SPREAD THE INFORMATION

Any information or special reports about various countries may be published with photos/videos on the world blog with bold legit source. All languages ​​are welcome. Mail to lucschrijvers@hotmail.com.

Search for an article in this Worldwide information blog

Posts tonen met het label a publication of common cause*. Alle posts tonen
Posts tonen met het label a publication of common cause*. Alle posts tonen

donderdag 6 september 2012

(en) Canada, LinchPin #16 - a publication of common cause* - Review: Disability Politics and Theory by KARINE WEHLM


Disability Politics & Theory by AJ Withers: Fernwood Publishing. "(D)isability falls
somewhere in a constellation. Like the constellation in the sky, disability is in constant
flux and appears different depending on the positioning of the
onlooker."(p.99) ---- Disability Politics and Theory is an excellent new book that
critically examines the key models of disability that have shaped how disability and
disabled people have been viewed in North America throughout the capitalist era and to
this current day. ---- The book?s author, AJ Withers applies an intersectional and
anti-capitalist analysis on these models and suggests an alternative model, the radical
model of disability, as a analytical tool to move the disabled people?s movement forward.
Withers? arguments stem from an understanding that multiple oppressions are intertwined
with one another and cannot be dealt with separately.

The author also argues that capitalism is
inherently problematic since, among other
things, it assigns individual self-worth and
value based on whether one can work for a
wage (and so produce profits for someone
else). Withers ends with a call for both non-
disabled people?s movements and the disabled
people?s movement to organize inclusively
for social justice and radical access.

The book begins by explaining the
Eugenic model, the Medical model and the
Charity model ? all of which individualize
disability and emphasize the necessity to
cure, reduce or eliminate disability, rather
than focusing efforts on improving disabled
people?s conditions by reducing barriers and
giving them power back over their lives.
These models all stem from the belief that
the problems posed by disability are inherent
to disabled individuals themselves, rather
than products of the negative reaction of
society to human diversity. Withers goes on
to explain how these models are still widely
applied today: the Medical model still being
the dominant mainstream model for dealing
with disability and the Eugenic model still
operating, for example, in the field of
genetic research on reproduction.

The author goes on to explain
the importance of the Disability Rights
movement model and the Social model,
while maintaining a critical analysis of
both. The Disability Rights movement
views disabled people as a minority. This
movement fights to end discrimination
towards disabled people and to help them
become accepted in the current society; the
Social model, on the other hand, demands
a change in society itself. This model
heralded an important shift in thinking
about disability and was a response to
the individualization of disability posed
by the earlier models. The Social model
separates impairment, which is part of an
individual?s characteristics, from disability,
which is ??the oppression that people with
impairment face?? (p. 86.). For example,
for a person using a wheelchair to move
around town, their impairment could be
the fact that their legs are paralysed while
their disability could be their inability to
access a building because of stairs. In the
Social model, a person is only disabled
if the environment and society is not
accessible or adapted to their needs. It is
the environment and society that needs
to change and not the person with the
impairment. Disability is therefore a social
construct and not inherent to the disabled
person.

Withers finishes by explaining an
alternative model, the Radical model of
disability, which tries to address both the
oppression of disabled people and disabled
minds and bodies while intersecting with
other forms of oppression. By choosing
to speak in terms of minds and bodies, the
author means who and what we are: we
are physical, mental, intellectual, sensory
bodies and minds. We have different ages,
life experiences, cultures, languages,
skin colours, genders, sexuality and class
backgrounds. The radical model rejects
the binary of impairment and disability
in the Social model and sees impairment
as also a social construct, because of the
fact that impairment too has different
meanings depending on the society we live
in. To take the same example as before, a
person unable to use their legs would be in
an entirely different situation if we lived
in an environment where there were no
stairs. In this case, the meaning assigned
to this particular physical fact would be
something different. Withers chooses to
talk about minds and bodies as a much
more inclusive and non-oppressive way
of discussing our difficulties, because we
all have our challenges, disabled and non-
disabled people alike. Using the words
minds and bodies is an attempt to move
away from categorical labels and towards
a terminology that includes us all.

Withers also proposes an
alternative to universal accessibility.
Although universal accessibility is
already much more inclusive than just
adding a ramp to a building, because it
tries to address in a comprehensive way
all accessibility needs relating to the
physical environment, it only addresses
the physical aspect of the environment.
Radical access, instead, articulates
a broad accessibility analysis that is
inclusive of other oppressions, such as
the inability to afford a ride on the bus
? even though it can be accessed using a
wheelchair.

One thing that caught my
attention in this book is how Withers
dismantles the myth of independence.
Being independent means that
someone can do a task by themselves,
without needing the help of anyone.
Withers instead argues that we are all
interdependent ? after all, very few
of us make our own clothes or grow
our own food. It is simply that certain
dependencies have been normalized,
while others have been marginalized.
I would also add that we should aim at
being autonomous rather than this ideal
of being independent, which means being
able to make our own choices in our
lives. This includes choosing to have help
or not. Very few people can say they are
truly autonomous because of the way our
society grants control and power to a few.
Only real social change, including the
abolishment of capitalism, hierarchy and
the fight against all forms of oppression
will make this possible for everyone.

Disability Politics and Theory is
an easy-to-read book giving a thorough
analysis of the key concepts and models
of disability. It is an eye-opener on
disability and it should be read by
anybody seeking to move this society
towards social justice. This book is
urging us to fight to create the changes
we want, because they won?t be handed
to us. ??We must work in solidarity with
other marginalized groups, and we must
get past our differences and fight for
justice, dignity, equality and access.??
(p.120)
=================================
* Anarchist organization

Bron : a-infos-en@ainfos.ca

dinsdag 31 juli 2012

Canada, LinchPin #16 - a publication of common cause* - Organized Labour at the Precipice The Missed Opportunities of CUPE 3902


WAI KIAT TANG ---- In the 2011-2012 ? academic year, CUPE 3902 - a trade union local that
represents tutorial assistants, sessional lecturers, invigilators and lab assistants at
the University of Toronto (UofT) ? had generated a high level of mobilization and
engagement amongst its membership, relative to the much more cordial experience of the
last bargaining period. This could partly be attributed to a general feeling of
dissatisfaction amongst the more active layers of the membership seeking solutions against
rocketing costs of living expenses in Toronto, as well as ballooning tutorial sizes and
diminishing educational spaces that mock the ?world-class? mantra that the UofT
administration promotes in their efforts to attract private investment from business
elites and the broader public at large.

This bargaining period was
burdened by the narratives that have
followed the 2008 capitalist crisis:
business and political elites working to
shift the burden of the great recession
onto the broader working class through
an austerity agenda that attacks our
public services, and an accompanying
ideological offensive against organized
labour. These narratives have been
directed towards the broader realm
lies in advancing the material benefits of
their own membership, while sacrificing
and ?taking hostage? the broader public
interest at large.

The fact that this narrative has been
so persuasive to non-unionized working
people should pose questions for
progressives seeking a militant labour
movement that fights against the bosses
and to this its To picture?

To answer this, we need to examine
the labour movement in its North
American Historically, context. the
North American Labour Movement,
as ?represented? by its leading labour
bodies in the American Federation of
Labor (AFL) and Canada?s Trade Union
Congress (TUC) generally submitted
to a ?Business Unionist? mentality that
sought to downplay political challenges
to capitalism and the bosses. Instead,
labour leaders worked at carving a larger
piece of the pie for its membership ?
ignoring the broader question of class
struggle against capitalism. It is from
these origins that we can mark the broad
contrast between North American and
European labour. While this summary
is somewhat overly-simplistic, it does
at least help contextualize the ruling
class narrative that villainizes organized
labour as comprised of selfish, greedy
workers who share no interests with the
broader working class.
In a university setting the narrative
follows a similar vein. For many
undergrads, it?s not clear why working
class youth should support organized
labour on our campuses ? especially if
this support potentially comes at the cost
of our education, in the event of a work
stoppage. The natural reaction of the
majority of students is ?what?s in it for
me??
This was one of the most positives
aspects of the CUPE 3902 bargaining
proposals, such as demands for hard-
caps to tutorial sizes and labs ? intended
to facilitate spaces of deeper critical
discussion not possible in large lecture
halls. For me, this marks the need for
labour to connect its demands with the
broader interests of the community as a
means of creating organic relationships
that strengthen the class struggle
supposedly championed by the left.
In the end our union accepted a
contract that failed to offer what many
would say were modest economic
demands ? namely wage increases tied
to inflation and the guaranteed funding
package granted to graduate students.

Our union also backed down from
our demands for hard tutorial caps,
accepting instead the establishment of
joint admin-union working groups to
?study? the tutorial size question with
regards to quality of education. It?s
not clear if these working groups will
have any teeth or whether they will
simply serve as another release valve
to hold back the question of quality
of education for another few years.
This concession amounted to a major
missed opportunity to bridge closer
relations and positive impressions
between the academic workers and
the students who will eventually
move into the workforce. For many
students, their first concrete exposure
to labour struggles will come in their
classroom ? as was the case when my
elementary school teachers went on
strike for better working and teaching
conditions against the austerity agenda
of the Harris government in 1997.
The fact is that if we want to win
as an organized labour movement,
we have to champion the aspirations
and demands of our fellow workers
and students. Furthermore, the fight
over this issue was an opportunity
to confront the powers that be over
fundamental questions governing how
the education system is run. What are
schools for? Who do they belong to?
Are education institutions merely a
factory shop to mold new workers into
the workforce, or are they fundamentally
public goods that seeks to educate and
produce critical-thinking members of
society?
If the progressive goals for free
and better education are going to have
substance, organized labour must
play a more active and militant role
in articulating these aims at the picket
line. Rather than contributing to the
progressive labour movement, CUPE
3902?s failure to take up this fight can
only contribute to the cynicism that
working people rightly feel towards
business unionism. Organized labour sits
at a precipice, with a looming threat of
continued irrelevance and distain from
the public at large. If we want to counter
this, we must smash the business unionist
mentality that?s been ingrained in the
North American labour tradition and
embrace a social progressive unionism
that is more community-centered in its
demands ? one that fights, ultimately,
under the battle cry of ?all for all?.
========================
* Anarchist organization

Bron : a-infos-en@ainfos.ca