The NAS will no longer post on X (formerly Twitter)

I think the difference between the Right in this country and American Republicans, is that traditionally the right in the UK has been more paternalistic in its approach, rather than only seeming interested in capitalism. This has shifted over the years, especially since Thatcher, who wanted both. The Tories of years ago were more representatives of the aristocracy, old money, Anglicanism and the status quo. Now they seem more venal, uncaring, untrustworthy and lacking in any constitutional sense. Having said that Labour aren't much better, especially New Labour under Blair and now Starmer.

Individual MP's can and do make brilliant cases for things that are important but not previously on a national agenda, often bringing in bills that become law and/or policy. I wish more parliamentary time could be given to Private Members Bills, that so often raise these incredibly important issues simmering away in the national conciousness but are not yet big enough to be in anyones manifesto.

Also, Margaret Thatcher, while Education Secretary ordered a government report and legislation which led to Statements for autistic and other SEN children for the first time. All of the current support such as ECHP's etc currently in schools comes from what she started.

She also fought to have SEN children included in schools and community settings rather than shut away in long-stay hospitals which they had been previously. 

I think that's pretty accurate. The Tories and Labour have become an almost intistinquishable middle ground for the last 20 years which is why Left wing people are turning more towards the Greens and right wing people towards Reform. 
Politics is becoming more polarised everywhere though due to social media 

That’s who I was thinking of too. The world order has changed so now Labour and Conservative are generally considered to be centrist, although not centrist in the way it used to be as they aren’t particularly moderate.

profdanger said:

so I had no idea that the right in UK have actually helped.

Well, actually the real right in this country now is Reform:

https://www.autism.org.uk/what-we-do/news/our-response-to-richard-tice-mps-comments

Richard Tice is a Reform MP.

Interesting, thank you!

Sorry, I’m used to America’s Republicans, so I had no idea that the right in UK have actually helped.

The only thing I have heard Republicans helping with is trying to outlaw electrical stimulation devices for behavior modification. (which imo should be a no-brainer)

Bunny said:

I'll just note that it was a Conservative MP who introduced The Autism Act 2009

I tend to think of Reform as the 'right' nowadays in British politics and the Tories + Labour as middle ground.

profdanger said:

the right isn’t going to help adults with Autism

I'll just note that it was a Conservative MP who introduced The Autism Act 2009. That Act requires the Government to produce an adult autism strategy and keep it under review. The strategy initially focused on autistic adults, but was later expanded (under a Conservative Government) to also include children and young people.

The National Autistic Society, along with other autism charities, is currently challenging the Labour government over compliance. They describe the Government’s response as “unacceptable”, and say they see no evidence of a new national autism strategy or a timeline, despite the legal requirement and the expiry of the current strategy in June 2026.

I've posted a related thread here:

NAS: Charity sector calls out Government on ‘unacceptable’ autism policy

Billy87 said:

No, because what I am referring to is not opposition to or criticism of the views themselves but rather the personal attacks on the people expressing those views. Disagreement is healthy provided the line is not crossed into attacking the person rather than the opinion. 

I don't remember that happening here.  Challenging views (without which change would never be effected), not personal attacks.

Billy87 said:

What has often happened on this forum is that more conservative leaning autists are attacked and criticised personally for having, often very mild, conservative views.

I remember this (heavily redacted) sort of thread more, which caused various members to leave:

 Queer community vigil/solidarity space 

I remember and could link to various threads where more 'left' leaning members of the community felt pressurised into leaving but I don't think that's what this conversation is about.

It's about perception and your perception of what happened here in the past is very different to mine.

We must be careful not to rewrite history.

Billy87 said:

for having, often very mild, conservative views

Your idea of a 'mild' conservative view might actually be quite offensive to another person.

It's relative.

Billy87 said:

Because, in any group in society, whether online or in person, if people from one particular sub strata or viewpoint are consistently singled out for criticism and vilification by other members of the group then other people with similar views will either leave or stop engaging with the group as a whole. This inevitably creates an echo chamber of people with the prevailing or dominant view 

As this forum is in a state of flux, with members posting and then stopping in a continual pattern and only a handful of members still here from 3 years ago, I don't see how it stays still long enough to become an 'echo chamber.'  If the active posters were constant that might happen.

Kvothe said:

They only support those whose political opinions agree with them.

Uh… yeah? That’s kind of how it works? I mean, the right isn’t going to help adults with Autism, so why support them?

I think the biggest problem with places like X and free speech absolutism of the kind espoused by Musk and his ilk, is that all about freedoms and responsibilities are ignored. If we want a society free from outside regulation and censorship, then we have to accept that we have a responsibility with how we use our freedoms. We might be free to hold a certain opinion, but others are equally free to hold thiers, the responsibility comes in when we express these opinions, we must expect to be challenged and questioned, to have to make a reasoned case for our beliefs and listen to those of others. What we shouldn't do is jump up and down playing the victim card because someone disagrees with you, nor should anyone's first resort be to accusations of insanity, deviant sexual practices or percieved deviant sexual practices, threats of violence etc that form so much of our discourse.

People need to learn to own their feelings and beliefs, personal, spiritual and political, and put them forward in a positive, "I believe/think that..." as oposed to " you must be a mad son of a lady dog to think that, you twisted sexual act".

It's our collective responsibility to decide what sort of society we want to live in, do we want abuse of women and children to be common place and allowed? Do we want a world where anyone who dosen't conform to hetronormative is subject to abuse and attempts to make them change or to make them criminal? 

I admit its harder with the views of some religions who are exptremely absolutest in what they believe na dwhat they believe their god wants, but whilst we might respect thier right to believe those things for themselves, do we believe they have the right to try and force them on everybody else? 

I agree about the data concerns and about the Grok issues 100%. I think X is a cesspool of verbal abuse and hatred from all corners of the political spectrum. 

However, it is worth noting that very few of the people currently complaining about and leaving the site had any issues with it when it was Twitter. During this time it was an extremely left leaning site, run by Jack Dorsey and consistently censoring right wing voices and deleting their accounts. Now, under Musk, it has gone to the opposite extreme. In my view both extremes are very harmful 

Cheese_and_Biscuits said:

inclusivity and empowerment are qualities to be aspired to from all positions on the political spectrum, no?

Inclusivity and empowerment are very vague terms that are overused these days and actually mean very little. 

Who are we including and, more importantly, who are we empowering? Not every group in society should be empowered surely? We don't want to empower football hooligans for instance. 

As for inclusivity, that is another very vague term. I agree that no one should be excluded due to race, disability, sexuality etc. However, the terms inclusivity and empowerment have gone so far beyond that basic good intention now. If everything is accepted and everyone included in everything regardless of their actions and choices then we create a society that has no moral framework to work from and no idea of any behaviours or actions that are deemed acceptable or unacceptable. In a society like that people become obsessed with themselves and their own rights to the point of forgetting to put others first. The sanctity of the self overwhelms our traditional belief in putting others first and sacrificing our own wants and desires in the service of our families, neighbours and communities. Sadly, that is the society we now find ourselves in and the main reason why people seem so unhappy in our modern world 

B said:

Have you considered that what you term an 'over' reaction may be just a reaction that you don't approve of because it doesn't coincide with your personal world view/political stance?

No, because what I am referring to is not opposition to or criticism of the views themselves but rather the personal attacks on the people expressing those views. Disagreement is healthy provided the line is not crossed into attacking the person rather than the opinion. 

What has often happened on this forum is that more conservative leaning autists are attacked and criticised personally for having, often very mild, conservative views. Many users have been portrayed as bad people and criticised and attacked personally rather than just having their opinions disagreed with. 

I'm all for disagreement and debate, it is how any civilised society moves forward. However, playing the man not the ball so to speak, is not so good. 

B said:

How can that be the case when the members constantly change?

Because, in any group in society, whether online or in person, if people from one particular sub strata or viewpoint are consistently singled out for criticism and vilification by other members of the group then other people with similar views will either leave or stop engaging with the group as a whole. This inevitably creates an echo chamber of people with the prevailing or dominant view 

I genuinely don’t understand.

In what way does leaving “X” constitute being left leaning? 

As I read the original message, the choice seems to be about “ethical issues” and “inclusivity and empowerment” . And very much based in this awful issue about people’s data being used unethically. I would assume people of all political persuasions are concerned about ethics … and inclusivity and empowerment are qualities to be aspired to from all positions on the political spectrum, no? Other than nasty extremists and people who are overtly full of hatred for others.

How do you read this as left leaning, rather than decency leaning? Do you assume those on the right are not concerned with ethics, inclusivity and empowerment? Seems quite sweeping to me and a bit offensive to the upstanding right leaning folk here. 

Is there an agenda here that NAS are making that I am missing? 

Do you see this as censorship? I don’t, it’s just about a choice of platform, not silencing people, a kin to choosing to stand on this box or that box instead. But censorship happens everywhere on the political spectrum anyway…. Left, right, etc.

Sorry for my speculative tone, I will stop guessing and eagerly await the clarity you will provide… 

Billy87 said:

vitriolic overreactions of other users when they post even the mildest of right wing opinions.

There is some bias in the way you describe those two things.

Have you considered that what you term an 'over' reaction may be just a reaction that you don't approve of because it doesn't coincide with your personal world view/political stance?

Billy87 said:

this forum has become a left wing echo chamber

How can that be the case when the members constantly change?

I don't think they intentionally coded it that way, i think it was a by product of letting the AI be 'free' they underestimated the depraved people in the world that would act on that 'coding' issue, short sighted i agree. I just feel we should let Musk and X try and fix the problem before we outright condemn it.

And i also agree Musk needs to be stronger on this.. he needs to fix it quick

This is a very refreshing post to read. The main reason I no longer post on here is because I feel this forum has become a left wing echo chamber, something which I do not feel represents autistic people as a whole btw who have a great variety of political opinions. I have watched many users with more conservative views be driven off this site due to the vitriolic overreactions of other users when they post even the mildest of right wing opinions. I decided I did not want to sufer the same fate so I stopped posting. 

When I joined this site several years ago it was nothing like that. There was a huge variety of different world views and opinions on here and everyone respected each other's views and got on. Wish it was still like that. I have no idea of the NAS opinions btw, I'm just talking about the forum

For the record, I dislike X and disliked it when it was Twitter as well, it is not a pleasant place. I also think the Grok image generation issue is disgusting and appalling and it is one of the reasons I left X for good. 

Regarding Musk himself, I do agree that he has been radicalised by his own site to some extent but I also believe that X has shone the light on issues that the media ignores. However, in general I think X is a force for bad in the world. I think Musk is a very troubled man, he takes ketamine to regulate his depression. It just goes to show that all the money in the world isn't enough to make you happy. I think he sees things in black and white extremes which fits with many people with Aspergers that I have known. I've spoken to him briefly before now on X but he's a hard man to read. I think it's sad that he uses his platform in such a negative way sometimes and seems to post without thinking or reflecting on what he's saying 

I would ask why it was coded that way to begin with and that the current response of only allowing that feature to be used by paying members and X, is wrong and a cop out, as has been Musks repsonse to it general.

Do you think X and Elon should have been given time to fix the issue?

I agree with what you say about the AI images and they should be stopped, but coming off x for that reason is suspicious to me

I wouldn't have said NAS was a left leaning organisation, obviously there will be some who don't get on with the site, but as was said below the site is what those of us who post here make it.

Do you think that Grok being able to take a photo someone has uploaded, maybe of a random stranger, usually a female random stranger, regardless of age and undress them and "enhance" them, with the permission or even knowlege of the person who's photo is being used?

Personally I think it's disgusting and abusive, an invasion of privacy and denigrates everyone, those who do this and those who have it done to them. We have enough problems with exploitation of women and girls with out this adding to it, it's basically a paedophile's play ground. 

Women in public life have enough to cope with with, death and rape threats, stalking etc without this too, women and girls are not objects to be sexualised for some sad sac's amusement or to fufill their inadaquacies.