Published on 12, July, 2020
Firstly let’s start with the governments decision to turn cash disability payments into vouchers instead. Removing cash from disabled people is inhumane.
Secondly let’s look at the assisted suicide laws that are supposed to come in at some point. They will in my opinion use these laws to kill autistic people that are simply depressed or suffering from bowel issues.
Thirdly let’s look at the crack down on advertising of alternative therapies for autism. They are cracking down on all advertising that claims anything other than pharmaceutical drugs can treat autism. Because you are not allowed to take anything other than what the government tells you you are allowed to take. For example they are banning advertising that claims that Pycnogenol can help autistic people. It is a potent anti inflammatory supplement made from plant compounds. The government has obviously banned these advertisements because they want you to think your symptoms are untreatable and that the only way to feel better is to take their drugs that they approve for you. Fair enough if the drugs actually worked but how many of you have tried antipsychotics and antidepressants only to find they either do nothing or make your symptoms worse sometimes even.
All this makes me not hopeful for the future of autistic people. We have discussed already how they want to find a gene responsible for autism so they can prevent it. Now they are looking at other ways to make our lives more miserable. The NAS has to not allow this kind of thing!
As if Labour would be any different.
i am afraid you are correct we need Proportional Representation and politicians that are free minded the party system I am afraid is broken now
Democracy is Mob Rule. It allows 51% of the population to deny the rights of the other 49%.
(Thomas Jefferson)
I stand by everything that I have said - there is no other solution
IrishInManchesterUK said: what we really need is strong leadership in the form of a Milltary dictatorship government
Because that has worked so well for countries around the world where the military took over power.
We are not at war so there can be no good reason for the military to be given control therefore they must seize it which has led to many of the worst human rights atrocities in history.
Brazil (where I live) had a military government from 1964 to 85 and they took exception to any groups who promoted either liberalism or democracy, leading to many of the more vulnerable members of society being "dissapeared". Likewise for the press who were not supportive of them.
Dictatorship in any form focusses too much power in one individual or small group and must be avoided at all costs in my opinion.
There is scope for a military co-government in war times but there need to be very clear controls over when the power is handed back.
I think it would depend on what sort of PR was gone for and how the law was constructed around it. Some countries seem to make a big mess of everything, some seem to go along quite easily.
I think laws being toothless and underfunded happens now, it's what governments do with laws that the public want and they don't. It's all purely for show and so as they can say they've done something that was wanted and that they listened.
I think consensus politics would be better, we desperately need to get away from what one party does the other tears down, it takes up to much time and resourses and we're the ones who suffer. For something's like an industrial plan, thts going to take more than the life time of one parliament to achieve everybody needs to agree.
Actually this is quite true - what we really need is strong leadership in the form of a Milltary dictatorship government - both from the days of the Czars, the Soviet/Communist Era and even after Glasnost/Perestrokia, the Russian people have always needed strong leadership governments and this is also true in other governments around the world where they have absolute rulers or dictatorships or milltary governments, which have turned out to be the most successful