Towards a DisHuman Civil Society
In what ways does a consideration of the politics of dis/ability permit a rethink of community membership, participation and engagement with civil society? What are the implications for the daily lives of dis/abled people, their families and their supporters? How might dis/ability permit us to (re)think political agitation, community identity and everyday activism? Concurrently, we are working with a number of civil society partners who are disrupting normative notions of what civil society means. In this chapter, we start by examining the nature of civil society after it has been touched by the processes associated with neoliberal capitalism. We then start to explore some affirmative and resistant possibilities offered by civil society in these dangerous times. Our search leads us, inevitably, to the politics of dis/ability and the potential of dis/ability to rethink the workings of civil society as a DisHuman project (Goodley D, Runswick-Cole K, Discourse Stud Cult Pol Educ. Online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2014.930021, 2014). We conclude by arguing that any consideration of civil society has to ask questions about the kinds of human beings that are valued at the heart of this civility. Dis/ability is the space through which to rethink the human, the civil and society.
- American Psychiatric Association (APA). (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 5th edition (DSM 5). Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
- Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman. London: Polity.Google Scholar
- Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus. Capitalism and schizophrenia. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
- DisHuman. (2015). Rebooting humanity through disability: Blog post 1. Retrieved from https://dishuman.com/. Accessed 9 May 2017.
- Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). (2016). Big society, disability and civil society research. Retrieved from https://bigsocietydis.wordpress.com/. Accessed 9 May 2017.
- Goodley, D. (2000). Self-advocacy in the lives of people with learning difficulties: The politics of resilience. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
- Goodley, D. (2011). Disability studies: An interdisciplinary introduction. London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Goodley, D. (2012). Dis/entangling critical disability studies. Disability & Society, 27(6), 631–644.Google Scholar
- Goodley, D. (2014). Dis/ability studies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2000). Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2005). Multitude: War and democracy in the age of empire. New York: The Penguin Press.Google Scholar
- People First. (2017). Welcome to Peoplefirst.org. Retrieved from https://www.peoplefirst.org/. Accessed 9 May 2017.
- Runswick-Cole, K., & Goodley, D. (2015). Disability, austerity and cruel optimism in big society: Resistance and ‘the disability commons’. Canadian Journal of Disability Studies, 4(2). Online publication. Retrieved from http://cjds.uwaterloo.ca/index.php/cjds/article/view/213/380. Accessed 9 May 2017.
- Speakup. (2017). Training. Retrieved from http://www.speakup.org.uk/?page_id=282. Accessed 9 May 2017.
- World Health Organization. (2001). International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Retrieved from http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/. Accessed 9 May 2017.
- World Health Organization and the World Bank. (2011). World report on disability. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/en/. Accessed 9 May 2017.