[nfbmi-talk] Here is something from Federation Literature that youmay wish to read.

[Jim in Detroit]

WoW!!!!!  That's all I can say.  of Course the two agencies are HHS (Health 
and Human Services) and Dept. of Education.

-----Original Message----- 
From: trising
Sent: March 05, 2013 01:08
To: nfbmi List
Subject: [nfbmi-talk] Here is something from Federation Literature that 
youmay wish to read.

Here is something from Federation Literature that you may wish to read.




To Man the Barricades
Some of you may remember the story Will Rogers liked to tell about his early 
career as a comedian in vaudeville. "I used to play a song called 'Casey 
Jones' on the harmonica with one hand," he said, "and spin a rope with the 
other, and then whine into the old empty rain barrel ... and then in between 
the verses I used to tell jokes about the Senate of the United States. If I 
needed any new jokes that night, I used to just get the late afternoon 
papers and read what Congress had done that day, and the audience would die 
laughing."

This story reminds me of my own activities over the past twenty years. I 
have gone all over the country as the guest of blind groups and civic 
associations; and, like Will Rogers, I tell stories about the Government of 
the United States-particularly the Department of Health, Education, and 
Welfare, and the other "professionals" doing work with the blind. And when I 
need any new jokes, I just get the latest reports from the agencies and 
foundations and read what they have been doing recently-and the audience 
dies laughing. Unless, of course, there are people in the audience who are 
blind, or friends of the blind-and they die crying.

Which is a roundabout way of saying that much of what goes on in the 
journals and laboratories and workshops of the agencies for the blind these 
days is a cruel joke. It is a mockery of social science and a travesty on 
social service. Far from advancing the welfare and well-being of blind 
people, it sets our cause back and does us harm.

The blind, along with some other groups in our society, have become the 
victims of a malady known as "R and D"-that is, Research and Demonstration. 
The R and D projects are largely financed by the Federal Department of 
Health, Education, and Welfare and account for an ever-increasing chunk of 
its budget. The whole tone and direction of programs for the blind in the 
country-rehabilitation, education, social services, and the rest-have been 
altered as a result. The art of writing grant applications, the tens of 
millions of dollars available to fund the approved R and D projects, the 
resulting build-up of staff in universities and agencies for the blind, the 
need to produce some sort of seemingly scientific results in the form of 
books and pamphlets to justify the staff salaries and the field trips and 
conferences, and the wish for so-called "professional" status have all had 
their effect. Blind people have become the objects of research and the 
subjects of demonstration. They are quizzed, queried, and quantified; they 
are diagnosed, defined, and dissected; and when the R and D people get 
through with them, there is nothing left at all-at any rate, nothing of 
dignity or rationality or responsibility. Despite all of their talk about 
improving the quality of services to blind people (and there is a lot of 
such talk these days), the research and demonstration people see the blind 
as inferiors. They see us as infantile, dependent wards. The signs of this 
creeping condescension-of this misapplied science, this false notion of what 
blind people are, and of what blindness means-are all about us. Some things 
are big, and some are little; but the pattern is conclusive and the trend 
unmistakable.

Consider, for instance, what has happened to the talking book. From the very 
beginning of the library service back in the 1930's, the first side of each 
talking-book record has concluded with these words: "This book is continued 
on the other side of this record." The flip side has always ended with: 
"This book is continued on the next record." Surely no one can have any 
serious quarrel with this language. It serves a purpose. The reader, 
absorbed in the narrative, may well not remember whether he is on the first 
or second side of a record, and the reminder is useful and saves time.

In the last three or four years, however, something new has been added. 
After the familiar "This book is continued on the next record," the 
statement now appears: "Please replace this record in its envelope and 
container." That one, I must confess, crept up on me gradually. Although 
from the very beginning I found the statement annoying, it took some time 
for its full significance to hit me.

Here I was, let us say, reading a learned treatise on French history-a book 
on Gallic statesmanship-one which presupposes a certain amount of 
understanding and mental competence. The narrative is interrupted by a voice 
saying "Please replace this record in its envelope and container." Then it 
strikes me: These are the words one addresses to a moron or a lazy lout. 
These words do not appear on records intended for the use of sighted library 
borrowers. They are intended for the blind. To be sure, they are not an 
overwhelming or unbearable insult. They are only one more small evidence of 
the new custodialism, the additional input of contempt for the blind 
recipient of services which is in the air these days.

I have heard that the words were added at the request of some of the 
regional librarians because certain blind borrowers were careless with the 
records. Are sighted people never careless with books or records? Are such 
words at the end of the record really likely to make the slob less slobby? 
The ordinary, normal human being (blind or sighted) will, as a matter of 
course, put the record back into the envelope and container. What else, one 
wonders, would he do with it?

Regardless of all this, one thing is fairly certain: My remarks on the 
subject will undoubtedly bring forth angry comments from library officials 
and others that I am quibbling and grasping at straws, that I am reading 
meanings that aren't there into innocent words. To which I reply: I am sure 
that no harm was meant and that the author of the words did not sit down to 
reason out their significance, but all of this is beside the point. We have 
reasoned out the significance, and we are no longer willing for our road to 
hell to be paved with other people's good intentions, their failure to 
comprehend, or their insistence that we not quibble.

Here is another illustration-again, a slight and almost trivial affair. I 
had occasion recently to visit a public school where there was a resource 
class for blind and partially seeing children. The teacher moved about with 
me among the students. "This little girl can read print," she said. "This 
little girl has to read Braille." Now, that language is not oppressively 
bad. Its prejudice is a subtle thing. But just imagine, if you will, a 
teacher saying of a pair of children: "This little girl can read Braille; 
this little girl has to read print." The supposition is that the child 
possessing some sight, no matter how little, is closer to being a normal and 
full-fledged human being; the one without sight can't cut it and has to make 
do with inferior substitutes.

Confront that teacher with her words, and she will be hurt. She will say, 
"But that is not how I meant it. It was simply the way I said it." It is 
true that she was not consciously aware of the significance of her statement 
and that she did not mean to say what she said; but she said exactly what 
she meant, and how she felt. And her students, as well as visitors to her 
classroom, will be conditioned accordingly. I don't wish to make too much of 
the teacher's terminology, or the words on the talking-book record. Neither 
exemplifies any great cruelty or tragedy. They are, however, straws in the 
wind; and either of them could be the final straw-the straw that breaks the 
blind man's back, or spirit. Far too many backs and spirits have been broken 
in that way, and the breaking must stop.

As I have said, some of the recent incidents in our field are small, and 
some are big; but they fit together to make a pattern, and the pattern is 
conclusive. During the past decade, for instance, the vocational employment 
objective of rehabilitation has steadily receded before the advancing tide 
of "social services" and "research and development," and the Division for 
the Blind in the Federal Rehabilitation Service has diminished accordingly 
in prominence and importance. By 1967 rehabilitation had taken such a back 
seat that it became submerged in a comprehensive pot of Mulligan stew set up 
by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare called "Social and 
Rehabilitation Service," with the emphasis clearly on the "social." A new 
public-information brochure turned out by HEW, listing all the department's 
branches and programs, placed rehabilitation-where do you suppose?-dead 
last.

As far as the blind were concerned, the ultimate blow fell late last year. 
Federal Register document 70-17447, dated December 28, 1970, announced the 
abolition of the Division for the Blind altogether, and its inclusion in the 
new Division of Special Populations! And who are these "special 
populations"? They include, and I quote, "alcoholics, drug addicts, 
arthritics, epileptics, the blind, heart, cancer, and stroke victims, those 
suffering communication disorders, et cetera." (I leave the specifics of the 
"et cetera: to your imagination.) Therefore, half a century after the 
establishment of the Federal vocational rehabilitation program, and almost 
as long after the development of a special division of services for the 
blind (and still longer since the creation of separate agencies or 
commissions for the blind in most of the States) the blind of America were 
to lose their identity and return to the almshouse for the sick and 
indigent.

This was too much, and every major national organization and agency (both of 
and for the blind) combined to resist it. By February of 1971 the HEW 
officials had made a strategic withdrawal. They announced that they had 
never intended to downgrade or de-emphasize services to the blind; but that 
in order to clear up any possible misunderstanding they were establishing a 
new "Office for the Blind," to be on a par with the "Division of Special 
Populations," and in no way connected with it. Thus (for the moment) the 
tide was reversed and the power of united action demonstrated; but the tide 
is still the tide, and the trend is still the trend.

It is not difficult to find the evidence. For example, under date of 
February 4, 1971, the Federal Rehabilitation Services Administration issued 
an information memorandum entitled "Subminimum Wage Certificates for 
Handicapped Workers." The document is self-explanatory; it is damning; and 
it is all too indicative of what is happening to the blind in America today. 
"A recent revision to the wage and hour regulations," the memorandum begins, 
"broadens State vocational rehabilitation agencies' certification 
responsibility with respect to employment of handicapped workers at 
subminimum wages. The responsibility was previously limited by regulation to 
certain categories of handicapped persons employed by sheltered workshops.

"The revision to the wage and hour regulations, effective February 4, 1971," 
the memorandum continues, "authorizes State rehabilitation agencies to 
certify certain disabled persons for work in competitive employment at less 
than fifty percent of the statutory minimum wage but not less than 
twenty-five percent."

So said HEW in February of this year! No longer must the pay be even fifty 
percent of the minimum wage! No longer is it limited to the sheltered shop! 
It may now be extended to private industry, to so-called "competitive" 
employment! And this, we are told, is rehabilitation. We are not to quibble. 
We are not to read meanings into things which are not there. We are not to 
find patterns or trends or hidden significance. No! We are to take our 
twenty-five percent "competitive" employment, and be grateful for it. That 
is what we are expected to do, but I doubt that we will do it.

I have already spoken about R and D-the so-called "research and 
demonstration"-financed ever more heavily and lovingly by the Department of 
Health, Education, and Welfare. I have at hand a typical product of "R and 
D"-a comprehensive 239-page publication of the American Foundation for the 
Blind, entitled A Step-by-Step Guide to Personal Management for Blind 
Persons.1 I invite you now to accompany me on a step-by-step guided tour 
through its pages and mazes. But let me warn you: It may be a bad trip.

"One of the areas," we are told at the outset of this guidebook, "where 
independence is valued most highly by a broad spectrum of blind persons ... 
is personal management." I myself would put that a little differently. I 
would say that the blind person should, and commonly does, take for granted 
that independence begins at home-that self-care comes before 
self-support-but that what he values most highly in life is not his ability 
to master the simple rituals of daily living, such as are detailed in this 
manual. It is not his ability to wash his face, take a shower, clean his 
nails, brush his hair, sit down on a chair, rise from a chair, stand 
upright, wash his socks, light a cigarette, shake hands, nod his head "yes," 
shake his head "no," and so on and so on through two hundred-plus pages of 
instruction. No, these are not the supreme attainments and values in the 
life of the blind person, or of any other civilized person. They are merely 
the elementary motor and mechanical skills which represent the foundation on 
which more meaningful and significant achievements rest. The skills of 
personal management are rudimentary, not remarkable.

However, the American Foundation's Guide to Personal Management for Blind 
Persons does not put the matter in such modest perspective. Rather, it is 
blown up to majestic proportions, as if it were not the beginning but the 
end of self-realization and independence. Most of all, it is presented as a 
very difficult and complicated subject-this business of grooming and 
shaving, bathing and dressing-virtually as the source of a new science. Much 
is made of the "need for an organized body of realistic and practical 
personal management techniques." The American Foundation, out of a deep 
sense of professional obligation and the excitement of pioneering on new 
scientific horizons, agreed as long ago as 1965 (in its own words) "to 
undertake the responsibility for developing, over a period of years, 
workable personal management techniques for blind persons." To begin with, 
an AFB staff specialist was assigned to coordinate the project, and he 
proceeded immediately to carry out a massive survey of agencies throughout 
this country and Canada-on such life-and-death questions and critical issues 
as how to teach blind persons to shake hands correctly and put the right 
sock on the right foot.

But surveys at a distance, no matter how thorough and scientific, were not 
good enough for such profound subject matter. No. What was needed was (to 
quote the report) "the pooled thinking and experience of a fairly large 
number of persons from diverse backgrounds and programs." In short, what was 
needed was a conference, or better yet, a series of conferences-in big 
hotels in major cities, complete with workshops, round-tables, lunches, 
dinners, social hours, and sensitivity sessions. In the words of the report: 
"For three years, 1967, 1968, and 1969, national meetings were held in New 
York, Chicago, and New Orleans at which key personnel from representative 
agencies met both to develop techniques and methods and to refine and 
improve already existing ones."

Here, to illustrate, is a typical technique-developed and refined over the 
years in New York, Chicago, and New Orleans, representing the distilled 
wisdom (if that is the proper expression) of key personnel from diverse 
backgrounds and specialized programs. Here, under the broad classification 
"Bathing," is the sixteen-step procedure for the "Sponge Bath." I quote in 
full:

Orientation: Discuss how equipment can be most efficiently used when taking 
a sponge bath.

Equipment: Water, two containers, soap, cloth, towel, bath mat.

Technique:

1. Disrobe.

2. Put water of desired temperature in sink or container.

3. Thoroughly wet washcloth and gently squeeze cloth together.

4. Take one corner in right hand, the other in left hand, bring corners 
together and grasp in whole hand.

5. With other hand grasp remaining cloth. Hold washcloth in closed fist.

6. Hold one hand stationary while turning other hand to squeeze excess 
water.

7. Unfold cloth and drape over palm of one hand. With other hand pick up 
soap and dip into water, then rub back and forth from wrist to tips of 
fingers on cloth.

8. Place soap back in dish.

9. Place soaped cloth in dominant hand.

10. Starting with face and neck, rub soaped cloth over skin portion.

11. Place soaped cloth in water and wring as described above several times 
until soap has been removed.

12. Use same motion as step 10 to rinse soap from face and neck.

13. Unfold towel. Using either or both hands, dry using a vigorous rubbing 
motion.

14. Continue to each section of body-washing, rinsing, and drying.

15. As towel gets damp, shift to a dry section.

16. For drying back, put bath towel over right shoulder, grasp lower end 
hanging in back with left hand and grasp end hanging in front with right 
hand. While holding towel pull up and down alternately changing position of 
towel until entire area of back is dry.

Immediately following this highly developed and refined technique-the 
product of five years of national conferences and international surveys-is 
the step-by-step guide to taking a "tub bath." I feel that you will want to 
know that this affair of the tub represents a more advanced and elaborate 
enterprise in personal management. The greater complexity is evident at the 
outset. You will recall that the first step in the sponge bath technique 
was:

"Disrobe." But the first step in the tub bath exercise is: "Disrobe and 
place clothing where it will not get wet." That is, of course, a substantial 
increase in subtlety over the sponge bath.

Let us pause here for a moment and contemplate the significance of that 
instruction:

"Disrobe and place clothing where it will not get wet." What does it tell us 
about the intelligence-the presumed intelligence-of the blind person under 
instruction? It tells us that he has not the sense to come in out of the 
rain; or, more exactly, that he has not the sense to bring his clothes in 
out of the shower. He is presumed to be either a mental case or a recent 
immigrant from the jungle, who has never taken a bath before. This latter 
possibility is given additional credence by instruction number fifteen: "As 
towel gets damp, shift to a dry section." If the trainee has ever bathed 
before, he will know about that. Only if he is a babbling idiot or Bomba, 
the Jungle Boy, does he need to be given that extraordinary advice. This 
presumption of incompetence or newborn innocence on the part of the blind 
person is, indeed, pervasive of the entire 239-page guidebook.

What else can it mean to say, with regard to the technique for shaking 
hands: "If desired, the hands may be moved in an up and down motion?" What 
else can it mean to say, with regard to the technique for nodding the head: 
"The head is held facing the person to whom you wish to communicate ... With 
the head held in this position, move the chin down towards the floor about 
two inches then raise it again to the original position. Make this movement 
twice in quick succession."

One last quotation, before we leave this magisterial work of applied 
domestic science. Under the general heading of "Hand Gestures," we find, the 
technique for "Applauding." It goes like this:

a. With elbows close to the body, raise both hands until the forearms are 
approximately parallel to the floor.

b. Move each hand towards the other so that they come in contact with one 
another towards the center of the body.

c. The thumb of both hands is held slightly apart from the other four 
fingers which are held straight and close together.

d. The fingers of the right hand point slightly toward the ceiling and the 
fingers of the left hand slightly toward the floor so that when the hands 
come in contact with each other the palms touch but the fingers do not.

e. The thumb of the right hand rests on the knuckle of the left thumb, the 
fingers of the right hand being above the fingers of the left hand.

f. The hands are brought back to a position about eight to twelve inches 
apart then brought together in a quick slapping motion.

g. Polite applause would require slapping the hands together about twice 
each second. More feeling would be expressed by the rapidity, rather than 
the volume or loudness of the individual's applause.

2. Hands Inactive: When the hands are not being used for some specific 
purpose, the most common position is resting the hands in the lap. For 
example, the back of the left hand might rest on the left or right leg, or 
in between, with the palm turned up; the right hand with the palm turned 
down over the left hand and the fingers of each hand slightly curled around 
each other.

I cannot leave this great book and its truly vital subject without reading 
to you the "Foreward" as written by Mr. M. Robert Barnett, executive 
director of the American Foundation for the Blind: "We would like to take 
this opportunity," he writes, "to express our appreciation to the many 
persons professionally involved in work for the blind across the country 
whose five years of hard work, creativity, and experience have made A 
Step-by-Step Guide to Personal Management for Blind Persons a reality. For 
many years, countless persons have expressed a need for such a manual and we 
hope that this publication will help to fill that need."

I would like to know who those "countless persons" are who have expressed a 
need for such a manual, wouldn't you? Are they blind persons-and if so have 
they been waiting all these years without being able to test the water, clap 
the hands, lift the bale, tote the barge, nod, shake, shimmy, rattle and 
roll? How have they managed their lives all these years without this 
personal guide from the American Foundation and its cohorts?

But maybe they are not the ones who have expressed a need for such a manual. 
Perhaps it is not the blind at all but-as the Foundation puts it-those 
"professionally involved in work for the blind" to whom this definitive 
guidebook is addressed. Not our blind brothers, but our blind brothers' 
keepers. Presumably they are the ones who are to conduct the "orientation" 
sessions which precede each of the various procedures and techniques-such 
as:

"Discuss types of ties and materials from which ties are made (silk, linen, 
leather, knit, synthetic, and wool)." And: "Discuss reasons for brushing 
hair regularly and the suitability of different types of brushes" (scrub 
brushes, toothbrushes, horse brushes, sagebrushes, brushes with the law, 
etcetera). Well, admittedly, I added the last part of that sentence myself; 
but I maintain that it is no different in character, and no more foolish, 
than the trivial and vacuous material set forth in most of the 239 pages.

Indeed, the very triviality and vacuity of this misguided guidebook may 
deceive some readers into dismissing it as an unfortunate exception, not 
characteristic of the main body of work turned out today by serious scholars 
and professionals in the field of work with the blind. Let me emphasize, 
therefore, as strongly as I can, the typical and conventional character of 
this manual. It is not the exception. Its name is legion; its approach, its 
philosophy, and its superficial contents have been duplicated many times 
over in the research and demonstration projects of the American Foundation 
for the Blind, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, the college 
institutes, and the State agencies caught up in the profitable cycle of 
grants, surveys, tests, and questionnaires.

There is another potential objection to dispose of. That is the supposition 
that this set of instructions, simple-minded as it is, is not really 
intended for the ordinary, capable blind person but only for a minority. 
Moreover, it is true that the book itself makes a verbal nod in this 
direction, admitting modestly that its techniques are not the only ones 
possible and that there may be other ways to approach the same goals. But 
the book also contains an opposite disclaimer, to the effect that the 
proposed techniques may be too complicated and advanced for some blind 
persons to handle without preliminary instruction. However that may be, it 
is clear that this lengthy five-year report is meant to be circulated 
generally to agencies and schools, to parents and counselors, to guides and 
custodians, without reservation or qualification.

The best evidence of how this book is intended to be read is to be found in 
its title. It does not say that it is a step-by-step guide to personal 
management for mentally retarded or extremely backward blind persons. It 
does not say it is a guide for tiny children. It says what it means, and 
means what it says- namely, that it is A Step-by-Step Guide to Personal 
Management for Blind Persons.

And we can do no less than that ourselves; we must also say what we mean. As 
long as such insulting drivel about us continues to be issued in the name of 
science by agencies doing work with the blind-as long as Federal money 
continues to be available to support it-as long as the climate of general 
public opinion continues to tolerate it-as long as blind persons continue to 
be found who can be coaxed or hoodwinked into participating in it-then, for 
just so long must we of the National Federation of the Blind raise our 
voices to resist it, denounce it, and expose it for the pseudoscience and 
the fraud which it is.

The Federal research and demonstration projects, the wording on the 
talking-book records, the attempt to abolish the Division for the Blind in 
Federal rehabilitation, the payment of subminimum wages in sheltered shops 
and private industry, and the guidebooks to tell us how to run our daily 
lives are all straws in the wind, signs of the times. But there are other, 
more hopeful signs. Though the Library of Congress tells us to replace our 
records in the envelopes and containers, its book selection policies have 
been refreshingly updated. More and better books are now available to the 
blind than ever before, including best-sellers and popular magazines. 
Likewise, though the Division for the Blind was abolished at the Federal 
level, the move was successfully resisted and reversed. And although 
teachers still talk of blind people who have to read Braille and can't read 
print, although subminimum wages are still allowed in sheltered shops and 
private industry, and although the Foundation's guidebook is still 
distributed by the hundreds and thousands to slow our progress, we (the 
organized blind) are abroad in the land in growing numbers-aware of the 
peril and prepared to fight it. It is just that simple: We are prepared to 
fight, and we will fight. We don't want conflict or trouble with anyone; we 
don't want to quibble or be aggressive or militant; we don't want strife or 
dissension; but the time is absolutely at an end when we will passively 
tolerate second-class citizenship and custodial treatment. We are free men, 
and we intend to act like it. We are free men, and we intend to stay that 
way. We are free men, and we intend to defend ourselves. Let those who truly 
have the best interests of the blind at heart join with us as we move into 
the new era of equality and integration. Let those who call our conduct 
negative or destructive make the most of it!

I want to say a few words now to those agencies doing work with the blind 
who march with us in the cause of freedom, who are glad to see the blind 
emancipated, and who work with us as human beings-not as statistics or case 
histories or inferior wards. To such agencies I say this: You have nothing 
to fear from the organized blind movement. Your battles are our battles. 
Your cause is our cause. Your friends are our friends. Your enemies are our 
enemies. We will go with you to the legislatures and the Federal Government 
to secure funds for your operation. We will urge the public to contribute to 
your support. We will defend you from attack and work with you in a 
partnership of progress.

Now, let me say something to those agencies who still look back to 
yesterday, who condescend to the blind, who custodialize and patronize. To 
them I say this: Your days are numbered. Once men have tasted freedom, they 
will not willingly or easily return to bondage. You have told us as blind 
people and you have told the community at large that we are not capable of 
managing our own affairs, that you are responsible for our lives and our 
destinies, that we as blind people must be sheltered and segregated-and that 
even then, we are not capable of earning our own keep. You have told us that 
we as blind people do not really have anything in common and that we, 
therefore do not need an organization-that there is no such thing as an 
"organized blind movement." But you have not spoken the truth.

If you tell us that you are important and necessary to our lives, we reply: 
It is true. But tear down every agency for the blind in the Nation, destroy 
every workshop, and burn every professional journal; and we can build them 
all back if they are needed. But take away the blind, and your journals will 
go dusty on the shelves. Your counselors will walk the streets for work, and 
your broom corn will mold and rot in your sheltered shops. Yes, we need you; 
but you need us, too. We intend to have a voice in your operation and your 
decisions since what you do affects our lives. We intend to have 
representation on your boards, and we intend for you to recognize our 
organizations and treat us as equals. We are not your wards, and there is no 
way for you to make us your wards. The only question left to be settled is 
whether you will accept the new conditions and work with us in peace and 
partnership or whether we must drag you kicking and screaming into the new 
era. But enter the new era you will, like it or not.

Next, I want to say something to those blind persons who are aware of our 
movement and who have had an opportunity to join it but who have not seen 
fit to do so. In this category I also place those blind persons who are 
among us but not really of us, who (technically speaking) hold membership in 
the Federation but are not really part of the movement. The non-Federation 
and the noncommitted blind are a strange phenomenon. Some of them are 
successful in business or the professions. I have heard them say, "I really 
don't need the Federation. Of course, if I could do anything to help you 
people, I would be glad to do it, but I am independent. I have made it on my 
own." I have heard them say:

"You really can't expect me to go down to that local meeting of the blind. 
Nobody goes there except a few old people, who sit around and drink coffee 
and plan Christmas parties. I am a successful lawyer, or businessman, or 
judge; and I am busy. Besides, they never get anything done. They just talk 
and argue." I have heard them say: "I don't know that I necessarily have 
anything in common with other blind people just because I'm blind. Almost 
all my friends are sighted. My life is busy with bowling, hiking, reading, 
or my business or profession." I have heard them say: "You people in the 
Federation are too aggressive. You are always in a fight with somebody, or 
bickering among yourselves. I am an individualist and never was much of a 
joiner."

I have heard some of them say: "I am an employee of a governmental or 
private agency doing work with the blind, and I think it would destroy my 
professional relationship with my clients if I were to work actively in the 
Federation. Anyway, we all have a common concern, the betterment of blind 
people; so I'll make my contribution by working as a 'professional' in the 
field. Besides, not all blind people agree with you or want to join your 
organization, and as a 'professional' I have to represent and work with all 
blind people."

I have heard them say all of these things, and to such blind persons I say 
this: You are patsies! Not only that but you are also deceiving yourselves 
and failing to act in your own best interest. Further, you are profiting 
from the labor and sacrifice, and are riding on the backs, of the blind who 
have joined the movement and worked to make it possible for you to have what 
you have. Some of you feel superior to many of the blind who belong to the 
Federation (especially those who work in the sheltered shops or draw 
welfare), but your feelings of superiority are misplaced; for collectively 
these people have clothed you and fed you. They have made it possible for 
you to have such equality in society and such opportunity as you now enjoy. 
Resent what I say if you will, but it is the truth, whether you like it or 
not and whether you admit it or not. It is true for those of you who work in 
the agencies as well as for those of you who work in private endeavor.

If you think this movement should be better or that it should be of higher 
caliber, then join us and help make it that way. If you think the local 
meetings or the State conventions are dull or uninspiring, then do your part 
to make them different. Even animals in the jungle have sense enough to hunt 
in packs. The blind ought to be at least as intelligent.

We need you, and we want you as active participants in the movement; but 
until you will join, we must do the best we can without you. We must carry 
you on our backs and do your work for you, and we will do it. The fact that 
we say you are patsies does not mean that we resent you. Far from it. You 
are our brothers, and we will continue to look upon you as such, regardless 
of how irresponsibly you behave. We are trying to get you to think about the 
implications of your actions. We are trying to get you to join with us to 
help make things better for other blind people and for yourselves. We are 
trying to get you to stop being patsies.

Finally, I want to address myself to the active members of the NFB-to the 
blind, and to our sighted brothers who have made our cause their cause. To 
the active Federationists I say this: We are not helpless, and we are not 
children. We know our problems, and we know how to solve them. The challenge 
which faces us is clear, and the means of meeting that challenge are equally 
clear. If we fail in courage or nerve or dedication, we have only ourselves 
to blame.

But, of course, we will not fail. The stakes are too high and the need too 
great to permit it. To paraphrase the Biblical statement: Upon the rock of 
Federationism we have built our movement, and the gates of hell shall not 
prevail against it! Since 1969 we have talked a great deal about joining 
each other on the barricades. If there was ever a time, that time is now. 
What we in the Federation do during the next decade may well determine the 
fate of the blind for a hundred years to come. To win through to success 
will require all that we have in the way of purpose, dedication, loyalty, 
good sense, and guts. Above all, we need front-line soldiers, who are 
willing to make sacrifices and work for the cause. Therefore, I ask you 
again today (as I did last year and the year before): Will you join me on 
the barricades?

FOOTNOTE
1. American Foundation for the Blind, A Step-by-Step Guide to Personal 
Management for Blind Persons, New York, New York, 1970.

Back to top


_______________________________________________
nfbmi-talk mailing list
nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
nfbmi-talk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/james.prather%40comcast.net



Jim in Detroit
James A. Prather
Central Michigan University: 1980
Michigan School for the Blind: 1974
"Fire Up Chips"
"Ungh, ungowa, Raiders still Got the Power!"