if I could do one thing

Posted on January 27th, 2009 at 8:15 am by admin

204


Last week, I read Naomi Klein’s new book The Shock Doctrine. This is a book about money in case you haven’t read it. Not a fun read, but it defines disaster capitalism, which is pure-gold insight.

One chapter keeps replaying in my mind. It describes how some victims of Katrina went to Thailand last year to visit some fishing communities destroyed by the tsunami. They were stunned to find that the communities had been entirely rebuilt — unlike New Orleans, which is still a mouldy heap.

The difference?

The Thai communities rebuilt themselves.

They didn’t trust the government to do it right. They heard rumours that the government wanted to open the beaches for the tourism industry. So they squatted on their land and started rebuilding. They had to assert themselves into the decision making and force their goals.

The moral of the story: Sometimes you have to do things yourself.

The failure of the rebuilding of New Orleans (and Bagdad) should not be a surprise. The grants went to private corporations. They didn’t go to the people themselves. The corporations didn’t even hire local people to do the contracts. They hired outsiders.

But who cares, right? As long as it all gets rebuilt.

Except that it didn’t get rebuilt.

The reason? Wrong goals, wrong vested interests.

People who live in ruined communities have one goal — to rebuild their homes. And they have a vested interest in their life in this community. Private companies have a different goal — to make a profit. They have a vested interest in their company’s stocks. Itinerant workers have a goal — to make a buck and then go home. They have a vested interest in their own lives.

Only the people of New Orleans really, really wanted their city to be rebuilt. But they weren’t part of the program.

Money doesn’t make things happen. It empowers people to reach their goals. Goals that point in the other direction are like a black hole. Money just seems to disappear.

So relate this idea to autism research.

Funding goes to universities and research centres to “find a cure.” The goal of the universities is to make a profit, raise their profile, and attract more students and faculty. For the researchers, it is to further their academic careers and research interests.

It is not to improve the lives of autistic others.

Sorry. It just isn’t.

Consider this. If improving the lives of autistic others meant these researchers had to change careers and research interests, how many would change? If research finally showed that the genetics route is a dead end, would all the autism genetics researchers suddenly become, say, pathologists or psychiatrists?

No. They would remain geneticists and move on to the next promising research area.

Because their goal is genetics, not autism.

There is a lesson in this for families. We rely so much on doctors, specialists, and researchers to come up with cures and fixes. Millions of dollars get spent. Nothing changes. Sure, sometimes there is a “new promising drug.”

But believe me, essentially nothing changes. There is a big black hole thing happening.What if, instead of FEMA, a group of New Orleans citizens had been in charge of all the rebuilding funds coming in after Katrina? What if this group had made all the decision about the money? How long would it have taken to get things cleaned up?

Days? Weeks, possibly?

It’s not rocket science, people.

Give me a grant of $10 million to find a cure for Asperger Syndrome. I am a parent. I have a goal and a vested interest. I would pick a team of six other intelligent and capable AS parents.

We would determine the research agenda and hire the researchers. We would monitor it and make all the critical decisions.

We wouldn’t care if something could be patented or not, or whether it was cutting edge. We wouldn’t have a great overarching scheme– we would be practical, immediate.

And then just give us two years.

I know at the end we would have something.