Beyond Tokenism: Embracing disability through critical academia
This hollow inclusivity risks tokenizing those it seeks to empower, reducing their experiences to box-checking exercises rather than transformative engagements. Inclusion without insight can be alienating, especially for disabled people who are regularly absorbed into structures that neither recognize nor accommodate their realities.
This conceptual void is starkly visible in two intersecting academic domains – Inclusive Education and Disability Studies. Both aim to protect and promote the rights of disabled individuals, yet they operate with vastly different lenses. Inclusive Education centers on pedagogical strategies that place disabled learners within mainstream environments, often focusing on adjustments and support mechanisms within schools. While valuable, this approach can remain mechanical unless underpinned by deeper socio-political analysis of disability.
This is where Disability Studies plays a transformative role. As an interdisciplinary field, it interrogates disability not as a personal impairment or medical anomaly but as a social, political, and cultural construct. At the heart of Disability Studies lies the social model of disability, which reframes exclusion. It is not the individual's body or mind that is deficient but society's design and attitudes that create barriers. Unequal access, prejudice, architectural constraints, and discriminatory policies are the true culprits in disabling people.
By shifting the focus from 'fixing' individuals to reforming society, Disability Studies fosters a rights-based, justice-oriented approach.
The disconnect between inclusive practices and disability scholarship remains vast. In classrooms, for instance, educators may accommodate disabled students yet lack awareness of the disability rights movement, its milestones, and its ideological foundations. Teaching about disability in isolation from its history risks perpetuating ableism under the guise of inclusion. If we want learners to grasp what inclusion truly demands, Disability Studies must be integrated across disciplines from History and Sociology to Law and Public Health.
Considering that, History often taught as a chronology of dominant figures and events, it frequently erases the lives and struggles of disabled people. Why, for example, were disabled individuals among those targeted during the Nazi regime? Could Hitler's own rumored ailments have driven a toxic ideology rooted in ableism and self-hatred? These questions are not just provocative, they are essential for understanding the social construction of disability and the politics of exclusion.
Yet despite its importance, Disability Studies remains underrepresented in higher learning institutions. The scarcity of degree-level programs delays research, policy reform, and the cultivation of informed advocates. Without academic spaces to study the history, activism, and cultural representation of disability, society loses crucial opportunities to evolve.
Universities must step into this leadership role, not only by offering Disability Studies degrees but by embedding its principles into the broader academic curriculum. Doing so would foster a generation of thinkers, educators, and policymakers who challenge ableism at its root. The aim is not to merely include disabled people in existing systems, it is to reshape those systems so they are built with disability in mind.
Inclusion must be rooted in understanding. It cannot be achieved by rhetoric alone, it requires deconstructing the societal barriers that disable people. By promoting Disability Studies, academic institutions can drive the cultural shift needed to realize true equity. The social model of disability is not just a theory, it is a call to action.
(Lucky Tumahole – Disability Advocate)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
13 hours ago
- IOL News
Why the revolution ate its children, and others
Letters to the Editor. Image: Supplied Letters to the editor Why the revolution ate its children The most humiliating aspect of post-independence and post-colonialism Africa, or even Latin America, is that the former struggle stalwarts never won a war against the former colonial powers. It is possible that they won against colonial militaries that were already retracting and preparing for independence. Many countries gained independence through a series of events that occurred concurrently. Proof of this is that none of the African nations liberated as early as the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s were able to unite against the white apartheid regime (supported by the West) – let alone match the SADF. Instead, the SADF went on a rampage, insulting all of Africa and bombing neighbouring countries such as Lesotho, Angola, and Botswana. Nowadays, South Africans don't appreciate or consider this, especially when the ferment is present. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading However, one thing that struggle veterans accomplished and won in conserving – conservatives – is the ability to treat fellow Black people equally and more than the brutality of colonialism and apartheid. And don't think the comrades didn't admire many of the Nazi and apartheid police tactics on propaganda and 'managing the masses'; whenever they sip on those expensive whiskies, they can never give up on mqombothi and Cuban cigars – true managers of their own, but only to their demise. It's easy to predict the typical sarcastic behaviour of these individuals when they lose touch with 'our people.' Typically, after looting the nation and stripping it bare of any colonial and post-independence glory prescribed and maintained by 'racist white oppressors,' the comrades begin to focus more on 'identifying threats,' not like NATO or the IDF, but within the oppressed – and this is almost always where they excel. As geniuses and war veterans, the comrades create separatist groups to divide and rule themselves, similar to how they were treated. Similarly, the ANC is directly responsible for the perceived stupidity of Dudula. The goal is to capitalize on the masses' revolt and desperation without addressing the root cause, which is a long-term failure to govern effectively. The entire point is to hold on to power for dear life because – as it was then among the serpents – 'This man should die for the nation than for the whole nation to perish!'However, as in Zimbabwe, it is threatening to do so here; these old dogs are unwilling to go down with the masses, preferring that the masses go down on their behalf and bear the brunt of sanctions, debts, and CIA-led coups and military operations while they, like parasites, sink their claws into the last vestiges of colonial glory. The masses, like their leaders, are largely unconcerned and only have each other and foreigners to vent their frustrations. And so they act and believe they are heroes – but heroes of lies, murder, theft, and self-destruction, which they will realize with great and foolish pride only when nothing remains. | Khotso Moleko Mangaung Let Eskom compete – or let it collapse The government is not equipped to determine the true cost of electricity. Any attempts it makes to do so only serve to distort market signals and drive Eskom and other electricity parastatals further down the path to ruin. Last year, electricity minister Kgosientsho Ramokgopa stated that high electricity prices are 'untenable' and 'disproportionately affect the poor.' Both these things may be true, but as a politician, Ramokgopa is not equipped to make these statements. He is motivated by political expediency and ideology – not market realities. Despite the minister's condemnation of high prices, Eskom and NERSA have continued to hike electricity tariffs – often above inflation. But it wasn't always this way. Prior to the start of loadshedding in 2007 and onwards, South Africa had some of the cheapest electricity in the world. But this wasn't because of efficiency or good governance. Eskom was politically mandated to maintain cheap electricity – damn the costs. This was its purpose since its inception in 1923. And in its quest to deliver unsustainably cheap electricity to drive industrialisation based on false pretence, Eskom failed to achieve even the most Kindergarten of economic rules. It failed to cover its costs. Eskom was never allowed to behave like a real business. Even when energy demand surged, it could not raise prices or reinvest profits to build new power plants. By the time blackouts hit in 2007, the cracks were decades old. Government-backed loans and subsidies kept Eskom alive, but the parastatal increasingly had to cut costs to keep prices low. It fired key experts, mothballed power stations, and delayed maintenance and expansion. Sanctions and turmoil became a blessing in disguise during the Apartheid era, as the economy shrunk – allowing Eskom's decreased ability to produce electricity to go unnoticed. But post-1994, the ANC added other mandates to Eskom. On top of providing cheap, plentiful electricity, Eskom also had to engage in racialised politics and expand electrification across the country. This resulted in mismanagement and corruption, as the utility lost sight of its key purpose. If the electricity prices were market driven, the laws of supply and demand would have warned Eskom that it was expanding demand far faster than its supply. It could have cautioned demand growth with higher prices, using the increased profits to build reserves and expand production. But Eskom is not a rational economic actor – it's a political one. It only cared about obeying orders from politicians who only care about votes and graft. When pricing is dictated politically, there's no incentive for efficiency, innovation, or even sustainability. On top of corruption and mismanagement – all key features of a state-run enterprise – these unsustainably low prices meant that Eskom couldn't build cash reserves, hire the engineers it needed, or build new power plants on time. So, when economic and population growth finally caught up with electricity production, we experienced rolling blackouts. If prices had been market driven, this wouldn't have happened. A power utility would be able to raise prices when electricity is scarce and lower them when electricity is plentiful. But for this to be possible, Eskom needs to be privatised, and its monopoly removed. Competition between businesses drives innovation and holds businesses accountable. We cannot know the true price of a good when there is only one seller. Private electricity companies competing to sell as sustainably cheap electricity as possible would result in not only a decent price of electricity that reflects reality – but also give correct signals to the economy so that economic growth doesn't hinge on a lie. South Africa's electricity crisis is not just about corruption or incompetence. It is about the fundamental failure of central planning. By removing Eskom's pricing power and monopolising generation, the government cut the lifeline of basic economics: profit, reinvestment, and price signals. If we want a sustainable, affordable energy future, we must return to first principles: let markets determine prices, let private companies compete, and let Eskom finally face the real cost of doing business – or get out of the way. | Nicholas Woode-Smith Free Market Foundation
The Citizen
7 days ago
- The Citizen
Beyond Tokenism: Embracing disability through critical academia
SEDIBENG.- In contemporary society, 'inclusivity' has become a widely celebrated value but too often, its implementation is superficial. Institutions and individuals claim to be inclusive, yet the overuse of the term belies a lack of genuine understanding of what inclusion entails. This hollow inclusivity risks tokenizing those it seeks to empower, reducing their experiences to box-checking exercises rather than transformative engagements. Inclusion without insight can be alienating, especially for disabled people who are regularly absorbed into structures that neither recognize nor accommodate their realities. This conceptual void is starkly visible in two intersecting academic domains – Inclusive Education and Disability Studies. Both aim to protect and promote the rights of disabled individuals, yet they operate with vastly different lenses. Inclusive Education centers on pedagogical strategies that place disabled learners within mainstream environments, often focusing on adjustments and support mechanisms within schools. While valuable, this approach can remain mechanical unless underpinned by deeper socio-political analysis of disability. This is where Disability Studies plays a transformative role. As an interdisciplinary field, it interrogates disability not as a personal impairment or medical anomaly but as a social, political, and cultural construct. At the heart of Disability Studies lies the social model of disability, which reframes exclusion. It is not the individual's body or mind that is deficient but society's design and attitudes that create barriers. Unequal access, prejudice, architectural constraints, and discriminatory policies are the true culprits in disabling people. By shifting the focus from 'fixing' individuals to reforming society, Disability Studies fosters a rights-based, justice-oriented approach. The disconnect between inclusive practices and disability scholarship remains vast. In classrooms, for instance, educators may accommodate disabled students yet lack awareness of the disability rights movement, its milestones, and its ideological foundations. Teaching about disability in isolation from its history risks perpetuating ableism under the guise of inclusion. If we want learners to grasp what inclusion truly demands, Disability Studies must be integrated across disciplines from History and Sociology to Law and Public Health. Considering that, History often taught as a chronology of dominant figures and events, it frequently erases the lives and struggles of disabled people. Why, for example, were disabled individuals among those targeted during the Nazi regime? Could Hitler's own rumored ailments have driven a toxic ideology rooted in ableism and self-hatred? These questions are not just provocative, they are essential for understanding the social construction of disability and the politics of exclusion. Yet despite its importance, Disability Studies remains underrepresented in higher learning institutions. The scarcity of degree-level programs delays research, policy reform, and the cultivation of informed advocates. Without academic spaces to study the history, activism, and cultural representation of disability, society loses crucial opportunities to evolve. Universities must step into this leadership role, not only by offering Disability Studies degrees but by embedding its principles into the broader academic curriculum. Doing so would foster a generation of thinkers, educators, and policymakers who challenge ableism at its root. The aim is not to merely include disabled people in existing systems, it is to reshape those systems so they are built with disability in mind. Inclusion must be rooted in understanding. It cannot be achieved by rhetoric alone, it requires deconstructing the societal barriers that disable people. By promoting Disability Studies, academic institutions can drive the cultural shift needed to realize true equity. The social model of disability is not just a theory, it is a call to action. (Lucky Tumahole – Disability Advocate)
IOL News
25-07-2025
- IOL News
Green Shoots: Our anger is key to hope, and our humanity
It is hard to write about things that lighten the heart, that cheer the soul, that tickle our funny bone and make us laugh with abandon. I think it was the people's poet Mzwakhe Mbuli who asked how he could be expected to write about the beautiful daisies when the horror of apartheid is what was his lived reality? What I really want to write about and explore with you are the green shoots of hope that emerge when we change our behaviour and attitudes, the things that are within our ambit of control, the things that would make for a better world – kindness, love, integrity, compassion. And I will do that – I have no desire to pontificate and lecture everyone about politics and rights and all those things. 'Green Shoots' has to resonate with you who take the time to read the thing, and hopefully move you to think about helping to create a better world. Today, I don't know if I can do that easily. Today, I have been absorbing the images coming out of Gaza of starving children, clinging to life because that is at the core of every human – to survive. And the Gazans have shown more of that desire to live than most. I remember. It was the Jews in the concentration camps and ghettoes who showed the same determination to resist their extermination. It was they who refused to die at the hands of the most barbarous system the world had seen. Nazism enabled the most horrendous atrocities to be visited on a people. History is full of these atrocities. It is filled with the stench of genocide – and the inhumanity of the perpetrators. In Namibia, colonial Germany tried to exterminate the Herero and Nama people, and today are being forced into making reparations. In South Africa, the British interred Afrikaners and black Africans in concentration camps, starving them into a submission that would not happen, that they refused. In Europe, Hitler and his thugs killed 6 million Jews, Sinti, and Roma people, and did all they could to destroy resistance to the Reich. The argument made by Israel is that the Jewish people needed a place they could call their own, where they could be free of the persecution that most of Europe visited on them. This is why they came to Palestine. It didn't matter that there were people living there – they claimed a God-given right to take over. Anything born out of such violence cannot be maintained without more violence. Israel, with the backing of the USA, UK, and others, has taken that violence to levels even the most zealous of the Nazis and their ilk could not imagine. Ethnic cleansing first by bombardment, then by starvation. How can we not be angry? But let it not be an impotent anger, where we throw our hands up, hopeless in the face of unspeakable evil. Let us be filled with a rage that says no to evil, that drives us to not shut up when the issue is raised in our social interaction and conversations, but instead to challenge anyone who says Israel is simply defending itself, or that Israel is defending the holy land, or whatever other narrative the evil ones try to spin. Speak out. Our anger now must drive our refusal to lose our own humanity by giving in to hopelessness. Even if we are not in the halls of the United Nations, we maintain the spark of humanness and love and justice and kindness by affirming our solidarity with those who survive in spite of Israel's genocidal actions. Our anger must nurture the hearts and minds of our children who must know that we were not okay with this, that we didn't keep quiet while the most monstrous human atrocities are being carried out in full view of the world. Don't feel impotent – don't give in to 'there's nothing I can do that will change this'. Resist. At all times resist the lure of despair. If those in Gaza can still live, can resist, who are we to give up?
