A Valid Argument

As I wrote in my last post, exclusion is often subtle. More importantly, those who understand it best have fewer opportunities to describe the problem. Therefore, what passes for factual information remains unchallenged and is generally false. 

Inclusion can be nothing more than a buzz word or a brand name. People who have spent time, energy, and possibly money on learning at prestigious establishments, more commonly known as schools, think in limited ways and often need to devalue the contribution of others in order to maintain their overly inflated status.  

My experiences with blogging and with social network sites remind me that educated people may read what I write. As I've been told, in no uncertain terms, some will expect me to not only continually remind readers of my complete lack of education, but also I'm expected not to write in any way that cannot be easily distinguished from the way valued people say things. A valued person is someone who has been granted the privilege of using condescending language to insult those who were not issued the license that they were, and they will justify the harm done by describing others as willfully ignorant.  

This license permits them to call what they have learned information. It is otherwise known as a diploma or degree. The ones who issue them teach a set of rules branded as logical, which supposedly regulate arguments, debates, and influential discussions. Since others haven't learned these rules, we accept what is said by people called experts with letters after their name. Perhaps these people are aware of the unfairness and maybe not. I've never heard one of them acknowledge it though. 

It might seem unlikely that this would happen within a community defining their goal as the encouragement of diversity and the empowerment of those with needs considered special. However, my experience indicates that it happens quite often. 

Those who have special talents may also have special needs. A few may even be able to market their services as a result of conventional talent. It's important though, to avoid having an advocacy effort become ineffective due to sending a hypocritical message. 

If the only exclusion being discouraged is that which can be identified by the flashing neon lights on a giant billboard, most of it will remain protected and effective. It's inconvenient to accept those who communicate in a different way and have a unique perspective but without attempting to do this, not much that needs to be challenged will be.