[nfb-talk] FW: {Disarmed} FW: A personalreport fromChairmanGordon Gund
Lisa Kidder
lisakid at peoplepc.com
Tue Apr 26 01:03:45 UTC 2011
I totally agree!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wm. Ritchhart" <william.ritchhart at sbcglobal.net
To: "'NFB Talk Mailing List'" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
Date sent: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 20:49:15 -0400
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] FW: {Disarmed} FW: A personalreport
fromChairmanGordon Gund
John,
Although I believe you are being mal-used by many on this list
currently, I
would like to encourage you to study the history of the race
problems in
this country during the past 70 years. The email you posted
below suggest
the blind do the same things that blacks were told to do during
their fight
for full-integration.
Telling the blind they should do all those things for themselves
requires
them to partake of separate goods and services. Such goods and
services are
never truly equal. Whatever we ask for should be only what we
truly need to
reach the same level field as all other citizens.
Please hold firm to your current efforts. You have been
well-restrained in
spite of sugnifigent provocation.
Thanks, William
-----Original Message-----
From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
[mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of John Heim
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 7:40 PM
To: NFB Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] FW: {Disarmed} FW: A personal report
fromChairmanGordon Gund
Mike, you've made my case for me better than I could ever have
hoped to make
it myself. Why in the world is the NFB deciding something as
important as
audible walk signals on a philosophy that a lot of blind people
don't even
believe in? Lives are at stake here. And I don't give a flying
fig about
leveling the playing field or the NFB philosophy. I think the
NFB should be
in favor of audible signals because they make blind people safer.
Now, we can argue about whether audible signals make blind people
safer or
not but the point here is that the NFB keeps making decisions
based on its
philosophy rather than on what's best for blind people. That's
wrong. Its
unethical.
How many times do I have to say this before it sinks in? I agree
with the
NFB philosophy. In fact, I doubt there is anyone on this list
who believes
in it more whole heartedly than I do. But a group like the NFB
has no
business making policy decisions based on a philosophy. Its
decisions should
be made on what works.
Whether to support the NFB philosophy is a personal decision that
all blind
people should make for themselves. And the NFB simply has no
moral right to
impose its philosophy on all blind people. If I want to wallow
in my
blindness and think the world owes me a $5 Ican tell from a $10,
that's my
business. Now, I don't think the NFB has any obligation to lift
a finger to
get me tactile money. But the NFB should not have fought tactile
money. That
just wasn't right.
But the ethics of the situation aren't my only problem. The
truth is that
its impossible to make consistent policies based on a philosophy.
This was
one of the first things I pointed out when I joined this list
years ago. The
NFB has a capricious, uneven set of policies because they're
based on an
inconsistent adherence to a philosophy rather than on
practicality. If the
NFB really believes that we should ask the world to adapt to us
only when
absolutely necessary, instead of suing Target, why didn't the NFB
simply
tell its members to shop somewhere else? A few years ago, the
NFB
organized protests against a skating rink that had set off part
of the rink
for blind people to skate in. Why didn't the NFB just tell the
blind skaters
to find another rink? Or why didn't it tell them just to adapt to
the
conditions put upon them by the rink? When the NFB organized
protests of the
movie, "Blindness", why didn't they just tell blind people to
make their own
movies?
The thruth is that you could be against any policy if you just
say its not
absolutely necessary. Somehow, the NFB finds it important to
organize
protests against movies and skating rinks while they're perfectly
willing to
live without tactile money and audible signals.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Freeman" <k7uij at panix.com
To: "'NFB Talk Mailing List'" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 1:35 PM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] FW: {Disarmed} FW: A personal report
fromChairmanGordon Gund
Joseph:
Your well-reasoned post below is dead on. I agree with it
completely. It
succinctly points out the methods some who disagree with NFB
policies use
to
denigrate these policies.
Yet I believe we are doing John a disservice by trashing him
here.
Fundamentally, what we are dealing with is a clash between two
views of
the
world as it affects the blind and what we, the blind, are
capable of and
what we can and should expect from the world. Sometimes these
world views
result in espousal of the same solutions to blindness issues.
Most of the
time, however, these clashing views result in radically
different
proposals
for what society can and should do. What follows are
generalizations.
Generalizations are always dangerous in that they tend to
oversimplify.
But
they are good tools for analysis.
One world view -- presumably the one held by John and many
others
including
many in ACB -- holds that we, the blind, are owed such efforts
and devices
as are needed to "Level the playing field" -- the current "in"
buz-phrase --
with the sighted and in analogous fashion to what we, the blind,
would
experience were we sighted. For example, if the sighted can see
a traffic
signal, this view holds that we, the blind ought to be able to
hear it.
In
like manner, if the sighted can see facial expressions and
action in
movies
and on television, we, the blind, ought to have described video
to make us
aware of such expressions and actions. Again, if the sighted
can
determine
the denomination of paper currency without aid, we, the blind,
also should
be able to do so. In other words, we, the blind, should be
compensated by
society for our lack of sight.
The other world view -- predominantly held by members of NFB --
holds that
society owes us nothing except the chance to compete with the
sighted
without impediments except those imposed by the physical
nuisance of
blindness. The assumption underlying this world view,
eloquently
expressed
by Joseph Carter, is that the world is not going to easily adapt
to our
needs but that in most instances, we can adapt to the world and
compete on
a
basis of equality with the sighted with relatively little
difficulty. It
follows therefore that we should only ask the world to adapt to
our needs
when we cannot deal with them without such adaptation.
For example, Joseph is bang on-target when he cites our current
push for
technology access as fulfilling this criterion. Things we once
could do
with very little adaptation on the part of society now require
adaptation
because of the advent of touch-screens, flat panels and the
like. We'll
go
as far as the Supreme Court to secure such adaptations.
Tactilly-identifiable paper currency, on the other hand, does
*not* meet
this criterion. While it would be nice and convenient to have
such
currency, it is not a necessity. We, the blind, have found ways
to handle
currency with relatively little difficulty even though it is not
identifiable by touch. Put another way, we of NFB certainly
were not and
are not opposed to tactile currency; as Joseph says, we are
cooperating
with
the Bureau of Printing and Engraving in testing out which
tactile features
would work best. Our only quarrel was with the assertion that
*not*
having
such currency was discriminatory against the blind. We just saw
this as
one
of those circumstances requiring us to develop alternative
techniques.
Similarly, we of NFB are not opposed to audible traffic signals
when
listening to traffic flow isn't sufficient to determine when we
should
cross
intersections or roundabouts. We fail to see, however, any
advantage to
blanket installation of signals as in most instances, we don't
really need
them, they are costly and sometimes themselves are safety
hazards.
We are also not opposed to described video; we supported the
21st Centuryh
Communications and video Accessibility Act. Yet we would
consider
described
video *essential* only in the case of emergency warnings. That
doesn't
mean
that many of us don't enjoy described video; we just don't
consider it
discriminatory when we don't get it.
I, too, get tired of those who disagree with us setting up
strawmen. But
I
think the impulse to do so is best understood as a reaction to
the
confrontation between two more-or-less opposing philosophies of
blindness
and of how blindness should be dealt with by the world.
Mike Freeman
-----Original Message-----
From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
[mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of T. Joseph Carter
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 5:07 AM
To: NFB Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] FW: {Disarmed} FW: A personal report
from
ChairmanGordon Gund
I just get so tired of the same damned unrelenting straw men
brought up
time
and again, anywhere he can wedge these things in, whether they
make sense
or
not. He's not been back two weeks and already we're all
illogical,
unethical, and he's back to the straw man about how we all want
blind
people
to beg for help from sighted people.
If I have learned one thing from politics, it's that certain
parties
always
want to re-frame the argument so that either you agree with
them, or you
are
against something that nobody ever would be. Either I am right,
or you
support cruelty to kittens! What do kittens have to do with
anything?
So if you listen to John, if you oppose a particular
modification to the
US
currency, you want blind people to be helpless and dependent,
despite the
fact that very few are helpless or dependent in this matter
today, unless
it
be by choice. Money identifiers are now $100, and my cell phone
can do it
for the huge investment of TWO BUCKS. John and I basically
agree that
electronic identifiers are not a suitable solution to the
problem, and yet
I
cannot support his baseless attacks (and incessant) incendiary
claims
against the NFB on even this issue. Despite the NFB's
involvement in
making
the currency accessible, John's blanket statement is that we
oppose doing
this on every level, and in THREE YEARS (or longer, I think) he
has yet to
accept a single person's claim to the contrary.
If you oppose chirping signals, you want blind people to die
crossing
streets. An outright lie. The NFB opposed these things because
the data
showed that they drowned out cars resulting in more blind people
at risk,
not less. Moreover, as of eight or nine years ago, the NFB has
been
actively developing a safe replacement for these squawking
monsters, and
the
documented position of the organization is that we support their
installation when they will benefit people. John's blanket
assertion is
that we oppose them universally. Our own resolutions to the
contrary are
not evidence, and nobody can prove otherwise to his
satisfaction.
If you oppose blanket mandates for descriptive video without any
consideration of what kind of descriptive video would be useful
or in what
context, then you are a monster who wants blind people to be
deprived,
uninformed, and miserable. The fact that descriptive video
doesn't
actually
exist as any kind of standard like closed captioning does and
that it's
just
shoehorned haphazardly into SAP channels, that nobody has
actually
determined what to describe or how, or that any effort to
mandate this now
can only serve to prevent a universal and standardized solution
from
emerging is irrelevant. Again we have the blanket assertion
that the NFB
opposes what is good and right, is evil for doing so, and not
one single
argument to the contrary is ever afforded even a first thought,
let alone
a
second.
I could go on, at length, but the fact remains that nobody has
ever swayed
John Heim on a single issue, ever, in the history of his
presence on this
list. We are all just illogical, unethical, and he is
brutalized and
attacked from all sides, asking Dave Andrews to sanction anyone
who
bruises
his poor, fragile ego. He can dish it out, in spades, in the
most
incendiary language possible, but he can't take his own
medicine.
And more importantly, he won't shut the hell up about any of it.
He just
continues to trash the NFB, and the good people of this list.
We have not forgotten this, and it should be clear that John is
immovable
on
pretty much anything, and that includes a fundamental belief
that the NFB
is
harmful to the blind. So then, what is he doing here? And why
is he
permitted to remain, spewing this crap day after day?
Joseph
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 08:16:28PM -0700, Gloria Whipple wrote:
Too bad that troll doesn't fall off the face of the earth!
Gloria Whipple
Corresponding Secretary
Inland Empire chapter
nfb of WA
-----Original Message-----
From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
[mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
On Behalf Of T. Joseph Carter
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2011 17:10
To: NFB Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] FW: {Disarmed} FW: A personal report from
ChairmanGordon Gund
The troll returns to one of his favorite ACB-inspired arguments
about
how evil the NFB is. I say again, go away.
Joseph
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 04:24:42PM -0500, John Heim wrote:
Yet, the NFB would have us ask for help to identify our money.
On Apr 22, 2011, at 9:21 PM, Gloria Whipple wrote:
Hi Joseph,
Well done! I like what you had to say.
My prayers go out to you and I hope you get better and I hope you
are
free from cancer soon.
All my best,
Gloria Whipple
Corresponding Secretary
Inland Empire chapter
nfb of WA
-----Original Message-----
From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfb-talk-
bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of T. Joseph Carter
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 19:01
To: NFB Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] FW: {Disarmed} FW: A personal report from
ChairmanGordon Gund
Gloria,
I think what it boils down to is that language is a powerful
thing.
The words a person uses are less important than the intent behind
them, but from a choice of certain words over others we can infer
an
intent. I have been battling cancer. This implies something
about
me and my relationship to cancer. I have been living with it,
and I
don't want to be. In fact, I am fighting to make it gone,
because
cancer is a horrible thing.
Am I fighting blindness? Do I suffer from blindness? Am I
forced to
use alternative techniques? Well yes, I do suffer as a result of
blindness. Not because of blindness itself per se, but because
of
the reaction of others to it who are not blind (and a few who
are,
sadly).
The refusal to be pigeon-holed into this "sad existence" of
"suffering because of blindness" is precisely the kind of
supposed
"unethical" behavior the NFB engages in by spreading our
philosophy.
It is akin to those during the 60s arguing against the notion
that
they were afflicted somehow with being black. Blindness is a bad
thing only if you make it be so, and we refuse to make it so for
ourselves. Moreover, we refuse to allow others to force us into
that
role.
Those who would disparage our efforts to do so are not our
friends,
just as those who would have you look down upon a man of color
because his skin was darker than, say, mine is. Is he somehow
worse
of because of that? Is he lessened as a man or as a person?
Does he
deserve something less, or for that matter anything more, than
any
other person simply because of the color of his skin? Most today
would say out of hand that he should have the same opportunities
anyone would have. No more, but certainly no less!
The blind deserve the same equality that our more
sunburn-resistant
brothers demanded more than forty years ago. In just one
generation
we have gone from a person of color being denied the use of a
drinking fountain to electing him to the United States
presidency.
If there remains racial inequality, it cannot be because of the
color
of a person's skin anymore. Some individuals may yet harbor such
attitudes (and I recently observed some of those people in a
public
display, sadly), but society rejects such people as undesirable
when
they are exposed. (And believe me, we are exposing them all over
YouTube, since the local media won't even report it.)
But what about the blind? The same society who refuses to allow
a
black man to be treated as a second class citizen openly condones
it
when a blind man is treated likewise. Disability is one of only
two
acceptable areas of discrimination that remain in this country.
(The
other is so far removed from topical for this list that I won't
discuss it here, much to Dave's relief.)
We cannot continue to meekly request that we be treated as first
class citizens. It didn't work in the 1940s, and it hasn't
worked
yet. Only by refusing to be anything less will we finally
achieve
that. Unfortunately, that means getting a bit uppity over
language
that paints us into a corner, as it were. I'm not here to be
pitied
or someone's inspiration. I'm here because I've got a job to do,
and
within the National Federation of the Blind, that job is to
achieve
for myself and for all of us the basic rights of first class
citizenship afforded to anyone else in this country today,
regardless
of their skin color, sexual orientation, and a whole host of
other
things.
I don't expect any more, but I also won't accept any less.
Joseph
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 09:33:15AM -0700, Gloria Whipple wrote:
James,
Thanks for explaining what I wanted to say about this subject.
I am glad someone is on my side!
Gloria Whipple
Corresponding Secretary
Inland Empire chapter
nfb of WA
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/ladyglo
ria%
40web
ba
nd.com
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/john%40
johnhei
m
.
net
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/carter.
tjose
ph%40
gmail.com
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/ladyglo
ria%40
webba
nd.com
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/carter.
tjosep
h%40gmail.com
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
info for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/k7uij%4
0panix.com
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
info for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/john%40
johnheim.ne
t
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/william
ritchhart%
40sbcglobal.net
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
for nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/lisakid
%40peoplepc.com
More information about the nFB-Talk
mailing list