I believe all organisations should be opened to criticism and they should
examine themselves regularly to ensure they are not abusing their position.
Some weeks ago I sent this forum a message about discrimination with census
form. I also E-mail that message as a letter to many other bodies including
the DRC, BCODP and Radar. The DRC responded very quickly and accepted that
there was discrimination on this issue. Where as BCODP and Radar still
hasn't responded at all, "now that's something that concerns me". I also
highlighted that people with hidden impairments were not being represented
by many organisations.
Sorry Larry until I see and alternative way of making reference to people
with hidden impairments than I'm using that. I think there needs to be a
democratic process for choosing appropriate terminology for the people that
are not getting there needs recognised. As the "social model" is the
present vehicle we have I think "people with hidden impairments" would fit
into this easily. And when/if the "social model" vehicle is going to be
traded in for something different I hope the choice of new vehicle will be
from grass roots with a democratic process towards choosing! Sorry folks
for breaking away on different subject.
Bye for now, Andy
www.hi2u.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Arnold" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 10:08 PM
Subject: Re: [danmail] Sack Low
> Well we have to realise that in addition to medical and social models of
> disability there is of course the political model.
>
> The DRC is essentially a political creation, a quango and to some extent
it
> were predictable who the great and the good would be who ended up on it.
It
> was no surprise to me, that Bert (eventually to be sir Bert) Massie chairs
> it.
>
> Therefore whoever is on it has to serve to masters, those who appointed
them
> and the constituency they believe that the organisation is set up to
serve.
>
> Low is a public servant, and his speeches have the same significance as
say
> a politicians controversial remarks to a rugby club or whatever.
>
> One is entitled to free speech and to hold, and defend contraversial views
> else what am I doing here, but when one has responsibiities to a gruop and
> one expresses views that are contrary both to ones role and ones
> responsibilities one has to be aware of the possible conflict, and
> consifder whether one is in the right arena to forward them.
>
> I say sack him. Let him go and teach at Leeds.
>
> Larry
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Mairian Corker
> > Sent: 07 June 2001 18:04
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: FW: [danmail] Sack Low
> >
> >
> > I don't think so Erik. There were two parts to Low's paper. The
> > first was an
> > academic critique, which I am sure will be responded to. The second was
an
> > attack on the disability movement and individuals associated with
> > it. Since
> > much of the change we have seen in the UK - though admittedly change
that
> > has not gone as far as we wanted (yet) - has been down to
> > disabled people's
> > campaigns, we have to acknowledge the role of the disability movement in
> > achieving that change. To attack the movement is both to deny
> > this role and
> > to downplay what has been achieved. The event at City University may
have
> > been invitation only, but what is forgotten is that the paper itself was
> > also published on the Web (this is how I accessed it). As such
> > what was said
> > in a 'private' event is now a public affair.
> >
> > I have always believed and I still believe that, as disabled
> > people, we get
> > no-where when we attack each other. However, here I make a distinction
> > between a personal attack (i.e. allegations that are motivated by
> > a personal
> > belief that someone is a 'bad person' and therefore has x motivation for
> > doing what they do) and attacks that relate to the person's work (i.e.
> > academic critique of a person's ideas). For me, the former is
unacceptable
> > in the public domain (though I know not everyone agrees with this). The
> > latter is part of academic life and I think too is at the heart of
current
> > debates about the social model. These are debates we should be having,
but
> > unfortunately, there are still too many who seek to stifle debate with
> > aggression, silence, hate mail and so on, instead of listening.
> >
> > But I think TUDA's point refers to something else. According to the
> > arguments that have been made by the movement, the importance of
> > politicising disability lies in empowerment and/or consciousness
> > raising and
> > its links to social change. There are lots of ways this can be
> > achieved, but
> > my guess is that it is those so empowered who are most likely to be
> > associated with the movement and to have both the knowledge and the
access
> > to resources to fight for their rights when they feel oppressed in
> > employment or whatever. How can such people now feel confident that
> > Commissioner Low, and by extension the DRC, will support them if they
wish
> > to fight? If they don't feel confident, what hope is there for all those
> > disabled people who have yet to understand, for whatever reason, that
they
> > have rights? Therefore, in my view, Low has compromised his position as
> > Commissioner, and by extension the DRC's position.
> >
> > If a government minister launched an attack on members of the
constituency
> > they are supposed to represent, or compromised their position in any
other
> > way, there would be calls for their resignation. Whatever advice
> > Low got, it
> > was bad advice. Unfortunately, when you become part of public
> > life, it's the
> > price you often have to pay.
> >
> >
> > Mairian
> >
> >
> >
> > on 7/6/01 4:39 am, Erik Leipoldt at
> > [log in to unmask] wrote:
> >
> >
>
> ________________End of message______________________
>
> Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
> are now located at:
>
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
>
> You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
________________End of message______________________
Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
are now located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|