How would a country run by autistics and aspergians look?

Post Reply New Topic

We are a country run by a lot of spectrum folks just not enough.

I would probably be up for it but there are some problems I can see with it. One of the main problems I could see is what happens when someone has a child who is nt or would because everyone would socially awkward then would he/she become socially awkward by watching us? Also, what if the Island we started our great country on was tropical, everyone's senses would be going crazy.

The population of non-neurotypicals can be maintained by non-neurotypical immigrants fleeing oppression instead of procreation.

An non-neurotypical ruled country with neurotypicals can work with an apartheid democracy where neurotypicals should not be allowed to vote ,be involved in politics or have a government job because of security issues, after all if neurotypicals are controlled they can't hurt non-neurotypicals.

An island might not be a good place to start a country.

It probably says something about me that I associate that quote more with a fat guy taking a "Pomeranian" bowling than I do with Israel or Zionism.

I like this as as thought experiment, but in reality, I don't think I would actually want to live separate from my NT friends and families. I'm pretty open though.

Among my thoughts:
* Stores will be closed at certain times and open the rest
* My ideal society would be one or two centralized areas, while the rest is remote rural population.

And who will decide this compensation is valid? 'They're mean to me' isn't a justification for theft, even if your goal is to establish Autisrael.

Why let neurotypical society decide if neurotypical society treats non-neurotypicals badly?

Why let neurotypical society dictate how you live your life?

Neurotypical society doesn't view the way neurotypical society treats non-neurotypicals as bad so why should non-neurotypicals view getting land as a form of compensation from neurotypical society as theft?

How should they do it, even if they come up with claims to an area, it's filled with people. Do you suggest removing the existing population in order to accomplish this? You advocate theft and then attempt to rationalize it into something else and seem to be heading toward suggesting violence as a means to achieve this poorly justified theft.

Non-neurotypicals could buy land and negotiate autonomy.

States are notoriously unwilling to cede sovereignty over areas except to other states. Even if you created an island (ignoring the cost of such a project) some state would cease it from you unless you possessed adequate ability to resist. All other land on earth is claimed by at least one state, and since you would have no legitimate grounds on which to make your claim to be the new state with sovereignty (including even owing the land), no states would recognize you, and your actions would be considered essentially theft and insurrection. Recognition is the main way states gain legitimacy and you'd be unlikely to succeed at establishing that.

Well, I think there are a lot of interesting ideas about the question.
On my opinion It is important to find creative solutions, like most off you did.
But still, I missing answers for important questions, such as there are works, probably most of us don't want to do, for example it would be difficult at least for me, go into a mine, and mining. But I think It isn't an unsolvable problem. You see, It is science fiction, but one day, robots can be an option, to tell the true, even we could help about that. There are persons among us (I even chance the majority of us) have an intelligence over the average, and yet I can't find any where in this forum, we would try to unite our minds, and develop something. I think start scientific projects could be an other dimension of being contact with each other, and a first step, for something new, something which only ours.
And yes, I agree with the others who say in our state could me more democratically, and less corrupt. We see what NT countries doing wrong, and if we have a problem or question, we could negotiate among ourselves.
Finally you said what shall we do, if an NT baby would born, well, for the first ones that could be a problem, but I guess, It's likely when he/she would grow up, left our country, because he/she would be happier with the ones like he/she, and over time the NT phenotype would be disappear, or (because there has to be at least a minimal immigration) they wouldn't be so many, they could change the entire nation's genetic.
So I think It is an interesting question, and these are just my thoughts about it, I am interested in a friendly argument, because I think it is at least an interesting thought experiment, with a plenty sociological aspects we haven't even touch yet.

Might it be getting ahead of things to suggest a country? There are currently 3 pro-Neurodiversity physical locations in the United States. Would it be more productive to first strengthen our own Identity and Culture and our own physical locations?

Tyranny of the Majority or the Minority? If I was in a society where everyone was like me I would be "normal", if someone came in that acted differently the society would want them to adjust to their "normal" standards. We are a minority, at the moment, so we are abnormal. Even among those diagnosed with ASD there is a rainbow of difference. Being misunderstood is part of being different.
There is a great quote I can't remember who said it sadly "The guardians of sanity are the insane, for only by observing their actions do we know what we won't accept."

Regardless of whether non-neurotypical are the rulers or oppressed, neurotypical society will feel that they are "oppressed by the existence of non-neurotypicals".

As I see it, this is the biggest obstacle. One false move and mazel tov! We're Israel and Palestine.

Everything aspect of life would be Homogenous and every detail would be told explicitly a day before it occurred.