[nFBMI-Talk] [nfb-indiana] In Light Of New Discussion Over NAC 2018

[Kane Brolin]

Hi to Sarah and Diane, and thanks for your stimulating responses to
those whole line of discussion about NAC as it relates to NFB policy,
practice, and history.

I hope you don't mind; but I think this discussion is important enough
that I'm copying the Michigan List and the Employment Committee list
on what you've said.  These are good points.

On 1/8/18, sarah at sarahblakelarose.com [nfb-indiana]
<nfb-indiana at yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> This is just my opinion, but I am a blind person and I think that holds a
> bit of weight. :) There are many people who are blind who are working in the
> blindness profession. I think that it would do them a disservice if we take
> an adversarial stance today without paying attention to the fact that many
> of them are themselves the ones doing some of this research. If we dislike
> what is being done today, we may need to come to terms with the fact that
> blind people ourselves do not all do things in the same way and it is time
> to learn how to live with our diversity.

>  On 1/9/18, 'Graves, Diane' dgraves at icrc.IN.gov [nfb-indiana] <nfb-indiana at yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> Hi Sarah and All,
>
>  ...  I think we need to be careful about an adversarial
> approach [to AER and the new NAC] at the outset.
>
>  ...  One of the things that I have discovered, just in my conversations with
> other blind people, is that our sometimes adversarial approach [in the NFB], tends to
> alienate us from other blind people.

Sarah and Diane, as you know, I am fairly new to playing an active
role in the organized blind movement.  So in a perfect world, I don't
find fault with what you say, because for many years I felt turned off
by what I saw as an overly adversarial approach by some folks in the
Federation whom I had met.  It can be a turn-off, particularly in
situations where a young and fired-up Federationist who doesn't know
how to show discretion will beat sighted acquaintances over the head
with Federation philosophy, even when said sighted persons have no
interest in blindness-related issues.  Yes, I've heard this happen
first-hand, especially in my college days.

Yet we don't live in a perfect world.  Civil rights can and do go
backwards unless we vigilantly protect them.   I would say that while
different blind people can and should have the right to handle a
situation differently from one another, we in the Federation need to
be very staunch about protecting informed choice for the blind.  This
means we must insist that blind people have a right to compete on
equal terms for paid employment with blindness-oriented rehabilitation
agencies and educational institutions, and we also must be invited to
play a significant role--maybe even an executive role--as programs and
agencies for the blind are administered.  The point is not that every
blind person must be required to use Braille throughout daily life on
pain of facing harsh judgment from his or her peers in the Federation.
Braille is a personal choice.  So is the white cane or the dog guide.
The point is not that every person with some residual eyesight must
use learning shades and total blindness skills 24×7 after graduating
from BLIND, Inc. or CCB or LCB.  But we must have access to structured
discovery, Braille, and other tools and skills that have been
developed and that are being used with success by blind consumers so
we can have the opportunity to benefit from them if we want to.  In
the event NAC or something like the old NAC, which excludes the blind
consumer and blind researcher, ever takes hold again and comes to
occupy a dominant position in rehabilitation and training facilities
and blind schools across the country, then we blind consumers are in
trouble.   I don't think Mr. Riccobono necessarily is insisting that
the NFB play a dominant position in all these situations, but he is
insisting that the Federation have a prominent seat at the table.
This is the right thing to insist on, since so many newly blind
persons and so many parents of blind children have no idea what to ask
for.  We in the Federation must step up and use our collective voice
and our legal muscle to demand things that individuals cannot
successfully get across just on their own behalf.
>
>  ...  We’ve come a long way since the 60s/70s. Let’s keep it moving forward.

Maybe those of us who've  lived through the '60s, '70s, and '80s, are
in a better position now than we were beforehand.  But it wouldn't
take long to reverse course, and our children and grandchildren will
not remember those prior struggles unless we remind them and keep
organized behind the same principles which have gotten us into that
better place.

-Kane