If there was an Autistic state would you migrate there?

Post Reply New Topic

I gotta tell you, if the battles I, a liberal, have had with conservative/libertarians here on WP - Aspie or not - are any indication, we'd be at each other's throats as soon as anyone else.

I still haven't seen any reasons why we need a state in order to do those things. What's stopping a phyle from doing it? Orania seems to be doing quite well.

Just this thread alone proves that as false.

Look around and see the truth, is what I suggest.

And to top it off, all of this is only text.

In real life, getting along with these folks could be tremendously MORE DIFFICULT, WHEN they don't have time to think about what they are going to say or DO NEXT.

IN THE real LIFE ASPERGER'S support groups I have been part of in a metro area of several hundred thousand people the people who attended could not even come to an agreement on where to meet next in social interaction outside of the group.

HA HA! cats cannot be herded into a society alone.

They need dogs to lead them around, to use a metaphor.

But anyway, it is always fascinating to watch so many folks ON TOTALLY SEPARATE PAGES OF LIFE not even realizing it AT ALL.

THAT'S not my type of Autism, and I feel blessed for it.

This is a logical fallacy:

If A contains a group B, which are composed of traits/qualities C, if group B were set aside from the rest of A, they would share more of C than anything else.

False. There is no reason to assume that to be the case. Traits and qualities are not mutually exclusive, and therefore groups are not mutually exclusive. We can't assume a greater commonality, simply because we are together.

These deductions are important becuase, it has lead in history to some of B claiming that if others don't share this mutual exclusivity of C, they are less pure or valid. When in fact there is no pure.

Don't get me wrong I hang out here becuase there are people who identify as different socially. However for me the differnce rather than the similarity is more compelling and interesting.

Whether you consider ASD to be the main determining factor in your personality or not, it won't change the result of different personalities and natures.

The second question is if we would emphasize more with each other. On the surface this seem reasonable, but it is not really empathy, but sympathy that is the determining factor. We may well sympathize more, but that is variable.

There is no reason to assume that more empathy is true. The definition of empathy is contentious in practice. I spent a lot of my twenties making observations on the nature of empathy, and what I found is it not really a moral high-ground, but a highly selectively used biological device.

I tend to question the literal definition of putting yourself in others' shoes, especially an absolute mind's eye sense. My theory is there is fine grain communication going on from the subject and also from the empathize where there are in contact ('paper' empathy less so than in person), and the common experience component, is relativist.

We don't experience the same things the same way, but there is a relative association between our 'shared' experiences. In same way if both have our rods and cones, we both can perceive and identify red. There is a common association, via relativism, but we have no idea how eachother's brains actually perceives red.

So I personally think the biological distinction between sympathy and empathy is blurred, becuase the "capacity" is really are range of interaction and thought processes, and the imperative to sympathize.

In that sense you might be right, but the flip side is you maybe you are overestimating this tendency, vs self-centric activity in the demographic as a whole. Like I said you will get different personalities, and I refer to the fallacy example above.

Remember you could get both empathy/sympathy outside of your group. Just becuase you mightn't get enough of it, doesn't mean you get more or in greater concentration in a set aside B.

True, affective empathy aka sympathy is an innate human trait that most humans share.

Cognitive empathy is an environmental culturally derived social cognition trait that sits upon emotional contagion that is the core of affective empathy aka Sympathy, as simple as a child seeing another child laughing or yawning, and naturally mimicking it in involuntary synchronous emotional mirror neuron flow.

Cognitive empathy, overall, is not derived by reading books alone, sitting in lecture halls, or playing video games.

Cognitive empathy, overall, is DIRECTLY DERIVED AND ENHANCED THROUGH FLESH AND BLOOD SOCIAL INTERACTION with a diversity of human beings both verbally AND NON-VERBALLY, AS NON-VERBAL reciprocal social communication in PRACTICE, comprises 60 to 90 percent of REAL LIFE HUMAN RECIPROCAL social communication.

Not doing it (practicing and learning cognitive empathy in REAL FLESH AND BLOOD LIFE) means potentially never gaining cognitive empathy or ENHANCING this real LIFE MOST IMPORTANT HUMAN ANIMAL SOCIAL COOPERATION INTELLIGENCE TO be successful in human cooperative social animal life.

Properly nurtured children in the first two years of life, as science now shows, is integral in the development of both COGNITIVE AND affective empathy.

And as Simon Baron Cohen's extensive research shows deficits in either types of empathy, cognitive or affective, are directly related to the incidence of Autism Spectrum Disorders and the so-called Autism Phenotype.

The cure for the reciprocal social communication difficulties of Autism are rather common sense per social cognition, in at least SOME cases, per getting off the frigging video games, books, and other non-social cognition ways of life AND GETTING IN SOME REAL PRACTICE OF BEING BOTH AN EFFECTIVE AND affecting human social animal IN WAYS OF verbal and non-verbal reciprocal social communication.

As science NOW shows, Autism is potentially mostly an environmentally produced variety of causal factored DISOrder.

And our modern cultures are certainly unbalanced in the ways of mechanical leaning cognition activities, for at least some folks, over social cognition real life flesh and blood verbal and non-verbal ways of reciprocal social communication.

Truly the beast here, in some cases, is not that hard to understand for those of us who have LIVED AND LEARNED WAYS OF SOCIAL RECIPROCAL SOCIAL COMMUNICATION, AFTER BEING locked up in classrooms, behind computer work screens, T.V.'s, video games, and THAT LIST GOES ON, PER MECHANICAL over social cognition LIFE ACTIVITIES.

USE OR LOSE IT DOES APPLY.

To use it here means, No, THIS IDEA per an Autistic State WILL NEVER WORK, for these common sense empirical reasons.

It would only EXACERBATE THE DISORDER of Autism, clearly by common sense.

The only way to improve cognitive empathy is TO GET OUT AND DO IT with folks who HAVE IT.

AND A IDEA OF an Autistic State put into practice would be THE LAST PLACE TO LOOK FOR THAT.

And truly in this way, it's not such a great idea, to spend TOO MUCH TIME HERE, ANYWHERE online.

Non-verbal communication in flesh and blood touching ways, isn't exactly the Internet's forte.

In fact, overall, IT likely is an environmental causal factor for at least some forms of Autism or some individuals who have the propensity for the disorder.

And honestly it shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

And honestly a rocket scientist is often compromised on that Autism Quotient empathy test too, so IT IS no surprise if A rocket scientist would not be able to figure it out either.

Probably not such a good idea that it is these 'type' of scientists who are the ones looking for a 'CURE' to improving cognitive empathy in Autism Spectrum Disorder.

It's kinda like the mind blind leading the mind blind, in what could occur here, if other FULLER thinking minds were not part of the equation here.

AND I'M truly sorry if this truth offends anyone but sometimes the truth IS extremely IMPORTANT TO HUMAN BEING BALANCED WAYS OF LIFE.

Part of my personality is a dislike anything factionalist or segregationist. So I would not be in favour, regardless of the obvious impracticalities to actually achieving it.

I also see the need to such as state as defeatist, and also in my opinion is more likely to attract people with a particular world view rather than ASD being the draw. This is a world view I'm not in favour of.

Even the most discriminated against, ostracised or marginalised are greatest when they refuse to be a victim. If you develop a culture of victimhood, many generations later it will be the same story, unless somebody breaks the cycle. This is true whether you are removed from the source of victimhood or not. Why? Well neurosis is like that, it is cyclical and self-reinforcing. There is a phenomena where those afflicted pass the same negative behavior and beliefs to their children, this streams through the generations and spreads unhappiness.

I like and get on with several people who are not in the spectrum. I want people to be happy, but don't think that this is the answer to happiness becuase it isn't.

I agree, disagreement is not my goal in life, or escape from it.

To truly be free is to be open minded, and exposed to challenge to adapt for change and potential excellence, in practice, as a way of life.

That will never change.

To escape it is certainly shooting oneself in the foot.

Freedom is never free.

The grass is only green inside of one, as is.

And it takes more than one colored hue IN leaf of grass to get the job down TRULY GREEN AS LIFE CAN BE, now.

711 FRESH

AND I'M SORRY, I JUST HAVE TO LINK THIS VIDEO NOW.

It's part of free association in creativity of IMAGINATION that CAN spark a person to new directions in life, if open minded to IT.

And Nah, an Autistic State noT likely a place to find THAT, IF THIS forum can be taken as any indication of THAT.

NOT TO escape Plato's CAVE IS NOT a place I will to LIVE.

...or an enclave, as ethnic groups and gay people routinely do. San Francisco has some famous enclaves; Chinatown (for Chinese people) and The Castro (for gay people). Local businesses within the enclave are inclined to hire people belonging to the enclave as they are "one of us". It's not a country, or even a phyle but it's a lot more achievable than a country. It's only a ghetto if the people within it can't generate enough money with their local businesss. An autistic enclave ought to be able to with technical-oriented businesses.

Yeah, an enclave or something similar would actually be achievable. I wonder what percentage of people here are "joiners" and would actually go for the idea.

That would be more palatable, I think, than a separate country for us.

Well, I want it to be more than an enclave, because an enclave would only help a small fraction of autists. Though perhaps it would be the best way to start.

If I was going to do this, it would be along the lines of a commune.

There is still at least one commune in the south that is going strong. They survive because they figured out how to make it work. A commune along the same lines for the Autistic Spectrum might actually work.

Another approach that might work is along the lines of a monastery. There is a monastery in New Mexico that is largely nondenominational that accepts outsiders to stay there and help out for limited periods of time.

That wasn't difficult to find. It is called The Farm and is located near Summertown, Tennessee.

There web page is at http://www.thefarm.org/.
The Wikipedia page is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Farm_(Tennessee)

That would completely depend on it (political) culture, economic situation, ect.

quote="AspieOtaku"]I would move there and reside in a city of Otakus. Also the county should have a close proximity to the ocean because I love the ocean![/quote]

And having a warm water port would be important in relationship to trade with other states.



And your state would have to maintain some form of diplomatic and trade relations with other countries. So if I understand this correctly the foreign service and economics department of this hypothetical state would be headed/run by NT's



And how high would the levels of immigration from autistic people born abroad need to be to prevent a NT majority from coming in to existence. Also since you state that your autistic state would do better then NT run ones, you would have to consider that there would be NT moving there. ´So would that mean that you are willing to put in place restrictions on immigration?



It is unlikely that he wants to form some kind of Objectivist utopia. Alto considering some of Thomas81's remarks there are some parallels. In the sense that if we, auties, would be freed from the restrictions placed on us by (so called NT run) society we would not only preform better, but outperform the society we have left behind. Only thing needed to complete the picture is that NT society would, according to him, slowly collapse when a significant number of us would leave.



Basically your argument comes down to that depending on the population size the proposed state needs to be highly authoritarian in order to function.



That would probably be the best way for Thoman81 and those who agree with him to move forward. Or else it would just stay in the fase of imigating such a place, without something concrete coming from it.



Most of these very small countries have the sovereignty lying in the hands of a monarch. So in that case it would be gaining influence over him or his heir. Also becoming a majority would not be required, if a question of how much power/influence said group have over the decision making process has that is important.



And there would reasons for why those island are uninhabited.



And then the Italian army moves in to kick you out. And that is presuming the Swiss guard had not already done so.

I don't have a problem with enclaves, retreats, cultural centres, private collaboratives. I'm liberal on this. I would argue that they are interdependent with society.

Would I live in one? Only by coincidence.

Only a some of these community members are permanent residents in some for the famous enclaves.

They aren't guarantee to happen though. They have to be created with a fair amount of consent. San Francisco enclaves just didn't happen over night, they happened organicly, and San Francisco was the centre of many scenes from the 50s on.

Practically speaking there is no way you would on principle get land from any states, to form a new nation. If they allow it for your cause, where do you stop? Where are you going to place it on the South Pole, the Moon, Mars?

With the risk of sounding sardonic, why do you think you are a special case, that you are entitled to such a thing?

You realise at to the extent when could divide up the population into trait based nation state, there would be no land left over, we might as well just float around aimlessly in space.

Without going into too much detail, my acquaintance who pm'ed me has indeed identified terra nullius in Europe and is going there in April to investigate the feasibility of establishing an autistic state there.

You could ask the same question with equal legitimacy to any other given group that has had the temerity to pursue self determination.


Which is a false dilemma because as i have stated before, not every single dimension by which humans can be divided represents the best interests for given groups. It is however my opinion, whether you choose to agree or not, that if autistics collectivised in one nation they could administer for their own interests better. In countries governed by norms, we are systemically neglected, abused, underrepresented, left in poverty and have our grievances ignored.

There is also pro cure groups that are working towards research that would lead to our genocide such as prenatal diagnosis that could lead to autistics being aborted in the womb for no reason than their neurology. Governments will tolerate this as a money saving enterprise. How else will we stand up to that when the time comes?