Over the years I have seen this red flag go up again and again from certain groups of deaf people or even certain deaf run organizations that exhibit certain cultish-like behaviors. I don't believe that these groups or organizations are cults at all. Just that there were some warning signs that could signal a deeper problem in their effort to control ideological thoughts and actions.
Just an observation of mine.
The year 2006 was the start of Unity for Gallaudet University protest (DPN2) when new array of dazzling terms suddenly appeared all of which reminded me of cult-like speak. These new terminologies were tossed around heavily early on and over the next 5 to 6 years to be used as a weapon of choice against those who disagree or have a different viewpoint or opinion. Terms like "deficit thinking," "deficit thinker," "colonialism," "post-colonialism," "dysconscious," "dysconscious **dism" (i.e. Deaf Uncle Tom), "subaltern rebel," "linguicism," "intergenerational unification," "discursive system," "subaltern," "subaltern-elite," "elite," "subalternity," "unconscious internalization," "minority imperatives," and many more. Enough to dazzle all new comers with such impressive array of words. All those terms reminded me of Scientology speak and how they were mostly successful in using their own words to "de-program" their new subjects to fit their new world "reality." In this case, ironically so, many deaf subjects or new comers were taught these new words and new ideological concepts who actually lacked English-literacy skills and are effectively monolingual in their own (visual) language which happens to be ASL or sign language. These "leaders," "higher followers" or "sub-leaders" use the written English language to include those dazzling terms in a format much like you would see in a doctorate paper heavily laden with psychological terms. It sounds impressive to new comers. All those fancy terms. This helps to "legitimize" the whole indoctrination process at "de-programming" centers at specialized workshops with the opportunity to simplify those terms further and its ideological concepts using ASL or sign language.
Bait. Hook. Reel them in.
Those were the obvious red-flags that something was amiss. I was actually targeted by one "elite" follower who used ad hominem attacks against me and others using an organization's website as his personal site to be used against me. That certainly didn't help the situation exhibiting certain cult-like action and attitudes. That organization tried to cover their tracks by deleting that particular webpage the next day but they failed. There was never a public apology to this day from that particular person for his cyberbullying and wholly unprofessional action. It was an absolutely surreal moment and at the same time a bit fascinating to have witnessed that personally.
Moving on.
The term "deficit thinking" is a form of "psuedo-science."
According to a book on “The Evolution of Deficit Thinking: Educational Thought and Practice” (by Richard R. Valencia, which is an interesting read on the history of how that concept came about) the definition of “deficit thinking” is:
Words like “deficit” and the prefix “dys” in "dysconscious" are tinged with negative connotations. The prefix “dys” comes from "dus" (bad) spoken by people of Greece starting about 1000 B.C where "bad" modifies the word. And, of course, deficit means “inadequate” or “insufficient.”
So, you can see why people like to use those particular terms with its built in negative connotations as way to attack and bludgeon others for having a different perspective and opinion. People have different viewpoints, perspectives, life experiences, failures, and successes whose own reasoning may be just as valid as the next person’s. It’s easy to call somebody a “deficit thinker” or "dysconscious **dist," for example, but then again that person may exhibit that very same attitude as well. It's like when a person accuses somebody by pointing a finger at him and in response you get 20 fingers pointing back at the accuser. To me, those terms are meaningless psychobabble and are worthy enough to have them drop kicked over a football field goal when it comes to deafness-related discussions. It simply doesn’t help the situation or the discussion. It invites confusion. We have seen it happen again and again. It never stops. It's full of generalities when used improperly and solves nothing.
Certain deaf leaders and "sub-leaders" like to use those "cult-like" sounding terms in their initial effort to impress and recruit potential new comers as part of the whole collectivism and "consciousness raising" efforts. That reminds me of spiritual gurus or swami who try and "enlighten" their new starry-eyed students who are desperately looking for answers, the meaning of life. But if you disagree with them or have an opinion different from their "world" views you'd be called loudly as a "deficit thinker," a heretic, an apostate, or something worse.
Those "cult-like" sounding terms or unfamiliar words usually get legitimized further from people who hold doctorate degrees in Deaf Studies or something similar. They are there to teach those (i.e. new or potential recruits) who don't know any better or don't understand the words and ideological concepts at specialized workshops, usually for culturally deaf people only. And in signed videos which are usually not captioned or supplemented with a transcript which is interesting when they usually scream about oppression, discrimination, lack of accommodation, and such. They play the same sick games of oppression just like their hearing counterparts. The irony is simply too much.
All in all, it was fascinating to watch this new kind cultish-like behavior take place and how it has evolved over the years. But the warnings are still there. Be careful not to be taken in or dazzled by impressive sounding words and concepts. We all understand that discrimination occurs and do take place everyday. We understand that hearing, deaf and hard of hearing and culturally deaf people need to be educated about hearing loss, deaf education, language acquisition, mode of communication, communication preferences, and the acts of discrimination and intentional prejudice based on hearing loss, ability to speak/listen, and/or even the ability to sign.
Just an observation of mine.
The year 2006 was the start of Unity for Gallaudet University protest (DPN2) when new array of dazzling terms suddenly appeared all of which reminded me of cult-like speak. These new terminologies were tossed around heavily early on and over the next 5 to 6 years to be used as a weapon of choice against those who disagree or have a different viewpoint or opinion. Terms like "deficit thinking," "deficit thinker," "colonialism," "post-colonialism," "dysconscious," "dysconscious **dism" (i.e. Deaf Uncle Tom), "subaltern rebel," "linguicism," "intergenerational unification," "discursive system," "subaltern," "subaltern-elite," "elite," "subalternity," "unconscious internalization," "minority imperatives," and many more. Enough to dazzle all new comers with such impressive array of words. All those terms reminded me of Scientology speak and how they were mostly successful in using their own words to "de-program" their new subjects to fit their new world "reality." In this case, ironically so, many deaf subjects or new comers were taught these new words and new ideological concepts who actually lacked English-literacy skills and are effectively monolingual in their own (visual) language which happens to be ASL or sign language. These "leaders," "higher followers" or "sub-leaders" use the written English language to include those dazzling terms in a format much like you would see in a doctorate paper heavily laden with psychological terms. It sounds impressive to new comers. All those fancy terms. This helps to "legitimize" the whole indoctrination process at "de-programming" centers at specialized workshops with the opportunity to simplify those terms further and its ideological concepts using ASL or sign language.
Bait. Hook. Reel them in.
Those were the obvious red-flags that something was amiss. I was actually targeted by one "elite" follower who used ad hominem attacks against me and others using an organization's website as his personal site to be used against me. That certainly didn't help the situation exhibiting certain cult-like action and attitudes. That organization tried to cover their tracks by deleting that particular webpage the next day but they failed. There was never a public apology to this day from that particular person for his cyberbullying and wholly unprofessional action. It was an absolutely surreal moment and at the same time a bit fascinating to have witnessed that personally.
Moving on.
The term "deficit thinking" is a form of "psuedo-science."
"process of false persuasion by scientific pretense"Indeed.
According to a book on “The Evolution of Deficit Thinking: Educational Thought and Practice” (by Richard R. Valencia, which is an interesting read on the history of how that concept came about) the definition of “deficit thinking” is:
“Deficit thinking is tantamount to the process of ‘blaming the victim’. It is a model founded on imputation, not documentation.”Imputation essentially means acts of accusation.
Words like “deficit” and the prefix “dys” in "dysconscious" are tinged with negative connotations. The prefix “dys” comes from "dus" (bad) spoken by people of Greece starting about 1000 B.C where "bad" modifies the word. And, of course, deficit means “inadequate” or “insufficient.”
So, you can see why people like to use those particular terms with its built in negative connotations as way to attack and bludgeon others for having a different perspective and opinion. People have different viewpoints, perspectives, life experiences, failures, and successes whose own reasoning may be just as valid as the next person’s. It’s easy to call somebody a “deficit thinker” or "dysconscious **dist," for example, but then again that person may exhibit that very same attitude as well. It's like when a person accuses somebody by pointing a finger at him and in response you get 20 fingers pointing back at the accuser. To me, those terms are meaningless psychobabble and are worthy enough to have them drop kicked over a football field goal when it comes to deafness-related discussions. It simply doesn’t help the situation or the discussion. It invites confusion. We have seen it happen again and again. It never stops. It's full of generalities when used improperly and solves nothing.
Certain deaf leaders and "sub-leaders" like to use those "cult-like" sounding terms in their initial effort to impress and recruit potential new comers as part of the whole collectivism and "consciousness raising" efforts. That reminds me of spiritual gurus or swami who try and "enlighten" their new starry-eyed students who are desperately looking for answers, the meaning of life. But if you disagree with them or have an opinion different from their "world" views you'd be called loudly as a "deficit thinker," a heretic, an apostate, or something worse.
Those "cult-like" sounding terms or unfamiliar words usually get legitimized further from people who hold doctorate degrees in Deaf Studies or something similar. They are there to teach those (i.e. new or potential recruits) who don't know any better or don't understand the words and ideological concepts at specialized workshops, usually for culturally deaf people only. And in signed videos which are usually not captioned or supplemented with a transcript which is interesting when they usually scream about oppression, discrimination, lack of accommodation, and such. They play the same sick games of oppression just like their hearing counterparts. The irony is simply too much.
All in all, it was fascinating to watch this new kind cultish-like behavior take place and how it has evolved over the years. But the warnings are still there. Be careful not to be taken in or dazzled by impressive sounding words and concepts. We all understand that discrimination occurs and do take place everyday. We understand that hearing, deaf and hard of hearing and culturally deaf people need to be educated about hearing loss, deaf education, language acquisition, mode of communication, communication preferences, and the acts of discrimination and intentional prejudice based on hearing loss, ability to speak/listen, and/or even the ability to sign.