lyrialDo not disclude the disabled
https://anarchist.nexus/c/flippanarchy/p/638938/do-not-disclude-the-disabled
A404
gurty
PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]Every once in a while, I find “leftists” or “anarchists” who discount ableism, i.e. the oppression experienced by disabled people specifically because they are disabled. Class reductionism is the most common way that leftists discount ableism. Class amplifies ableist oppression for sure, but winning the class war would be insufficient (but necessary!) to abolish ableist oppression.
Usually anarchists and other leftists are pretty good on ableism, but not always.
My brother is very disabled (diabetic and neuropathy to the point where he can’t even hold a plate of food). The sentiment of someone like that being completely unable to contribute any kind of labor is sadly all over the place. Some, sadly, think of labor as “meaningful work” in the sense of tilling fields etc., but disabled people can very much aid in the society in terms of art, writing, or just being a joy and inspiration to those around them.
Even if someone can’t “provide labour”, so what? You don’t need to be “useful” to have inherent worth
ArkhiveAbsolutely!! From each according to their means, to each according to their needs. That’s goes for food just as much as it does for art and conversation. Capitalism has totally ruined words like “labor” and “productive” and others. Anything someone brings to the table is “valuable” not in the capitalist, money sense, but in the bettering of their lives and the lives of others sense.
Swedneckit’s a baffling thing because Marx came up with a really easy to understand slogan that summarizes what we should strive towards: “From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs”.
A lot of anarchists tend to throw out the Marx with the Lenin… And then unironically praise Nietzsche and pat themselves on the back for having read one of his books.
It doesn’t have to be a conscious decision like “disabled people fuck off”. It’s usually doing something without thinking to whom it’s accessible.
Establish your cool open for all anarchist library in a place not reachable by wheelchair? Excluding disabled people. May have an easy fix, but you gotta think that shit through, ideally before announcing how you’re open for everyone. Just one example.
Most anarchists may be cool about that in theory, but reading reports from disabled anarchists, exclusionary examples are far from being the minority. Masks or filters at indoor gatherings? Alt texts? Some openly published contact where disabled people can ask about meeting their needs? Just some topics that often aren’t though about at all.
If someone said ‘if there are nothing but a bunch of racist bigots in flippanarchy, I don’t want any part of it!’ then all people would see is ‘there are racists in flippanarchy’.
Anarchy is not abelist, racist, sexist or homophobic in its very nature. There is zero point in making this signalling gesture, all it does is imply no-smoke-without-fire assumptions.
Thats why I am downvoting. It would be like me saying ‘if lyrial is a rapist, I want nothing to do with them’.
But anarchists are, again and again. And since there’s no perfect anarchy anywhere but always just striving towards it, it’s necessary to point out blind spots. Dismissing that criticism as signalling is ignoring the fact that we have to learn anarchy, it doesn’t just come to us in it’s perfect form.
I appreciate that, but it’s redundant to the point of being unhelpful. It would be like reminding BLM that racism is bad. The very point of anarchy is to remove these social hierarchies.
“Hey there, Defund The Police forum - just to let you know that if you aren’t for police reform, you aren’t my friend!”
Like, what are we doing here?
Anarchy has to be many things and some are more often overlooked than others. Some of the replies here show exactly that pointing it out is necessary.
Having all possible aspects of anarchy combined is a rather theoretical thing IMHO. There can always be new things which are used to discriminate people for and create hierarchies around - identifying and overcoming them has to be constant anarchist praxis.
You are talking as if this post just discovered ‘Excluding Disabled People’. When discrimination arises, it does so in opposition to anarchism. Anarchy doesn’t need its terms and conditions updating. We learn how to implement it, we don’t gush over tweets that read like ‘does anyone else think being shitty to disabled people is bad or is it just me?’ That just draws anarchism into the most superficial part of the culture-war.
I genuinely apologise if I sound strangely ticked off by this, but I have an admittedly-unhealthy issue with anarchy being used as a means of scoring good-boy points on social media.
Why would I exclude the disabled?
Of the Air (cele/celes)You may do out of ignorance, not malice or intentionally.
Dippy
alapakalaOP, fix your post to include our hard-of-seeing folks, and the link to @[email protected]
Missing the alt text on this one is a big oof. I have fixed that and will add the thread link when I get a chance later. I need to not post when half asleep.
worry not, walking to work, I’ve found it for u.
Enjoy editing✌️😁
Enjoy editing✌️😁
Ms. Que Banh (@[email protected])
If your form of anarchy excludes #PeopleWithDisabilities - I'd say you're not really an #anarchist at all. #AntiAbleism