5 ms·

except they weren't really "support systems" i mean they were, if you got lucky. If you were neurotypical; if you bought in to the local religious sect's part

except they weren't really "support systems" i mean they were, if you got lucky. If you were neurotypical; if you bought in to the local religious sect's particular flavour and embraced it wholeheartedly; if you followed the other local cults of sports fandoms; if you were lucky enough to either have family without their own trauma that didn't take it out on you OR decided to repress it in exactly the same way that they did and just simply passed it forward or didn't talk about it. i don't know what the ratios are but a LOT of people fell through the cracks. it's just that the birth rate was high enough to continue the population growth, and there were socially acceptable ways to ignore the inconvenient problems (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosemary_Kennedy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosemary_Kennedy) it's why there's now suddenly an influx of ADHD and Autism diagnosis - because in the past anyone outside of the norm who wasn't lucky to do one of the things above was simply ignored, beaten, or died. now the stigma is gone and we're finding EXPLICIT paths to treatment, tolerance, and embracement of mental health, neuroatypical brains, spectrums, etc. Is there overpathologizing? Maybe? Hard to know! The stigmas still aren't gone. Go read the comments on any video providing tips on how to parent children on the spectrum and see neurotypicals freaking out about how soft the current generation is. the western world seems to have peaked in tolerance in the 2010s, and is now backsliding into authoritarianism and fascism. that's trying to recreate a lot of those original support systems (by destroying the new ones). It's a bold plan, let's see how it happens.

EMIRELADERO 1y ago
I agree with everything you said except for the last paragraph. The people who, according to your theory, want to reverse the tolerance trend and slide towards fascism/authoritarianism didn't pop out today. They existed and lived in society in the 2010s too. So, from a logical standpoint, what changed?
- chairmansteve 1y ago
  > what changed? The algorithms are promoting those views?
- BriggyDwiggs42 1y ago
  The parent comment didn’t even pose a theory as to why. People can change beliefs over time. Weimar Germany had less Nazis in it than Nazi Germany, which would be equally confusing under your framing.
- intended 1y ago
  Nothing changed - mostly it seems the American condition is a side effect of dedicated partisanship and asymmetric political behavior since the 1970s. The media apparatus in America has split into a center and left, and then a right wing which has different norms and produces its own products. That in turn has created a durable political coalition that self referentially calls itself when it needs to support its descriptions on reality. It’s significantly more effective at producing narratives, and moving ideas from the fringes to the main stream news channels. Since it has little traffic with the left and center media channels, it avoids counter claims and norms on journalistic standards. So you can now primary Bipartisan politicians, and then the ideas that gain media attention are the ones that reinforces party talking points. Counter views simply do not get air time. What we are seeing today, is the progression of those forces, as the narratives are never challenged.
- thrance 1y ago
  Material conditions degrading further with no end in sight, a massive influx of money towards right-wing populists appealing to a frustrated middle class, etc. Same story as always. How can a country slide into authoritarianism? It seems impossible until it happens, and by then we can hardly tell we're there.
MichaelZuo 1y ago
Isn’t the first half a tautology? By definition roughly half the population in any society must belong to a below average family and/or below average communities. And it seems pretty likely that those with below average capacities at handling, processing, reflecting, etc., on these issues would be concentrated there.
WorkerBee28474 1y ago
> it's why there's now suddenly an influx of ADHD and Autism diagnosis - because in the past anyone outside of the norm who wasn't lucky to do one of the things above was simply ignored, beaten, or died. I think you're understating how well those people were incorporated into society. My grandfather was born in the 20s and was described as quite "high strung", was amazing with technology, would repair anything, and even used to build his own farm machinery. These days he'd definitely be called severely anxious, and probably labelled as being on the spectrum. Yet he was part of a community, farmed his whole life, and built a family. People knew his quirks and compensated for them.
- Tijdreiziger 1y ago
  Sorry, but are you arguing that autistic folks can’t be part of a community, farm, or build a family?
  - geerlingguy 1y ago
    I saw it as arguing that people with autism, ADHD, etc wouldn't be ignored, beaten, or killed, as seemed to be the argument in the parent comment?
    - Mtinie 1y ago
      One anecdotal observation does not fully tell the story.
    - Tijdreiziger 1y ago
      Ah, I see. I think the ‘label’ (ugh – what a terribly awful way to describe a diagnosis) and the beatings are orthogonal, though. In my parents’ time in a (then) Dutch colony, nobody was diagnosed with anything (that was only for crazies), but all the men knew how being hit with a belt felt (daughters were spared, from what I’ve been told). Self-medicating with alcohol and beating your kids if they ‘misbehaved’ was just the done thing, as far as I’ve been told. This is to say that anyone who showed (what we would now identify as) neurodivergent behaviour probably would’ve been beaten, but this then wouldn’t have precluded them from going on to start a family and business (and maybe beat their own kids). Actually, this is probably still how it works in many parts of the world. Even here in the Netherlands, beating your children was only outlawed as recently as 2007.
typewithrhythm 1y ago
There is substantially more going on than "tolerance vs intolerance". We have a huge influx not just because of changing diagnosis standards, but also because the financial benefit for getting a diagnosis has also expanded. The views of people you are trying to label as fascist are more accurately described as individualism vs welfare state.
- wredcoll 1y ago
  Ahh.. indiviualism, is that the one where you shouldn't have to help anyone else as long as things are going fine for yourself?
  - mapontosevenths 1y ago
    Ayn Rand has a lot of friends here. She also described the neurodivergent as "subnormal" and thought that society should do nothing to help them or the handicapped. Additionally, she believed that "normal" children shouldn't have to ever interact with those who were mentally different as it would harm the "normal" children. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1HD8KXn-kI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1HD8KXn-kI
  - typewithrhythm 1y ago
    You can call it selfish, but you can't call it fascist. In my perspective, it's less about what you should or shouldn't do; its about making sure that question is down to your individual morality.
- stevenAthompson 1y ago
  What financial benefit would a diagnosis have?
  - typewithrhythm 1y ago
    Depending on the specific services in an area: everything from subsidised legal access to medications, to access to accommodations in schools seen as favorable (private environments to take tests, or extended deadlines). Some areas have specific assistance to parents of children with a diagnosis. Some have easier access to disability support services and payments.
drewcoo 1y ago
> It's why there's now suddenly an influx of ADHD and Autism diagnosis I claim the DSM-5 is why. We changed diagnostic criteria then we diagnosed. People who used to be "normal" were suddenly "undiagnosed until late in life." But the people themselves hadn't changed much, just the diagnostic criteria.
- steve_taylor 1y ago
  DSM-5 took a bunch of distinct disorders and rolled them into one new disorder called Autism Spectrum Disorder. The only problem it solved is to reduce the number of disorders with unknown pathologies. My classically-autistic son who needs a lot of support apparently has the same disorder as a nerdy guy who comes across as a bit abrasive, doesn't understand the point of small talk, and would rather work on Linux kernel patches on a Saturday night than hit the town.
achierius 1y ago
It worked for the large majority. It now no longer works for that large majority, and practically also does not work well for the rest. We have in this sense regressed, thanks to the social liquidation of capitalism.
navane 1y ago
I'm pretty sure current highly interconnected society elicts more spectrum behavior then back when 90% of the populace was just digging soil for grains.

EMIRELADERO 1y ago

I agree with everything you said except for the last paragraph. The people who, according to your theory, want to reverse the tolerance trend and slide towards fascism/authoritarianism didn't pop out today. They existed and lived in society in the 2010s too. So, from a logical standpoint, what changed?

chairmansteve 1y ago
> what changed? The algorithms are promoting those views?
BriggyDwiggs42 1y ago
The parent comment didn’t even pose a theory as to why. People can change beliefs over time. Weimar Germany had less Nazis in it than Nazi Germany, which would be equally confusing under your framing.
intended 1y ago
Nothing changed - mostly it seems the American condition is a side effect of dedicated partisanship and asymmetric political behavior since the 1970s. The media apparatus in America has split into a center and left, and then a right wing which has different norms and produces its own products. That in turn has created a durable political coalition that self referentially calls itself when it needs to support its descriptions on reality. It’s significantly more effective at producing narratives, and moving ideas from the fringes to the main stream news channels. Since it has little traffic with the left and center media channels, it avoids counter claims and norms on journalistic standards. So you can now primary Bipartisan politicians, and then the ideas that gain media attention are the ones that reinforces party talking points. Counter views simply do not get air time. What we are seeing today, is the progression of those forces, as the narratives are never challenged.
thrance 1y ago
Material conditions degrading further with no end in sight, a massive influx of money towards right-wing populists appealing to a frustrated middle class, etc. Same story as always. How can a country slide into authoritarianism? It seems impossible until it happens, and by then we can hardly tell we're there.

MichaelZuo 1y ago

Isn’t the first half a tautology? By definition roughly half the population in any society must belong to a below average family and/or below average communities. And it seems pretty likely that those with below average capacities at handling, processing, reflecting, etc., on these issues would be concentrated there.

WorkerBee28474 1y ago

> it's why there's now suddenly an influx of ADHD and Autism diagnosis - because in the past anyone outside of the norm who wasn't lucky to do one of the things above was simply ignored, beaten, or died. I think you're understating how well those people were incorporated into society. My grandfather was born in the 20s and was described as quite "high strung", was amazing with technology, would repair anything, and even used to build his own farm machinery. These days he'd definitely be called severely anxious, and probably labelled as being on the spectrum. Yet he was part of a community, farmed his whole life, and built a family. People knew his quirks and compensated for them.

Tijdreiziger 1y ago
Sorry, but are you arguing that autistic folks can’t be part of a community, farm, or build a family?
- geerlingguy 1y ago
  I saw it as arguing that people with autism, ADHD, etc wouldn't be ignored, beaten, or killed, as seemed to be the argument in the parent comment?
  - Mtinie 1y ago
    One anecdotal observation does not fully tell the story.
  - Tijdreiziger 1y ago
    Ah, I see. I think the ‘label’ (ugh – what a terribly awful way to describe a diagnosis) and the beatings are orthogonal, though. In my parents’ time in a (then) Dutch colony, nobody was diagnosed with anything (that was only for crazies), but all the men knew how being hit with a belt felt (daughters were spared, from what I’ve been told). Self-medicating with alcohol and beating your kids if they ‘misbehaved’ was just the done thing, as far as I’ve been told. This is to say that anyone who showed (what we would now identify as) neurodivergent behaviour probably would’ve been beaten, but this then wouldn’t have precluded them from going on to start a family and business (and maybe beat their own kids). Actually, this is probably still how it works in many parts of the world. Even here in the Netherlands, beating your children was only outlawed as recently as 2007.

typewithrhythm 1y ago

There is substantially more going on than "tolerance vs intolerance". We have a huge influx not just because of changing diagnosis standards, but also because the financial benefit for getting a diagnosis has also expanded. The views of people you are trying to label as fascist are more accurately described as individualism vs welfare state.

wredcoll 1y ago
Ahh.. indiviualism, is that the one where you shouldn't have to help anyone else as long as things are going fine for yourself?
- mapontosevenths 1y ago
  Ayn Rand has a lot of friends here. She also described the neurodivergent as "subnormal" and thought that society should do nothing to help them or the handicapped. Additionally, she believed that "normal" children shouldn't have to ever interact with those who were mentally different as it would harm the "normal" children. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1HD8KXn-kI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1HD8KXn-kI
- typewithrhythm 1y ago
  You can call it selfish, but you can't call it fascist. In my perspective, it's less about what you should or shouldn't do; its about making sure that question is down to your individual morality.
stevenAthompson 1y ago
What financial benefit would a diagnosis have?
- typewithrhythm 1y ago
  Depending on the specific services in an area: everything from subsidised legal access to medications, to access to accommodations in schools seen as favorable (private environments to take tests, or extended deadlines). Some areas have specific assistance to parents of children with a diagnosis. Some have easier access to disability support services and payments.

drewcoo 1y ago

> It's why there's now suddenly an influx of ADHD and Autism diagnosis I claim the DSM-5 is why. We changed diagnostic criteria then we diagnosed. People who used to be "normal" were suddenly "undiagnosed until late in life." But the people themselves hadn't changed much, just the diagnostic criteria.

steve_taylor 1y ago
DSM-5 took a bunch of distinct disorders and rolled them into one new disorder called Autism Spectrum Disorder. The only problem it solved is to reduce the number of disorders with unknown pathologies. My classically-autistic son who needs a lot of support apparently has the same disorder as a nerdy guy who comes across as a bit abrasive, doesn't understand the point of small talk, and would rather work on Linux kernel patches on a Saturday night than hit the town.

achierius 1y ago

It worked for the large majority. It now no longer works for that large majority, and practically also does not work well for the rest. We have in this sense regressed, thanks to the social liquidation of capitalism.

navane 1y ago

I'm pretty sure current highly interconnected society elicts more spectrum behavior then back when 90% of the populace was just digging soil for grains.