This may sound kind of stupid, but I realized earlier that, despite now calling myself member, I know next to nothing of DAN. What it stands for is clear enough: on it’s Facebook page, it states ” The UK disabled people’s Direct Action Network, DAN, is a grassroots network of proud, angry & strong disabled people from all backgrounds and of all ages, who use non-violent civil disobedience as a means to fight for freedom and equality. DAN has taken action AGAINST: patronising charities who profit from and perpetrate disabled people’s dependence, the warehousing of disabled people in institutions, welfare cuts, care charges, assisted suicide and euthanasia. DAN takes action FOR: equality and freedom, such as independent living, inclusion, accessible transport, fair access to work and welfare.” That is clear enough, and those aims are broadly my aims too. Yet I find myself asking – purely out of curiosity- what is dan, and how is it organised? Is it a pressure group? Does it have a leadership or hierarchy?

Of course, I also completely agree with the use of nonviolent civil disobedience as a means of fighting injustice. Now more than ever, the tactics of Gandhi and Dr. King must be utilised in order to fight what seems to be becoming the overt oppression of disabled people by the Tories. Yet unlike the campaign for Indian independence or the American civil rights movement, the British disability rights movement appears not to have a single leader. What it does appear to have, however, is DAN. DAN appears to be the central body of our movement, our figurehead; a group within a group through which we all have a voice. That’s why I am so curious about it: I’ve read that, contrary to what I wrote in my entry yesterday, Saturday’s action was not a DAN action but what DAN itself calls a ”cripple’s picnic.” If that wasn’t a dan action, what the hell is? And who is in a position to use such language, and how did he or she get there, wherever there is? This confuses me greatly, as I don’t understand the structures involved. As I say, I fully support dan’s aims and modus operandae, I also think , in a way, DAN now takes the place of a central figure in terms of crip liberation; I just wish someone would clarify what it is for me so I can be a better activist.