[nfb-talk] Open Letter to Marc Maurer

[T. Joseph Carter]

But Robyn, you have to understand the NFB position here.  The ACB does in
fact call for universal APS deployment, because only when they are
everywhere can blind people travel independently without the need for
training.  We in the NFB define "travel independently" a little
differently--our definition includes safety which an APS cannot provide,
and in fact can hinder.  And indeed, this is indeed an example of how we
see the ACB demanding that the world change to fit us when we can easily
change to fit the world (with better results, in fact.)

I won't debate the money identification issue with you because I have
stated why I believe the claim made by the ACB hurts the blind, but have
also cited many good reasons why the money should be changed to be
identified without vision.  Essentially, the ACB is doing the right thing
here, but for totally the wrong reasons.


It really does come down to attitude in the end.  How much do you think it
is society's responsibility to even the odds so that we can be successful,
and how much do you believe it is our responsibility to even the odds for
ourselves?  If it is society's responsibility to correct the injustices of
centuries of abuse of the blind, then probably you're going to think that
ACB positions make more sense.  If you believe, after what we have been
expected to tolerate supposedly for our own good, that we cannot and
should not depend on the sighted public any more than we absolutely must,
then you'll generally agree with the NFB positions on issues.

Where it gets complicated is when society's role versus ours aren't the
only factor to consider.  In the NFB, we tend to take the more aggressive
attitude that we don't want pity from anyone.  If you pity the blind, then
you're not likely to have much respect for them, aside from the fluffy
feel-good attitudes.  "Wow, you do all of that by yourself?  You're doing
so good for a blind person!"  In the NFB, we tend to be gravely insulted
by such comments from anyone who ought to know better, and we don't really
appreciate them even when the person has no reason to have known better.

Generally speaking, we would rather accept some additional complication in
our lives (like the effort to find another way to identify money or to
avoid getting ripped off because you can't conveniently do it just now)
than be subjected to the poor-blind-person thing.

That's not to say that the ACB seeks or even accepts such treatment, but
they do seem to worry about it if and when it comes up, rather than
working to actively prevent it as the NFB does.  In that way, it really is
like the difference in political party.  A conservative (not necessarily a
Republican, I note), will tend to seek to prevent certain things from
happening, whereas a liberal proceeds with less caution.  Sometimes the
liberal politicians can get more done, but the conservative ones tend to
proceed with more caution to avoid foreseeable mistakes.  Both approaches
have their good and bad points, and neither have anything to do with
either political party anymore, IMO.

The problem is that a lot of us see that making the wrong mistake takes us
back to conditions like those of the 1950s when agencies for the blind
stated plainly that the blind would earn the rights and privileges of
citizenship when every single blind person proved themselves to be truly
independent of the agency safety nets.  Oh yes, they did argue such things
back then.  And you know, after being told such things, the early
Federationists pretty much made that the organization's mission: to bring
about that day.  We aren't trying to do it because we think that we
shouldn't have those services or even because we don't absolutely need
them.  We do it because, despite the fact that we are guaranteed those
rights by the constitution, there were those who would deny us those
rights.  There still are, in fact.


Some of it is about how others see us, I freely admit.  In the case of
currency changes for our benefit, we don't want to see it done wrong for
obvious reasons.  We also don't want to give the sighted world an excuse
to choose not to hire us because it'll cost so much money to change
everything for one blind guy.  And maybe to a very small extent, every
time we need to seek out some new accommodation we know we could probably
do just fine without, we can hear the distant echoes of all of the people
over the years who have told us that we can't compete on equal terms with
the sighted world.

You're probably saying to yourself that this is a bad thing, and that we
need to get over it.  Not one of those people who threatened anyone who
would dare join the NFB is left at this point.  It probably seems like we
are dwelling on something that is at the very least water under the bridge
by now.  I disagree.  We need to remember these people not because they
have the power to undo what we've accomplished, but because they keep us
honest.  That in turn tends to keep us from undoing our own work.

I think it is because the ACB chose not to remember these things that it
does things at times that have the potential to do us harm.  They don't
choose to remind themselves that just fifty years ago, you might lose your
(sub-minimum wage) job if you were involved with organizations of the
blind.  Because they have forgotten, they aren't ready to challenge those
who believe that blindness somehow translates to an inability to do
anything beyond seeing.

If they were, they'd be labeled as the NFB is: A bunch of radicals who sue
anyone who disagrees with them.  A fanatical organization which insists
that blind people be allowed to do things that just aren't safe.  A bunch
of malcontents who refuse to accept the help they need to make it in this
world.  It would be no more true of the ACB than it is of the NFB, but
that wouldn't stop people from trying to actively discredit the ACB so
that any "right-thinking person" would stay far away from you bunch of
supposed lunatics.

If by all of those labels they mean that we in the NFB won't put up with a
bunch of people telling us what we can't do just because they don't think
we can, based solely on our lack of vision, then I personally accept those
labels with pride.  Welcome to the National Federation of the Blind:
Helping blind people get in touch with their inner nutcase so that they
can claim or reclaim the life they deserve for decades.


Okay, rant over for now.  =)

On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 09:04:04PM -0600, MARSHA R WALLEN wrote:
> I agree William we do not have to agree my beef is the false statements
> about ACB in that ACB does not think that we cannot live without
> accomodations and will not be productive and that is unfair to make such
> a broad statement.  ACB does not want the blind to be pitied these kind
> of misleading statements are as offensive as the personal attacks
> senatorial candidates make during election times.  Frankly that kind of
> behavior makes me not want ot vote for either party.  The ACB should not
> spread false rumors about ACB either.  Even in ACB there are differing
> opinions on the currency issue becuase we are all different and all have
> different priorities.  On that issue accessable currency may open up more
> jobs and to say that it makes us look stupid and incapable is far from
> true.
> 
> So no we dont have to agree but keep an open mind as I will and dont just
> tout the party line. 
> 
> Robyn
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk