Would a cure to Autism be left or right wing idea?

Post Reply New Topic

The way that any condition is "situated" can be looked with more clarity by using slightly more sophisticated frameworks (rather than simplistic binary conceptions) developed by "philosophy of science" discipline.

The idea of cure, for example, has many dimensions, not two. There is the descriptive dimension, which arises from positivistic science (ie observational methods). There is the explanatory dimension, which arises from claims and assumptions. There is the evaluative dimension, which determines what those with more power deem the most important. There is the social/cultural dimension which is concerned with maintaining cultural status quos and ascribing value or not to proposed changes.

^ This, because of brevity constraints, is a simplistic snapshot itself, however what the philosophy of science has conclusively demonstrated is that paradigms, rather than political parties, are the core determinants of which ideas are adopted and which are discarded in science, and a number of members here will have heard of Thomas Kuhn's now dated but landmark volume on how paradigms rule scientific ideas and the way that only some findings and ideas become accepted, promoted and believed by both science, scientists and culture.

It won't break down across party lines. There are no parties, not really, not deep down below all the rhetoric. The parties are a phenomenon manifest of human self-categorization processes; A pair of oft-coopted high-visibility juxtaposed identities onto which any commonly occurring problem that has been reduced to a sufficiently binary choice can be mapped. Ultimately both parties reflect the massified desires of the people that comprise them, which are the desires of neurotypicals on all sides.

It won't come down to science either, for science is owned by the majority and is only used to further their aggregate desires. There is an infinity of science but they've only recorded a *useful* sliver of it. One need only look at the way they begrudge the modification of economic theory to account for their own irrationality to see how little they care for science itself when it says things they don't like.

The desires of the majority move the world. Always have, always will. It's how majorities work in hierarchical social species that are fundamentally willing to use coercive force against each other. The whole bit about how history is written by the victors isn't an anecdotal truth, it's a meaningful solution to the interpersonal dynamics that form the fabric of human societies.

I don't see how this is a political issue in the first place.

In my experiences, those on the right have been more accepting while those on the left have supported the idea of eugenics; but, in the end, those are only those I've talked to, and I don't see it as a left/right issue. I see it as people just being people, as to whether or not they're accepting of someone with a differing personality.

Also, on a side note, I've grown up outside the city, but did live a couple years in a city and the atmosphere is so different. Outside the city, I've heard of and experienced more tolerance and acceptance than I would within the urban jungle (which, not trying to offend anyone, is a place full of very rude, impatient, and overall negative people). That's just my experience though.

Well, looking at who proposes cures for those born different -- that is inherently the right-wing, such as a "cure" for the lgbtq community. I've never heard of a "get rid of those born different" cure from the left, personally.

Also, over my time on twitter, right-wingers have continuously shown mock and derision for people with autism. Just search on twitter: "autistic screeches Trump." If they only had a low view and opinion of the left, they wouldn't need to include autism in any way, shape, or form. Instead, however, they single autism out specifically. However, many on the right just seek to be anti political correct for "edge lord" sake which makes it hard to determine what their actual views are.

In the end, though, neither since as the top stated the right's seeking to "cure" others is different since the views of same-sex attraction and autism is different.

1. Libertarianism (not "far right" libertarianism ("far right" in the states would apply to Nazis, KKK, etc groups) is actually considered to be neither left nor right, this has also led to a schism within the libertarian party with some labeling themselves "left libertarian" and "right libertarian." Thus, it would be more apt here to say libertarianism is more socially liberal (left) (social conservatives (right) don't want social change), economically conservative (right). Everything else stated is accurate.

2. In the present day, conversion "therapy" or rather torture is banned from many (but sadly not all) Union states (which largely vote democrat), but are still alive and well unfortunately in all of the Confederate states (which largely vote Republican) - as well as in the states that were neither Union nor Confederate.

http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/conversion_therapy

3. While parties were never polled on conversion therapy, Texas' GOP platform frighteningly endorses it in this year's platform.

https://www.advocate.com/politics/2018/6/20/texas-gop-endorses-ex-gay-therapy-hate-crimes-law-repeal-marriage-reversal

The closest is a 2017 PEW poll on whether or not one should accept homosexuality. Only 54% of Republican/leaning Republican say homosexuals should be accepted, whereas 83% of Democrats stated that they should be:

http://www.people-press.org/2017/10/05/5-homosexuality-gender-and-religion/5_1-8/

It is also important to note that despite how disturbing knowing this is, these centers are set up by many fundamentalist religious groups. Most of them are Christian based with ties to Evangelicalism, Mormonism, and Jehovah's Witnesses while others are tied to Orthodox Judaism and maybe other religions (but haven't heard of centers tied to other religions). It is important to note that Christianity is the over-encompassing term, while Catholicism is a branch and doesn't fund these centers (at least to my knowledge).

The first and largest of which is Love In Action (LIA) (now known as Restoration Path) which is Christian based.

http://restorationpath.org/

4. Due to the right's bigoted views in LGBTQ regards deriving from religion - it's hard to determine what their views on a cure for autism would be, since the view of a cure is more "religious" than secular based.

5. Vaxxers are bipartisan.

2. There, sadly, it's more Southern Strategy than economics. If it was economic priority, support among Republicans would be higher than 54%. Trump is the Southern Strategy Frankenstein - GOP open attacks on minorities have noticeably increased (for example, having literal Nazis running for office) as both parties have become increasingly partisan. This move by the GOP, however, is actually suicidal because younger generations are more socially left with each passing generation. Right now the GOP, like the DNC, is courting elderly voters with little to no care to the younger voters. Eventually, however, this will doubtlessly backfire against both parties and force both parties to change (younger voters are leaving both in droves and labeling themselves independent).

3. Many Evangelicals, Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses give Christianity a bad name (although some Mormons are trying to reform the Mormon religion, and there are doubtlessly Evangelicals and Witnesses trying to do so as well). Most Christians, I believe - although I don't have the statistics - are Catholics or Protestant which are more accepting and the majority. The extreme views on LGBTQ is frighteningly only part of it, more extremist factions believe that black people are inherently sinners ('The Mark of Ham'). Unfortunately, I forgot where I read this but it's the deep, deep South and I believe (or rather hope) that it's rare. A local pastor once likened these extreme groups to Satanism because they invert the bible to justify discrimination rather than following the tenants of WWJD. "Fundamental" in Christian terms doesn't mean at the root of Christianity, it's a misnomer - it means the conservative version of it and most Christians don't look highly upon these branches due to their extremity (and giving Christians an overall negative representation). Basically, as weird as it is to say - fundamentalist Christianity is not the, and is far from being the, fundamental of Christianity. Since these groups are inherently tied to the Republican party it's going to take swinging these religious groups: 24/25% Evangelicals and Mormons support same sex marriage whereas only 14% of Jehovah's Witnesses. Those views are doubtlessly a reflection of how they see lgbtq in general. That will, unfortunately, take time. Mormonism may be forced to change very soon in some way due to a scary increase in teenage suicide statistics tied to teenagers being disowned from their families for breaking strict "religious" tradition; stating it in sweeping general terms since it isn't solely tied to the lgbtq community.

http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=3473487&itype=CMSID

With that said, each passing generation is more accepting and as time goes by these institutions will be forced to change to stay relevant.

It's not a left or right idea, i'ts just a good idea.

This autistic columnist for the Guardian thinks its right wing in Europe.

I’m autistic – don’t let anti-vaxxers bring back the culture of fear

This autistic columnist thinks the anti vaxx movement is a right wing idea
I’m autistic – don’t let anti-vaxxers bring back the culture of fear Karl Knights