By : Rufaid Imtiaz

Abstract: 

Disability is often categorised as a medical condition, but it requires a more holistic understanding. Political and economic institutions shape its outcomes. In a world where capitalism is advanced by the state, people with disabilities are largely excluded from economic participation. This paper explores the intersection of capitalism and disability and examines how this relationship exacerbates inequality. It also contextualises disability within India’s caste system and incorporates real-life experiences to deepen understanding. 

Introduction: 

Disability is generally perceived as a problem to be solved or a medical condition to be tolerated. The Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation in the United Kingdom, on the other hand, made a big step in 1976, arguing that disability is placed on top of our infirmities by the way we are unnecessarily segregated and prevented from full participation in society. This is now commonly believed by individuals concerned about disability. 

It becomes imperative to understand that the social model of disability has transcended traditional definitions of disability, which focus on a person’s physical or biological traits. Lennard J. Davis writes about how traditional definitions lack accounting for the holistic representation of itself. He talks about the intended exclusion of several to benefit few. Another problem with traditional definitions of impairment is that they overemphasise a person’s difficulties. Simultaneously, the new paradigm now focuses on the individual’s handicap and how it impacts their capacity to lead a regular life. However, the contradiction in this definition is that it does not take into consideration the many ways in which persons with disabilities live their lives. The World Health Organisation defines impairment as medical, focusing on a person’s issues rather than their capacities. This definition also ignores the surrounding environment and people. 

To fully comprehend disability, we must move beyond the limitations of existing paradigms, which attribute disability to mere discrimination. Instead, we need to address the structural causes—political and economic systems—that create barriers for disabled individuals. A more inclusive and equitable society can only be achieved by tackling these underlying issues. In this article, we will take account of disability as a category established by society in a result of capitalism’s oppressive economic system forwarded by the state. As it develops and oppresses the handicapped body, it is an indirect instrument utilised by the capitalist class to gain growth. Disability is a component of capitalism’s inherent contradiction, and disability policies that fail to recognise this are ineffectual, if not detrimental. 

Capitalism: Commodification of Disability and the Indian Perspective  

Disabled people have a harder time finding jobs, as compared to non-disabled people, which can cause a slew of issues in the formers’ life. Even when they do find jobs, they usually earn far less than others, and they regularly confront hurdles that prohibit them from doing their duties adequately. The case of Vande Zande v. State of Wisconsin, mentioned by Davis, in her paper, Bending Over Backwards, provides a realistic example of the same. They are often oppressed because their work might not meet the so-called market parameters. This exclusion has occurred and continues to occur throughout history. Individuals with impairments usually battle to do their occupations more than individuals without disabilities, making it incredibly difficult for them to make a livelihood.  

Historical materialism that states class struggle and material condition as driving force for disability, provides a theoretical framework for understanding these events and results. Under feudalism, handicapped persons might participate in the economy in a variety of ways, depending on their capacities. However, as capitalism advanced, employment grew more specialised, and robots increasingly displaced people. This trend has made it more difficult for handicapped persons to obtain jobs and has prevented them from attaining the same levels of economic success as non-disabled people. The social model that takes into account disability with capitalism together, suggests that the capitalist structure can be one of the root causes of exclusion and discrimination.  

Cultural explanations for disability focus on societal attitudes but fail to address the economic structures that perpetuate disablement. Merely shifting attention from individual impairments to a culture of disablement does not bring meaningful change because disablement stems from broader socio-political and economic inequalities. Postmodern approaches to disability also fall short, as they do not critically engage with the educational system, which systematically excludes disabled students. From a Marxist perspective, schools serve as instruments of social reproduction, justifying exclusion while allocating state resources to other priorities, such as military spending. 

It is also worth mentioning the Indian perspective and its contribution to the biases created against disability through capitalism. Exclusion is embedded into our social fabric in India through the Caste system. Caste denied women access to education and criminalised it, with devastating implications for the ‘lower’ castes (Shudras) and ‘untouchables’ (Dalits), who made up the bulk of India’s population. Even though caste prejudice is formally illegal, schools continue to present meritocratic justifications for casteist practices. 

Another sphere of life that has eluded disabled people are examination at various levels. It serves an important function in our culture and are frequently seen as obligatory. They contribute to the viability of schools and the availability of skilled instructors. As a result, the education system has rather glorified such differences. Schools were privatised and profits were increasingly internationalised when neoliberal ideas were brought into Indian education in the early 1990s. The Human Resource Ministry announced a new Draught National Policy on Education (DNEP) in June 2019, shortly after a far-right party was re-elected. This strategy offers a new system with many “exit points” after Class VIII, making it simpler to reject (blind) children at various stages of their education. This is similar to the claims made by Upendra Baxi in his paper, where he mentions “bloody legislation”, where laws themselves (state) eventually strengthen capitalism. As a result, such capitalism ends up creating biases. 

If we do not address how schools can be damaging to kids with disabilities, they will be perceived as inferior and doomed to failure. I believe it is critical to take a position against privatisation and consider if we can eliminate ableism in schools without eliminating the concepts of failure and competitiveness.  

The experience: 

To get a better understanding the crux of the argument, I would like to bring in a real-life experience into this context. This is a story of a friend who shared his encounter with me a few years ago. We both grew up together since he (I won’t disclose his name) was my neighbour and our families got along well. We went to different schools though (his being a government funded), and while most of us were aware of his impairment, it was never an issue for him. The contest began in high school (10th Standard) when his class was allocated to the 4th floor. He needed a wheelchair since he was lacerated, and going to the fourth floor, even from the elevator, was difficult for him. He requested that the class be moved to the ground level, as it had been in the past. Initially, there was no action; strangely, no one else, not even me, raised the problem.  

Later, when he brought the subject to higher authorities, they took the customary utilitarian stance and, rather than resolving the issue, went ahead and polled the class. Consequently, most of the class rejected the concern made, by stating that it is easier for us to move to scientific laboratories from here than from the ground level. My friend never expressed any worry after that since he left the school after a few months. 

Shocking, right? I acknowledged how a capitalist and ableist society is accountable for creating able-bodied myths that make every person who fails to fit into these places feel like intruders who do not belong. During the same period, I began to consider how ableist structural conditioning affected me into accepting standards of a “perfect relationship,” the expectations of which were produced by capitalist conceptions and expressions. And we owe his school a debt of gratitude for this insight. 

I examined and unlearned the conventional concept of disability, and I even began to consider my privilege. It struck me how capitalism infiltrates our lives in unexpected ways, making many a young, disabled youngster like my friend feel insignificant and low on self-esteem. I began to grasp better the confluence of capitalism and disability in a society that only accepts able-bodied, privileged narratives that nearly always showcase ideal bodies and flawless aspirations. Baxi is correct when he says, “The capitalist classes are not concerned about society or the structures of regulation that impose constraints on them because these are entirely subject to negotiation through channels of persuasion and power. 

Conclusion: 

What contribution may discussion on disability politics make to the abolition of capitalist exploitation? While we may not get an answer to this question in the paper, a thought gets ignited when we discuss the same. The idea that disabled individuals will always be excluded from the workforce, even in an accommodating society, is flawed. This perspective neither addresses nor seeks to solve the problem. People with disabilities are often perceived as incapable of success, reinforcing exclusionary norms. The key question, particularly in India, is whether ableism in schools can be eliminated without challenging the structures of competition and failure. Ignoring this issue assumes that ableism can be addressed without dismantling its roots in education and capitalism. 

As a result, we can conclude that capitalism has exemplified the disabled’s complications from left to right and centre. My experience substantiates my understanding and might be yours as well. Eventually, the utilitarian perspective of the greater good has left the disabled far behind.  

Author’s Bio: 

Rufaid Imtiaz is a fifth-year law student at O.P. Jindal Global University. He has a keen interest in law and its intersection with other subjects including religion, history, and political science. He enjoys writing on law and politically lined issues.  

Image source: https://images.app.goo.gl/Yo81ECfXN2AiDQ2M6