Sexual Citizenship, Governance and Disability: From Foucault to Deleuze

Margrit Shildrick

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137311351_7

2013-01-01

Abstract:What would it mean to look beyond citizenship — at least in its neoliberal form — towards new concepts of belonging that might deal differently with issues of power, inequality and difference that open up rather than restrict personal imagination and socio-cultural imaginaries? My starting point is that citizenship as we currently know it, and perhaps particularly in the contemporary globalised polity, fails to satisfy the very human desire to flourish (which I understand as the ontological condition of well-Being, rather than well-being),1 not simply on a personal level but as part of a wider sense of belonging. At the very simplest level, citizenship — as with any category — relies on a series of exclusions of those who do not or cannot fit, and amongst such groupings, the drive for citizenship is often unabated. I want to address the issues concerning one such excluded group — people with disabilities — not to suggest that the pragmatic response should be to uncritically endorse any claims on the polity and leave it at that, but to propose that the very complexity of answering to the differences that underlie the sociopolitical drive in the first place might paradoxically indicate a new way forward. My reflections here are somewhat tentative, but emerge from a critique of the conventional ground of mainstream disability politics (Shildrick 2009) as it operates to maximise the status and life experiences of disabled people in the West.