 |
December 1994 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
December 1994 |
| |
|
|
|
|
"Ruin is the destination toward which all men rush, each pursuing his own best interest in a society that believes in the freedom of the commons" (1968, Garrett Hardin).
The commons, in the context of Hardin's 1968 quote, could be a group, a community, a society, a nation, or the world. This concept of inevitable ruin, known as the tragedy of the commons, means that tragedy will result because of the unwillingness of individuals to relinquish their own interests for the good of the commons (the community).
The tragedy of the commons is a metaphor widely used to understand global politics because it illuminates so well the sources of many human predicaments. Some of these issues are population control, global warming, ozone depletion, and other ecological and environmentally based issues.
In global politics, the tragedy of the commons can be used to consider recent UN population projections. These projections show the world population growing well into the 22nd century before it stabilizes at more than 11.6 billion. The environmental toll and benefit of such population growth, as the tragedy of commons suggests, will not be shared equally by all nations. Global warming may be the ultimate tragedy of the commons. It was intended by none, yet is seemingly beyond the control of all who will bear its costs.
We can use this theory in national, state, and local politics as well. In this article, I will try to use it to explain what I think consumers and professionals in the disability community (our "commons" if you will) should work towards as we enter 1995. 1995 is, after all, only five years before the next millennium.
It is this editor's opinion that we must start to view ourselves and our world from a much broader perspective, as opposed to the tunnel vision and narrowness which keeps us apart. With that in mind, the consumers and providers of assistive technology need a broader based viewpoint of the community. We need to view ourselves, not from selfish viewpoints, but from the viewpoint of all of us being the commons.
What I see as our (the disabled community, including providers) selfishness includes the fact that Maryland's disability politics have remained the same for years. It seems that I am still hearing the same issues year after year.
The issues of which I speak include lack of affordable and accessible housing for people with disabilities; high unemployment rates for disabled adults; and better transportation services to people with disabilities. These issues have a political history as far back as the 1960's, yet still command our attention. While there is much work to be done with these issues on the state and local level, many have been recognized as important and now have Federal legislation and funding to address them. If they retain our full focus, then tragedy of our commons will be inevitable.
The issues of the late 1980's and 90's revolve around a wider agenda which has been of less concern to the commons, but must be addressed as we embark into the 21st century.
These broader based issues are: The American's With Disabilities Act (ADA), The Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act (TECH Act), The Injury Prevention and Control Initiative and the ... Disabilities Prevention Initiative, (both from the Centers for Disease Control), Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
As individual Marylanders (consumers and professionals) must push for these new federal agendas to become permanent, so must the commons as a whole. For example, Maryland needs to study and prevent injury, so that disability and assistive technology needs can be avoided, while at the same time, continuing to be a national leader in the assistive technology field. Only when each individual of the disability commons will set aside selfish concerns and we as a group embrace these newer, universal issues can we thwart the inevitable tragedy of our commons.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|