DPAC Kills?

DPAC is short for ‘Disabled People Against Cut’ which is a loose organisation of people claiming to be disabled who have been central in the protests and actions of terror against ATOS in their fight to defend a medical model understanding of disabled people being naturally inferior worthless unfit beings who should be paid off and excluded from society, which is totally opposite for what real disabled people have fought for over the last 50 years.

Their main marketing ploy is to claim ATOS has killed and therefore murdered 1000 people with no evidence. They cite with glee how people have committed suicide when they have received letters to say they are fit for work like we are supposed to believe someone would kill themselves over £45. They talk about real disabled people but they mean drug addicts, alcoholics, people suffering stress, back pain and so on as they defend a corrupted benefit system that diverts money away from real disabled people.

I would argue it is DPAC, not ATOS, which kills disabled people through their lies and myths. As they destroy the idea of disabled people being included in society, the social model, they lie to real disabled people about their entitlement to benefits while giving fake disabled people false hope that they have a divine human right to be thrown on the scrapheap for a bit of cash. So it is this disgraceful immoral behaviour which is maybe leading people into despair and killing themselves.

DPAC needs to smell the coffee and admit what they are really about, destroying the lives of disabled people to enable benefit fraud. They think as a person with significant impairments, not only am I unemployable but I am better off dead as I am betrayed by the people who have stolen my voice as they claim to represent me. The truth will come out and I hope DPAC pays for its crimes against humanity.

4 thoughts on “DPAC Kills?

  1. Simon,
    I have no idea where you have developed your impressions and opinions from, but they bear no resemblance to the facts of what you are discussing.
    Far from defending a bio-medical model of disability, DPAC oppose this vociferously, and draw from a coherent, clear Social Model of disability. The Social Model of disability, best described and explained by academic and disabled activist Mike Oliver, sees disability as being a product of a disabled and broken society which places obstacles in people’s way, and then seeks to attribute personal blame to them for their impairment. If I can not get into my local library because there is no wheelchair ramp, by the medical model, I need to seek therapeutic treatment, I am broken, I am the problem. By the Social Model, It is the library is broken, and excluding me, as it has no ramp. DPAC draw clearly from this perspective. We find ourselves different in a society which disabled difference, and this is the underlying problem that we campaign against. What we are also totally opposed to is the particular use of what is termed the ‘bio-psyco-social’ model of illness as promoted by the current government (and, as their puppets) ATOS. As an academic as well as a disability rights activist I feel the need to state, clearly that within Sociology, the ‘bio-psyco-social’ concept is used *very differently* and has some benefits as a theory of illness (it isn’t, and never was, a theory of disability), However, its profoundly twisted use by the government and Atos is symbolised by their regular failure to insert the first part of this (bio), totally ignore the last part (social) and focus obsessively on the concept of disability as a psychological weakness only. If you can’t get your wheelchair up ten steps into the library, you are Just Not Trying Hard Enough. By this concept, entirely non-scientific and magical qualities are given to the mind based on misunderstandings and very superficial evidence of ideas of a mind-body duality, and the idea becomes enacted that if you give the wheelchair user no assistance to get into the library that they can somehow magically ‘think themselves well’ and learn to walk again. Austerity, a total lack of supports, or any attempt to adapt the environment become the order of the day under this brutal concept, and DPAC are utterly opposed to its use as a discourse to describe or judge our lives. DPAC draw from the Social Model of disability, which sees disability as being created and maintained by social and environmental factors not individual ‘failures’, but within that we posit disability as being something that is very, very real, and not dreamed up because we have ‘weak minds’. Therefore, DPAC are not in any way against the tradition of what disabled people have fought for the last 50 years, as you claim, in fact, we are very much following in the identical tradition of disability rights activism for not just 50 years, but considerably longer than that.


  2. Just to say I am not too stupid in understand your very academic comment. I do agree the whole notice on fitness/unfitness is wrong but you are sadly fooling yourself if you think DPAC has anything to do with the social model. The movement has refused to take on the responsibility Mike Oliver fought for disabled people to take up as civil rights not human rights. as society is fixed there should be less disabled people not more and so now your library is fixed and you are refusing to use it, you, as a movement have reverted back to the medical model in your quest for impairment validation as pity. The movement excludes real disabled people as it fights to be deemed unfit and worthless and to be deemed incapable for a bit of cash. You are using the social model as its excuse not to take responsibility. My problem is that in order for fake disabled people to be deemed as worthless in your twisted medical model, wrapped up as a lazy social model, you need to portray people like me as better off dead and you want us dead so you can have our money as you allow sick people trample over my right to exist as you demand a right to be put on the scrapheap, which is what the ATOS Games in about. I am not Tory, I am just do not be murdered to justify your hatred of yourself and your refusal to accept real disabled people have a right to take responsibility as equal citizens because it is against the best interests of the drug addicts and fake disabled people DPAC is protecting. So you are endorsing a potential holocaust of real disabled people as you steal the social model to twist it back into a medical model as the facts of your hate and pity campaign of DPAC suggests. No point saying more as you are probably too institutionised by your medical model socialist beliefs you justify by corrupting my theories and my history as a real disabled people and maybe, just maybe, you are too stupid, not me!


  3. Anonymous says:

    Even “real” disabled people get the flu. When they do, I hope they take time off work rather than carry their flu germs round the office with them.

    When they do have to take a week off with a really nasty dose of flu, I presume that they claim the sick pay to which a normal contract of employment entitles them. They might even give in the sense of self-pity to which non-disabled give in when the flu strikes.

    Or is that “giving in to the medical model”?


  4. Jesus, this screed is ridiculous. How on earth can you even consider such nonsense? DPAC are fighting the tory powered monolith. Noone else seems to care, and you want to run them down? Are you just trying to make a name for yourself in the blogosphere or do you seriously believe this rubbish? How can there be any justice for the thousands of disabled people that ARE being mistreated by ATOS and the state, if people like you contribute this sort of divisive nonsense? Shameful.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s