so much schadenfreude or hatred I have as a reaction towards them, I just have to wonder, why? Why do they act this way? Why do they like these things when they hurt or have no use? Why do they care about these inconsequential things? I have not answered the essential questions of why, so therefore, though my observations, thoughts and perceptions might not be objectively superior, they are much more accessible and logical than that of most "normal" people, and therefore, are superior in my eyes, for me, in the situations I deal with.

how is that "stupid" or "irrational"-assuming you're not atheist?



A lot of people consider Autistic people ret*d pieces-of-shit.



Given that basically a 'cure' of autism means there is no more autistic people, yes that is genocide as there are no more autistic people. And even those who do not tak the 'cure' are then shoved out and not prefered in insurance, etc.

Not to mention who knows what the future holds...



NEVER underestimate government or Society's f****d up ability to make things happen..



They think differently and that's the basis of what they are-arguably the 'open-minded' part can apply.



LOL @ U instead!

*Guy tells Jews in 1920s. *

Jew says "But.....this is ludicrious, haha you really think the German government would do this to us"

*20 years later his ass is thrown in the oven at Auchwitz*



PROTIP: A New World Order is simply a change in Government and the world in general-like what happened after WW2. Also, it's hard to deny a World Government is happening. The UN, WTO, G8, continental blocs like the EU, NAU, Mercousr, etc.

"Evil" or "Conspiracy" is something else-but yes 9/11 was an inside job in my opinion.



Like how people believed autistic people were ret*d and locked up in a prison of the mind?
that Autism is EEEEEVVVVVIIIIIIILLLLL and needs to be cured at all costs?



again, never underestimate the government or worse-society. Society can have your friends/parents/relatives do it "for your own good"



And many of the people with "Other Forms of Autism" would say differently. And if a cure comes, Insurances would force it on others=being greedy f***s/



the people in Darfur say otherwise. Same for those in South Ossetia.

Arguably, if you read Pekka-Eric Auvinen and Ted Kazynaki's writings, linked

Ted Kazynski:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Industria ... Its_Future

Pekka-Aric Auvinen
http://oddculture.com/2007/11/07/the-pe ... manifesto/

they would say Society is detrimental to humanity in general, at least to people seeking self-actualization. And that Society has robbed humanity of its' humanness and has weakened humanity. That and society actively oppressing many peoples by its' BS social stigmas and the like

Not that necessarily agree with what they say




Why not a voluntary collective, like "Anonymous" is?

Warsie, you are free to find a cave or a log-cabin or a hole in the ground and stay there. The same holds with every other crackpot in our midst.

Someone whose theories don't match yours isn't a 'crackpot', SM... appreciate the invite, but once I get back, will likely be back to lurk and be a general pain in the arse.


M.

ahem, I blocked you!



PWNED!!!111!!!111

I disagree with anyone that says society is detrimental to the human being. I don't care who said it, it's nonsense. Why are we idolizing the Unabomber now?

He posted that he did not agree with him... one can make an argument, based on animal models, that over population is having a detrimental effect of social psyche. It isn't nonsense - just something you disagree with. Two different things entirely.


M.

Also about Genocide.....more info

http://www.genocidescholars.org/aboutgenocide.html


What is Genocide?

By Gregory H. Stanton, President, IAGS

The crime of genocide is defined in international law in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide.

"Article II: In the present Cohttp://www.wrongplanet.net/mods/bbco]de_box/images/bold.gifnvention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.



Come on. Lots of this happens now.


The following are genocidal acts when committed as part of a policy to destroy a group’s existence:

Killing members of the group includes direct killing and actions causing death.

Causing serious bodily or mental harm includes inflicting trauma on members of the group through widespread torture, rape, sexual violence, forced or coerced use of drugs, and mutilation.

Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy a group includes the deliberate deprivation of resources needed for the group’s physical survival, such as clean water, food, clothing, shelter or medical services. Deprivation of the means to sustain life can be imposed through confiscation of harvests, blockade of foodstuffs, detention in camps, forcible relocation or expulsion into deserts.

Prevention of births includes involuntary sterilization, forced abortion, prohibition of marriage, and long-term separation of men and women intended to prevent procreation.

Forcible transfer of children may be imposed by direct force or by through fear of violence, duress, detention, psychological oppression or other methods of coercion. The Convention on the Rights of the Child defines children as persons under the age of 14 years.

Genocidal acts need not kill or cause the death of members of a group. Causing serious bodily or mental harm, prevention of births and transfer of children are acts of genocide when committed as part of a policy to destroy a group’s existence:

It is a crime to plan or incite genocide, even before killing starts, and to aid or abet genocide: Criminal acts include conspiracy, direct and public incitement, attempts to commit genocide, and complicity in genocide.
Key Terms




The law protects four groups - national, ethnical, racial or religious groups.

A national group means a set of individuals whose identity is defined by a common country of nationality or national origin.

An ethnical group is a set of individuals whose identity is defined by common cultural traditions, language or heritage.

A racial group means a set of individuals whose identity is defined by physical characteristics.

A religious group is a set of individuals whose identity is defined by common religious creeds, beliefs, doctrines, practices, or rituals.

© 2002 Genocide Watch


see.

It's not society as much as type of society. On based upon primitive pack-instincts is not compatible with the concept of progression. I always laugh when I hear nations describe themselves as "progressive societies..."

I've yet to hear of a society that promotes individual progress, rather than attempting to prove their methods over others.
Not that there is much difference. A relevent example?

The current war between Georgia and Russia.
In the most basic of nutshells, Georgia wants South Ossetia back/eliminated (in politics, control or annihilation equate to much the same, again, basically expressed). Without going into too much other detail: Why?
What gain, what loss, what purpose?

in generalizing NT and AS people like that, you are coming across as the ignorant and insensitive one. not all non-spectrum individuals are oppressive, but a lot of them are. not all spectrum individuals have a higher intelligence, but some do.

who are you comment on how they justify their means to continue through a tough life.

you aren't god.

True. An additional/different perspective on it that I know from friends and acquaintances:

It's not that they're generally evil or arrogant, but the ideas they have about such differences as disabilities tend to scare them in a way.

I asked my friends - I think they're wonderful people - and some are feeling very very uncomfortable with disabilities. They say they think it's so foreign, strange and otherworldly that they can't relate to these traits nor can think of a way to decrease the distance between what they know and understand (by being that way) and differences of other people.

A person in a wheelchair - most of the staring people won't hate the person in the wheelchair but they are afraid to get involved, don't want to do something wrong.

There is also the idea that people are a certain way, Which is why some people are 'bad' and 'lacking'. It's their way to think about it (and that of most people, regardless of neurology).

They expect something from another and it's so normal to them that they neither have a second thought nor expect a difference. That's how the world works - and often people cannot begin to imagine what they have not seen yet. If a sudden difference is then announced, many seem to have no idea how to go about it.

The idea that people are a certain way - traits that cannot be separated from personhood for they're considered 'right' or 'good' - is something most naturally grow up with. If you seen 100 cats with 4 legs, you only know that cats with 4 legs exist and you thus can only believe 4 legs is right, good and normal, what do you think how you'll react to a cat with 3 legs?

What could you possibly do with a cat that does not fit your idea of cat? It's less cat of course. Maybe just 90% cat because of the missing leg. Cats must absolutely have 4 legs.

Or: How can people ever feel another person's feeling naturally and automatically? Empathy doesn't seem to make up a person or seem very relevant in some situations etc. But what is unthinkable for some on the spectrum (that exclamation always comes up) is perfectly existent for other people, including most non-autistic people.



OFT plus an elaboration to add to that too:

Mandatory can just mean that since there is a cure, assistance for ASDs will be done away with. There is cure that saves money and time. And money and money and money.

If you're impaired by your autism in a way that society can only provide what they consider special help, you often have to have that assistance. You may need it to live. Or, to be able to work.

If somebody has only typical problems that society can easily provide for because most have that problem, he or she of course can decide freely what to do.

But if you really really need the assistances to live or to work or to do anything vitally important- if there's a treatment/cure that's cheaper than the costs of past treatments, then help of insurances, of cities and financial help will just be cancelled.

That is not utopian. That's how it works with diseases now. It's a reality many people fight with. Ask people with disease, they have a hell lot to tell about being denied treatments, receiving cheaper and not as effective treatments, cheaper treatments that do not help or make them worse or just being denied any further assistance because they denied any further cheap or ineffective or sometimes even harmful treatments.

It doesn't have to be a disease too. Just an MRI is often too expensive and insurances will say no, no matter if a child is having severe problem with walking after having an injured ankle. Insurances then want something else to be done such as watching the problem or doing physiotherapy - or, if a person resists these - nothing at all. That's then the end of paid treatment.

It's funny to watch two philosophical opposites fight.

Slowmutant => The status quo is always correct. “The Man” is there for the individuals own good. Social traditions are always good and needed.

Warsie => The status quo is always evil. “The Man” is always out to get us and discriminate against us. Social traditions are always wrong and oppressive.

I think the truth lies somewhere in between you two.

typing correctly does not equate 'intelligence'