> Larry wrote: 'That is a metaphor, I am not suggesting someone purloin a
tank
> to take on the town hall, I mean if one wishes to make ones point in the
> camp of ones enemy, sometimes one has to use there tactics and if that
means
> for instance wearing trousers instead of a loin cloth then so be it'.
>
> Larry it is political, the battle ground is political. If we agree on that
> then we need to find tune the strategy. Strategy needs to be planned so to
> speak to advance our cause, not for the sake of damaging the others camp.
If
> the latter, people will sympathise with your opponent, not with you. And
> they will wave you with a big smile. Andy
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry Arnold" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: "A Velarde" <[log in to unmask]>;
<[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 11:28 AM
> Subject: RE: Amended email Colin Revell:- A background history to my case
> from 1995 -present
>
>
> > Now fuck me backwards as I know what normalising discourses are and are
> > opposed to them, there is a difference of rough manners and commonplace
> use
> > of expletives and behavior in a public place that is likely to get one
> > thrown out if repeated.
> >
> > I come from a predominantly working class background, however much of my
> > discourse takes me into the territory of the polite middle classes from
> whom
> > a lot of academia seems to be drawn. I might slip in my linguistic usage
> > from time to time, and I do not modify my accent, I am still rough edged
> but
> > I do not take a physical hammer to my opponents, that is transgressing,
> cos
> > if you do that you expect them to respond in kind.
> >
> > Now there is outright war and guerilla action, but if one is resorting
to
> > the formalities of courts and due process of law to establish ones case,
> > ones rights, one is expected not to trespass too far outside of the
> bounds,
> > and if one does it is a calculated act of civil disobedience, for which
> one
> > expects to be a casualty if it goes wrong.
> >
> > I have engaged in varios incivil protests before and even yelled from
the
> > strangers gallery at the monkeys in the zoo below, thing is nobody herd
me
> > because they were yelling loud enough below not to hear.
> >
> > Perhaps I have been more fortunate than Colin, or perhaps there has also
> > been something in the way that I have been prepared in meetings to leave
> > once I have transgressed and used strong language. I have been thrown
out
> of
> > many public meetings, but always at the point which civil discourse was
> not
> > gaining me anything.
> >
> > It is also true that people aware of my explosive propensities have
> provoked
> > me into that state of action in order to justify there claims that I was
> > being unreasonable.
> >
> > However in all my discourses I have pursued a dual approach of civility
> > alongside the occasional demonstrations of rage and avoided the ASBO's
and
> > bans. When I turn up to a Council meeting or whatever, they know what to
> > expect, there will be some disregarding of the chairs directions, or
some
> > heckling, but there is also an understanding that I will withdraw if the
> > heckling becomes too disruptive.
> >
> > Anyway to use a metaphor, if you the tribal person want to fight
> > civilisation, it is no good doing it with bows and arrows, you have
> > sometimes to adopt the customs of your enemy and use artillery.
> >
> > That is a metaphor, I am not suggesting someone purloin a tank to take
on
> > the town hall, I mean if one wishes to make ones point in the camp of
ones
> > enemy, sometimes one has to use there tactics and if that means for
> instance
> > wearing trousers instead of a loin cloth then so be it.
> >
> > Larry
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> > > [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of A Velarde
> > > Sent: 16 February 2006 10:35
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > Subject: Re: Amended email Colin Revell:- A background history to my
> > > case from 1995 -present
> > >
> > >
> > > Paul wrote: If "neurodiverse crips" assert themselves in
> > > "neurodiverse ways" is it simply as Colin asserts, that "our
> > > neurodiverse 'behaviour' is always misinterpreted". It does seem
> > > to mean there cannot be limits to what is acceptable conduct
> > > without being accused of imposing 'neurotypical' behavioiur.Now
> > > clearly this is a thorny issue..."
> > >
> > > In my impression there is a need to dissect this issue as what we
> > > are discussing is a very political matter. there are 3
> > > different issues to analyse regarding appropriateness: of
> > > conduct, of behaviour and language. These can be analysed in a
> > > matrix of two vertical columns: of appearance and of content. in
> > > this matrix therefore there're 12 issues to discuss: I.e. is the
> > > content/appearance of our/their conduct appropriate? is the
> > > content/appearance of our/their behaviour appropriate? is the
> > > content/appearance of our/their language appropriate?
> > >
> > > In each of these areas there is a political struggled of forms.
> > > The persons who we relate in an organisation would be distress if
> > > we trespass what is the grounds of the 'acceptable. (and some
> > > will love to see us trespassing I.e. losing our temper/manners
> > > etc, because then content would not take priority. what would be
> > > discussed then will be the form, our form, never theirs). Paul is
> > > right when he suggest that this is similar in racial relations.
> > > (I.e. How wonderful the establishment feels when a person of
> > > ethnic minority swears. 'Here he is the tribal man/woman
> > > offending the civilised nation. Look at him, her. someone would
> > > even turn on the reflectors and start the camera rolling to
> > > record the incident for everyone to witness'. So everyone is
> > > relief because none will notice with the same intensity the
> > > offence committed against the swearing person in the first place).
> > >
> > > We are in a land of political manners. ground that has already
> > > been set. So the sophisticated, the educated, the normalised
> > > could show off, and the forgotten, the working class, the rough,
> > > the excluded, the colonised, the drugtaker, the travesty,the
> > > prostitute would feel uncomfortable and self exclude from
> > > participation in the construction of society for the benefit of
> > > the 'middle nation'. (All who have had a panic attack when
> > > giving a speech or reading aloud would pay attention to this. It
> > > is not you, it is the setting you are in)
> > > what I am referring to in this juxtaposition of discourses is
> > > that the cultural setting we are in make sure that everyone that
> > > is not benefited by the normalising capacities of the episteme
> > > (system) is autoexcluded.
> > >
> > > So what?
> > > Yes there are forms that need to be considered. But also there
> > > are thing that the educated (enlightened?)in the struggle of
> > > disabled people and other normalised categories, need also to
> > > consider. When you see a person swearing, or behaving different,
> > > whether because you just arrived, or because it is shown on TV,
> > > try to look at the content, try to understand him/her. Because
> > > he/she is not the animal that appears to be, and the
> > > establishment is not the civilised system that appears to be
> > > either. Look at the content, make an effort. This is
> > > particularly important for research too, so we could have a more
> > > rounded picture of what is going on.
> > >
> > > So going back to the matrix. a campaigner, or a person who is
> > > going to knock at the massive wooden door of the establishment,
> > > to say I compliant because ...(I.e. you in fact are excluding me
> > > and I reclaim the right to exit in this world, my world too and
> > > not only yours!). would need to take into account that forms
> > > matter. It is the first hurdle. if we pass it, the content of
> > > what we say would be heard by some.
> > > Hope this help, Andy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
________________End of message______________________
This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies). Enquiries about the list administratione should be sent to [log in to unmask]
Archives and tools are located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|