April 2nd was annual World Autism Awareness Day, a worthwhile enough cause, you may have thought – and so it was, until the identitarians got their twisted hands on it.
There is nothing wrong with being autistic. But is it really something to be ostentatiously proud of? Another annual festival, Autistic Pride Day, takes place every June 18th. Tellingly, the occasion – marked with marches through the streets flying a banner with a rainbow-coloured ‘infinity symbol’ logo on it – was directly modelled upon the previous key identitarian movement of Gay Pride.
This rainbow infinity symbol represents “diversity with infinite variations and infinite possibilities” because, nowadays, autism, just like gender, is said to exist upon a limitless spectrum – whether this is actually true or not, as I have recently discussed elsewhere.
Ready and Able
The stated ideological desire of the politicised wing of the Autistic Pride movement is to metaphorically ‘disable’ normative society wholesale, much as the stated desire of the Gay Pride movement is to metaphorically ‘queer’ normative society likewise. The idea that autism, like homosexuality, is a deviation away from a societal norm is hereafter to be challenged, as a point of purest partisan principle. After all, in our brave new woke world, there are to be no more human norms anymore at all, at least not officially speaking: ‘normality’ is merely a societal myth used to uphold the malign historical hegemony of the Foucauldian power-matrix that is white, cisheteropatriarchal capitalism.
Therefore, say some campaigners, most social challenges faced by severely autistic people are to be henceforth reconceptualised not as a sad and limiting consequence of some persons unfortunately being born with the condition, but instead as unnecessary normative societal limitations placed upon their natural state of freedom of being, a form of innate systemic prejudice termed ‘ableism’.
Rather than it being a disability or neurological disorder, some autism sufferers would prefer to remake themselves as yet another oppressed minority victim-group. Just as few psychologists today would try and ‘cure’ homosexuals of being gay, certain ‘Auties’ – as the identitarian branch of sufferers sometimes call themselves – argue they should not be subjected to any kind of medical intervention, aid or treatment either, just allowed to exist as they are, on their own terms.
Up to a point, this idea sounds perfectly reasonable. The problem comes when certain of the more Cultural Marxism-riddled hardline minority amongst the Auties take their cause quite some considerable way beyond the point of perfect reason.
Autie Knows Best
If you want to sum up the entire deluded ‘ableist’ narrative in one simple idea, it is this: that the existence of stairs is a gigantic historical conspiracy against wheelchair-users. Alternatively, you could say the widespread prominence of written signs is likewise a vast sinister plot against the blind, or music and speech are sadistic schemes intended purely to disadvantage the deaf.
Within a specifically ‘neurodiverse’ context, since many extremely autistic people often have trouble fully functioning in close human company, the widespread use of common social norms such as maintaining eye contact, shaking hands or communicating face-to-face and verbally, rather than via the more impersonal intermediary medium of screens and text-typing, may similarly be considered ableist restrictions upon the freedom of such ‘Auties’. Professional workplace or school and university standards, like having to give speeches or presentations, or needing to sit still at your desk wearing a suit, also now become revealed as cruel acts of severe anti-autistic repression.
Some Auties say all they want is to be treated equally. Trouble is, just as ideologues from Stonewall and Black Lives Matter interpret being treated ‘equally’ as in fact meaning ‘establishing a tyranny of the perpetually aggrieved minority against the majority for no good reason’, so certain rather unrepresentative Auties take their demands and behaviour rather too far. Unfortunately, given the way Western society is increasingly becoming structured, it is this particular minority of activists who now tend to get all the accolades, funding and attention from those in positions of institutional power.
Danger: X.Z.B.!
The most prominent such Autie in Action today is possibly Lydia X.Z. Brown, described by Wikipedia as “an American disability rights activist, writer, attorney and public speaker”, but by me as “a typical self-obsessed far-Left identitarian ideologue who gives normal autistic people a bad name”. Naturally, therefore, rather than simply being roundly ignored, like she should be, Brown has been garlanded with honours and positions by the Establishment she claims constantly discriminates against her, but which in actual fact falls over itself to fawn over the very fact of her being.
Again according to Wikipedia, Brown is currently “Chairperson of the American Bar Association Civil Rights and Social Justice Disability Rights Committee… Policy Counsel for Privacy and Data at the Centre for Democracy and Technology, and Director of Policy, Advocacy and External Affairs at the Autistic Women and Nonbinary Network”, as well as being the proud recipient of several public awards too piously and prolixly titled to be worth my enumerating fully here (they feature emetic phrases like “Champions of Change”, which I can barely even force myself to type). In 2013, Brown even received a special accolade from then-President Barack Obama in the White House – where she appears to have spent her time performing a series of very strange sensory-stimulating acts with the curtains.
Besides being autistic, Brown is also a transgenderist, in the niche respect that, despite being born a female (i.e., she is a female), she feels, at least as far as my limited normal brain can understand matters, that she magically possesses no sex or gender at all. Going by the modish pronoun ‘they’, Brown has helped popularise the exceedingly obscure self-identity of being ‘gendervague’, a term she is sometimes inaccurately said to have invented, and which refers to some tiny particular self-ID nexus perched precariously upon the ‘intersection’ between transgenderism and autism. As if all this was not enough to cope with, Brown is also Chinese or something.
One laudatory 2018 profile describes Brown thus: “A gender non-binary, queer, disabled person of colour, Brown is self-described as ‘multiply-marginalised’.” Now that the ‘marginalised’ [sic] have inherited the Earth, however, surely the term should actually be redefined as ‘multiply-advantaged’?
Brown initially went to college innocently dreaming of becoming an Islamic scholar, having a lifelong love for ancient Persian Sufi poetry – yet creating actual scholars is no longer the main intention of the ideologically captured U.S. university system, and she seems to have self-radicalised (or been groomed so, a cynic may guess) into becoming a Leftist activist instead. Realising in her Freshman year that there were “systemic problems” on her campus where “ableism ran rampant” (I guess the buildings must have had stairs or something), Brown came to feel that “becoming a student advocate was not a choice… it was mandatory”.
Brown quickly became a student leader, admirably advocating more sign-language and speech-caption availability during lectures to help any hearing-impaired students. Great, well done. Then, though, she moved on to becoming a lecturer, delivering speeches with telling titles like ‘Re-Thinking Disability: From Public Policy to Social Movements’. Thinking about disability as a ‘Public Policy’ means reasonable, humane things like installing wheelchair-access ramps in public buildings. Thinking about it as a ‘Social Movement’, however, means something rather different.
Now, what was needed was not Disability Policy, but (uh-oh!) Disability Justice. What’s that? According to her 2018 profile, “Disability justice seeks reparations, a deep pivot of values away from ableism, and an understanding that the law alone – in all its plodding deliberateness – may not be enough.” Why did she become a lawyer, then? (Actually, you can see her deranged far-Left thoughts about “the [U.S.] in-justice system”, which occasionally dares to imprison violent black criminals – even ones who gang-torture and slice the scalps off disabled white kids live online – here.)
Acting Like a Retarded Person
The above sub-heading may sound offensive to some readers, but this is actually what X.Z.B. herself advocates. Head over to her strange and extensive blog, Autistic Hoya, and look for the essay ‘The Neurodiversity Movement Needs Its Shoes Off, and Fists Up’, which tells the tragic tale of how, while working in an office job one day, our heroine was sat at her desk with her shoes off, as this apparently made her feel more physically comfortable – or, as she puts it with typical overblown rhetoric, “it’s infinitely more comfortable and freeing for my proprioceptive needs”, whatever they might be. (Lydia does admit that she voluntarily wears such horrible items when walking outside, however, “a task that, for me, always needs shoes”.)
When a supervisor noticed this, she told Brown it looked a little bit unprofessional but, in what sounds like a sympathetic compromise to me, said she could keep them off under the desk, but had to wear shoes when walking around the rest of the workplace so nobody else would notice. At the time, Brown agreed to this reasonable concession but, she later wrote in her blog:
Since then… I have to respond [to this argument for me to ‘keep my shoes on’ in a wider metaphorical sense – i.e., to maintain normative, allegedly ‘ableist’, standards of public behaviour] with a resounding and vehement NO. I do not believe in even attempting to appease the impossible, asymptotic standards of respectability politics and (white, abled, cis, masculine-centric) professionalism simply because such attempts will always and inevitably be doomed to fail.
Brown repudiates the entire notion of ‘Respectability Politics’ – i.e., acting normally, like normal people do, because they are normal – as an anti-activist dead-end, doomed to inevitable failure, with society’s constant demand for Lydia to participate in self-erasing white capitalist heteronormative things like wearing shoes in public being a repressive masking of her true sacred inner-self. Having explained this, Brown begins to sound alarmingly Leninist in tone:
Radical, militant anger — and radical, militant hope, and radical, wild dreams, and radical, active love — that’s what’ll get us past the death machines of ableism and capitalism and white supremacy and laws and institutions working overtime to kill us.
“Death machines”? She seems to mean such hyperbolic phrases literally (emphasis mine):
We have cultural narratives to rewrite because they [straight, white, able-bodied, ‘neurotypical’ people] really do hate us and they really will kill us, and if we’re going to rewrite the narratives, then there’s no reason to hold ourselves back from our most radical and defiant rewritings. We have autistic children who need us to support them as architects of their own liberation against the schools and clinicians and institutions and police and prosecutors who would crush and destroy them.
Honestly, Lydia, you really don’t have to worry about anything like that at all: nobody sane is ever going to go around killing autistic people.
Committing Identity Fraud
Some autistic or extremely mentally disabled people often engage in an uncontrollable form of public activity termed ‘stimming’ – i.e., ‘self-stimulating’ that is, making strange noises, flapping their hands about, pulling faces and sticking out their tongues. Brown herself, not being profoundly autistic, doesn’t need to do this at all, any more than she needs to take her shoes off. She more than possesses the necessary capacity for self-control. And yet, as part of a self-invented form of Autie activism she calls “autistic subversion”, she voluntarily chooses to act like this anyway:
I deliberately choose to stim by hand-flapping and sometimes rocking, in public spaces. I did not hand-flap or rock intuitively as a child. I did not start to do so until I was well into college, and by then it was always a conscious, deliberate choice. This does not make stimming any less authentic than it is for someone who has always done it their entire life.
In other words, she goes around pretending to be disabled when (at least in this particular sense) she actually isn’t – and then gets a big medal or something from President Obama for doing so. This, Brown says, represents authentic self-stimming “joy” – but so does public masturbation, a sceptic may observe, and that tends to be generally thought against the law. “Public stimming is beautiful, and we should keep doing it,” Brown advocates.
Imagine if she had said: “I have full control of my bladder and bowels. And yet, in order to combat the pernicious scat-hetero demands of the evil Western toilet-industrial complex, I joyfully elect to piss and shit myself in public on a daily basis and this performative incontinence is no less authentic than that of someone forced to wear a colostomy bag or a catheter.” Would she get a Presidential Medal for that? As the current U.S. President is the similarly afflicted Joe Biden, maybe so.
Up until highly recently, acting up like this in public would have been considered nothing less than a reprehensible act of mocking the disabled. Now, it is artfully reframed by wokeists as “a political choice, because it is choosing to be openly and unapologetically autistic”. To the rest of us, though, it still just looks like mocking the disabled – and will dismantle prejudice just as effectively, which is to say, not at all.
Steven Tucker is a journalist and the author of over 10 books, the latest being Hitler’s & Stalin’s Misuse of Science: When Science Fiction Was Turned Into Science Fact by the Nazis and the Soviets (Pen & Sword/Frontline), which is out now.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The other conspiracy of silence amongst the main parties and press is, of course, the utter stupidity of net zero. Since there is nothing wrong with “carbon”, and plenty good, we simply do not need to de-carbonise. Save trillions. Three trillions, to start with: https://www.nationalgrideso.com/news/analysing-costs-our-future-energy-scenarios?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email#:~:text=What%20does%20the%20analysis%20show%3F
h/t David Turver.
That’s immediately my thought. And where is Halligan on that topic? Not very far along, as far as I can tell.
Chap called Michael Staples commenting on a DT article about chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance:
“The Telegraph, whilst being sceptical of the practicality of Net Zero, has never to my knowledge published a word criticising the underlying science of CO2 being the principal cause of climate change. It suggests that they are being paid by someone to exclude a view held by many who comment here.”
It is puzzling, isn’t it? I sort of hope they are waiting for next week to throw open the Overton Window and lay into Labour on mad, bad and wrong net zero.
Hope springs, etc
“Rather than addressing the central question – whether, if the U.K. faces a pandemic similar to COVID-19, we lock down again or not”
Ah, a “pandemic similar to COVID-19.” That would be the ‘pandemic’ that wasn’t otherwise known as The Scamdemic.
The Scamdemic that was foisted on populations worldwide in order to soften them up for the
poisonsinjections which have done way more harm than the Lockdowns and will continue to maim, sterilise and kill for years to come.Lockdowns cannot be discussed because to do so would result in the real reasons they were imposed being admitted and that might result in heads on pikes.
Ain’t that so Johnson?
The policies of LD are anti-science, immoral, illegal and without any merit.
They also killed. What the article misses is that 30.000 older people were murdered under the cover of the first LD behind closed doors. 2 million shots of midazolam were issued under Hancock’s orders across the NHS and ‘health’ systems. These 30 K murdered were ascribed to the fake flying SARS II ‘virus’ which doesn’t exist, ginning up the fear porn and propaganda.
LDs killed, injured, destroyed families, businesses, psychologies and tortured children and adults alike.
Yet none of the criminal elite who implemented this medical nazism is in prison. Most are now millionaires and/or Sirs, Dames, Lords etc etc.
The excerpt is enough for me; I agree with Liam Halligan’s view. We are looking at the long grass re any real investigation, given that so many of them are guilty. However, on account of what was done, they might find that there is less confidence in their policies on other matters as a result of it all.
Farage gave both Lockdown and Nett Zero prominent attention in his Birmingham rally today.
No “mistakes”, no “blunders”. All deliberate, globally co-ordinated, ignoring all previously agreed upon “pandemic” policies.
“if the U.K. faces a pandemic similar to COVID-19, we lock down again or not”. There was no pandemic, and the “lockdown” was a mockdown and had nothing to do with any fictitious “deadly pandemic”.
It’s not really “lockdowns” we need to do talk about, but the “covid” scam and its origins.
Nothing you’ve said that I disagree with. The problem is that 90% of people simply cannot handle that step change in the discussion. The only way I’ve found to get others on side is to play softly, softly, catchy monkey, leaning into more truth as they gain more confidence in you and what you’re saying. A slow process, but the only one I’ve found that works. And even when it doesn’t I know I’ve left them with things to think about that don’t seem batshit crazy to them.
An admirable approach.
could you give an example of things to say, no one has listened to me yet !
The first nut I try to crack is lockdown. Pointing out the obvious, now widely accepted, harms that it did and continues to do. I tend to focus mainly on what was done to children – it’s not hard for me to get passionate about that! That initial exchange let’s me know whether I’m dealing with someone capable of thought, or a socialist Guardian-reading moron. If it’s the former I can then lead into the obvious lockdown-vaccine connection, which is ‘vaccinating’ children with an untested product. If they’re still with you at this point, which many will be because the focus has been children, I lean into more truth about the ‘vaccine’ and the oddness of the lockstep approach of messaging, censorship and actions from governments across the world. I always try to hold an air of being incredulous rather than certain – people tend to respond better if it seems you’re still looking for answers, and more of an exchange of ideas can take place, where, again, you can quietly lead them down certain paths.
That’s a very rough guide to my approach. Some will say it’s dishonest, cowardly or manipulative. I don’t care. All I care about is growing the number of people that distrust the elites.
thank you ,very good points.i did hear of one brainwashed moron [ first in line to get the shots, loved wearing masks], who has said now that lockdowns were not a good idea . good idea also the incredulous approach , even if dishonest .any thing that helps.
i don’t know if i have the patience, i tend to just get really angry very soon at their stupidity , can’t help it!
but also they wouldn’t and won’t even debate. it’s just ” that’s misinformation i’m hanging up””
or “it’s over now “. no one cares.
i will try this new approach
hear hear!
Not only are we not supposed to discuss The Lockdown, nor question the “safe and effective vaccine” but we are supposed to be critical of Russian “interference” in The Election, supposedly routed through fake Facebook accounts. I don’t think the public will fall for the Putin Derangement Syndrome again! I’m more concerned about WHO interference routed through fake Tory MPs and senior civil servants, and the resulting Immune Derangement Syndrome.
Nice one 👍
I am still waiting to be called to give evidence to the Hallett Inquiry having made my submission in November 2022 and given my advice on what should be done starting in May 2020. If an infectious organism doesn’t kill people it doesn’t signify. If it does kill people you need to work out why, apply the right investigations to determine who is getting seriously ill and then apply the right treatment – all of which I described in detail to government (in May 2020) and was ignored. The same principles will apply to the next pandemic. Forget testing except for the deteriorating sick, forget vaccination, forget lockdowns. I did go along with the first, because a lot was unknown, but the evidence subsequently is against all three. Had we pursued my original plan economic ruin would have been avoided. One question I want answered is why, when original planning dismissed lockdowns, did the advisors do a volte-face.
I really am surprised that posters do not realise what the Public Enquiry process itself is supposed to achieve? A long time ago it was a way of finding out mistakes and avoiding them in future. Now it is a way of covering up mistakes they want to do again. Take the Grenfell enquiry, I watched a good deal of it, from a professional point of view.. Where is the Report several years later? I suggest that it will never be published, it is lost somewhere in file 13 in the Home Office. The evidence should have resulted in numerous (probably at least 100) persons serving long prison sentences for negligent manslaughter. The first of these should be the entire management of the London Fire Brigade which is unfit for purpose. Then there are the other criminals, fire inspectors with fake qualifications, the Building Research Establishment management who are incompetent in many ways, the inadequate Building Regulations, the Council for lack of maintenance and failure in many smaller ways, and the list goes on.
As you see, nearly all of these are Public employees. Very little has really changed.
The Covid Enquiry evidence sessions were about to uncover massive criminality in Government and the medical and scientific “experts”. Therefore it was “paused” until after the election. I suspect that it will never continue and the report again will lie in file 13 somewhere. The truth is so horific that the “Blob” will do anything to suppress it, because we would need to build 50 more prisons. I would like forensic accountants to follow about £500 Billion of our money until it is found and vouched properly. There will be a huge number of the Blob in prison and bankrupt!