I have two things to tell you before we begin. One, this essay will contain repeated and very precision-intended uses of a derisive word for dark-skinned Americans that they themselves often use to deride other dark-skinned Americans who behave in a manner that they find objectionable. Two, this is necessary for making the point that I ended up circling around in this essay. If you do not like it, the door is in that direction. *makes a pointing motion*
Okay, this is going to be another low-output month. I do not apologise for that because to be quite frank, I feel rejected both by normies (and do not care) and the so-called autistic community at the same time (I sort of do care, for varying reasons). But rest assured that I do have a number of writing ideas in the queue. It is just like everything else. I have to get around to them. For those who are curious concerning the progression of the guild I have established in World Of Warcraft, as of this writing the guild is about a quarter of the way between levels 5 and 6. The perk associated with level 5 is that whenever a member loots in-game “cash” from an enemy, the game will now generate an extra five percent of the looted amount and put it in the guild’s bank. Given that it will cost ten thousand gold to buy the guild’s next bank tab, this is a big deal. The perk associated with guild level 6 is that whenever a member kills an enemy or hands in a quest, they will get ten percent extra experience from it (as will the guild in the latter case). But these are not important things right now.
I am not sure exactly how many times I have linked to Kruma Steward‘s essay concerning what he refers to as the “Nigga identity”. Politically correct assholes will piss and moan about his use of the word nigga in this context, but I believe it is entirely appropriate. And it is something I never get tired of talking about and applying to other contexts.
In some places, you might hear the Irish being referred to as “god’s white niggers” (to quote an in-character narration from Stephen King‘s fantastically-lengthy novel It). But when I compare the Irish as I have seen them to what Kruma describes as black Americans who have still internalised the slave identity, I feel the description does not fit. As Kruma puts it, a key component of the nigger identity is that somewhere near to the top of the pyramid that is their identity, the word “slave” occurs. That is, they are displaced slaves. Whilst the Irish, and pretty much everyone in the so-called United Kingdom that is not English, have had a similar thing near the core of their identity, the two differ in a very important way.
During the first third of what has so far been my life, various factions within Ireland were engaged in a guerilla war with both each other and the English forces that basically ruled or occupied the Northern partition of Ireland. That was why, as I heard it, there were signs around cities in England warning people (mostly tourists) that if they see an unattended box or bag sitting in a public area, report it to the police, and for fukk’s sake do not pick it up. This is because whilst the English have attempted with varying degrees of success to relegate the Irish to second-class citizenry, during a long period spanning more than a century, the Irish and their various factions decided to adopt the status of a nation fighting a “dirty” war. The Irish may have allowed themselves to think of themselves as dispossessed, second-class, or even inferior. But they never quite adopted the internal identity of slave. That is an important distinction.
As Kruma has written in more detail, much of the status, situation, and behaviour of the Black Americans (and to make this damned clear, he is writing that from the perspective of an insider) can be attributed to how they think of themselves as well as how the rest of their society thinks of them. They put shit on each other for taking their education seriously. They support a million-dollar industry revolving around making their hair appear different to what comes out of their head naturally, and by they in that instance, I do not mean just the women. They, to one degree or another, glorify purveyors of a culture praising criminality and violence against themselves. And these are just three of many examples. But there is a strong element mentioned in Kruma‘s essay that bears thinking about. Namely, the existence of a school for very young children in which parent and child alike goes through an active deconstruction of the “nigger identity”. Their view of themselves and their world is actively cut down and reassembled into something that serves them rather than “the master”, so to speak.
This is, to a degree, the situation that the autistic are finding themselves in. To a degree, the autistic have been slaves. Although the construction has not been as direct or organised, we have had organisations with varying motives try to construct an identity for us that does not serve us. In order to understand their purpose in constructing that identity, it is important to understand what that identity consists of. Whilst the distinctions between “low functioning” or “high functioning” do serve us in a way, the normies have also made a very hard attempt to twist them into something that does not serve us. When we refuse to argue with one another about whether we are “autistic enough”, the curebies and normies prompt the ignorant assholes to do it for us. When Kruma writes about how people were arguing if Barack Obama was “black enough”, and wonders for the benefit of the audience how that must look to someone observing it from the outside, it reminds me of this function competition that the normies have set up for us.
In fact, the question of how these things look to intelligent insiders is one worth asking. When you tell a high-functioning autistic adult that his opinion does not count in the “debate” about legalising their genocide solely because you perceive him as high-functioning, you look like an absolute piece of shit to them. Your life has suddenly become worth less to them than theirs. In fact, the frequently-repeated statement from a Type O Negative song, titled IYDKMIGTHTKY (Gimme That), comes to mind when describing how an autistic adult feels when they are told that some minor and likely inconsequential detail of their neural configuration means they should just sit it out and wait for Autism Speaks to come after them. It is, “If you don’t kill me… I’m going to have to kill you”.
But the point here is that the curebies know their case is extremely vulnerable, and unable to survive detailed scrutiny. They have been resoundingly defeated on the Internet, within the scientific community, and in the collective consciousness of those they are trying to force their preferred autistic identity onto. Their only recourse is to lobby governments to turn a blind eye to the murder of the autistic, or even to explicitly allow autistic genocide. And this effort is made a lot easier when the public votes for what turn out to be the wrong people in this respect.
In the past, I have made videos along these lines, in one of which I state, both quite plainly and in roundabout fashion, that voting for Hillary Clinton would be voting for people like me all over the world being rounded up and killed. To date, simply putting videos like this up on the “everything must be online and not paid for” culture’s purview has proven sufficient to weaken the curebies’ hold on the public mind. And that is why they continuously court celebrities. For one thing, they know how psychologically devastating it is to militants like myself, or even just mere empowerment-focused individuals. For another, they know that ignorant and stupid folk see celebrities proclaim something to be good and just automatically assume that it must be.
I know how that last part must sound to a lot of you out there. So I will state this very plainly. Autism Speaks count on you being stupid and ignorant enough to assume that if celebrities are speaking in their favour, then they must be good. They know full well that amongst people who actually are autistic, they have absolutely no support. In fact, that is a gross understatement. Amongst people who are actually autistic, if the Wright family’s mansion were burning down with them in it, you would find a lot of people who would be actively trying to prevent emergency services from helping them.
This is why Autism Speaks et al have basically given up trying to force their conception of the autistic identity onto us. Instead, they are forcing it upon us by proxy. They figure that if everyone we deal with has the conception of us that they want us to have, and we encounter that for long enough, we will change our conception of ourselves to suit.
They could not be more mistaken. I will write about this some more in due course, but I would not be surprised if they were the ones who decided that the autistic should be bullied into the use of so-called “person first” language. I am going to give you this little fact straight: I cannot fukking stand Donna Duncan in any remote sense anymore. If my wish were granted, she and her organisation, calling itself “Better Together”, would be thrown out on its arse and replaced with something more focused on empowerment as opposed to mere treading water. Without exception, every person I have seen connected to her organisation is just merely treading water and bracing themselves for the next devaluation of them.
I have had to repeatedly tell her that “putting the person before the disability” is fukking rude in my case. I have even said to her, flat out, and long before I ever read Lydia Brown‘s post in which the same point is made in different language, that you do not call me “person with autism” for the same reason you do not call Aborigines “person with blackness”. So if you try to tell me to use “person first” language, you are acting like a curebie in two important ways. First, you are asking me to psychologically and emotionally divorce myself from something that has shaped my perception of the world and my identity since I could breathe on my own. Second, you are being a rude little shit that tells me what I can call myself. And the latter means I do not owe you the courtesy due a child molester so far as I am concerned.
So the big question here is what we call the identity that Autism Speaks and curebies try to force upon us. Although “nigger identity” is not exactly appropriate, it will fit in the absence of a better alternative. As in saying to curebies “stop trying to shove your nigger identity into me, and note that I did not say please”. It must be noted that this identity, the one I am referring to as a “nigger identity” right now, is quite a different one from the ones that can be collectively called autistic identity.
So how do we define this alternative, the positive one we want acknowledged, that is the autistic identity? There is some difficulty with this, because although autistic adults have a lot of things in common, the differences in how they see themselves are as dramatic as the differences between how the autistic see themselves and how normies see the autistic. What we need to focus upon, then, are the things that empower us and make us actual people, real and whole. Bumper stickers that say things like “I am autistic and I vote”, for example, whilst being clichéd and even stupid when in the hands of other lobby groups, would help a lot. Posted bills saying things like “I am autistic and I believe that voting is a waste of time because nobody who gets elected will listen to me about me”, whilst more complicated, would also be timely. Yes, this is an idea that reflects me and how I feel, but therein lies the rub. When you ask an autistic adult how his world should be run, you will get an answer that they believe serves them. That is why the current system in which heads of state are consulting with everyone other than the autistic is long past its use-by date.
But a key aspect of how we define our identity is how we define when we are portrayed well in the media. We must publically declare, as loudly and often as we can, that not only is Rain Man not us and basically our equivalent of Blackface, but so-called “geek culture” is not our culture, either. And that means we must also declare very loudly, everywhere we can, that when the autistic are portrayed well in any media, it is universally by accident.
Let us not mince words. The identity that the curebies want to push upon us is a destructive one. Not merely in the sense that they are intending us to destroy ourselves in the figurative sense. That is why the comparison of the identity they are trying to push into us to what Kruma refers to as the nigga identity is apt. Because the nigga identity is a descendant of an identity that was pushed upon the ancestors of black Americans with the intent of subjugating them. The core identity of slave was designed to curb these ancestors from expecting the same things out of life that free men of all classes and races have as a matter of course. Things like having a semblance of control over one’s own destiny, or that if one is murdered there will be an investigation and attempt to bring the killer to justice.
Even during the first half of the twentieth century, black Americans in certain places could not expect that if they were murdered, it would even be superficially investigated by the authorities. They were not Human beings to the entirely-white police forces in these states or cities. Now, you might question why I just mentioned that, but the sad fact is that in 2012, an autistic adult can be murdered by someone they trust, even a parent, and the jury can simply let the murderer off with a pat on the back. When stories occur in the media about normies being murdered, the writings are entirely oriented on the victim, the victim, the victim. But when the victim happens to be autistic, the coverage is entirely about the family, the family, the family, or even the killer, the killer, the killer.
That is why I have drawn that comparison between the murders of black Americans and the autistic. Even today, albeit to a reduced degree compared to the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the risk of being caught when one murders a black individual is lower than that entailed by murdering a white individual. Especially when that white individual is both rich and male. The bias is more towards money than race, however. When O.J. Simpson was tried for the murders of Ronald Goldman and Nicole Brown, the fiasco that the trial turned into made it abundantly clear that money was talking. Lawyers of all stripes have stated that if not for his so-called dream team of lawyers, O.J. would have been convicted in a matter of weeks. It is said by some that death sentences have been handed down with less evidence.
However, this only proves two things. One, that biases in how seriously each individual murder is taken are complex things with a myriad of possible explanations. Two, that O.J. Simpson‘s case is more of a confirmation of the bias against black people in justice systems where whites are the majority. Why, I hear you ask? Because the fact that so much fuss and debate about Simpson being acquitted, that it was considered so extraordinary, means that the bias still exists. If it were not, it would just be another case of a celebrity supposedly using his greater means to escape justice. White celebrities do that all of the time with far less fuss, bother, or speculation.
Which brings me to a disturbing point along this arm of the star-shaped breakage. Early examples of autistic children and autistic adults being murdered solely for being autistic made the news and got repeated a lot in several circles. But new cases, and trust me when I say that there are new cases, seem to be very hard to find mention of even in the most remote corner of the online world. There is only one reason why this would be the case. Namely, the curebies are going to a great deal of trouble in order to hush these stories up. Given that Autism Speaks is basically a tax avoidance scheme for General Electric, the idea that Bob and Suzanne Wright would divert enormous sums of money to hush up media reports concerning such murders is completely plausible.
If people with enough brains reads such stories, and reads Autism Speaks’ propaganda, they are going to start asking questions. Questions like if Autism Speaks are supposed to be helping the autistic, then why is their writing prompting and being used as justification for the murder of the autistic. Or why there is so much hatred directed toward Autism Speaks on the part of the autistic. Or why Autism Speaks goes to such immense effort to negate and silence the voice of anyone who is critical of them. Or why Autism Speaks will not allow any commentary on their videos and other such material. I could go on all day, but the sum of it is that in spite of their effort to make the autism civil rights “debate” one-way, their side only, Autism Speaks know they are losing the battle to push their version of the nigger identity into us.
Now, before I go, I have two things to say. One, if you have a problem with me using the words nigger identity to describe what Autism Speaks is trying to push on me, even after reading Kruma‘s explanation of what it is, then fukk off and die. Yours is the last voice in the world that I have any time for. Second, telling me that I must use “person first” language, the language that actually puts the person last for the sake of appearing to be “enlightened”, is fighting words. And if I kill you by punching you for doing that, tough shit so far as I am concerned.
Having said all of that, I hope that my fellows on the spectrum can learn something about the direction we should be moving in from reading this. If not, then perhaps my feelings of being isolated from them are correct after all.