From Diagnosis to Liberation: Autism Advocacy and the Case Against Capitalism
Celebrating Embrace Autism and Imagining an Autistic Vanguard for a Post-Capitalist World
Embrace Autism’s blog post, The Rise of Late Autism Diagnoses, is a vital resource in a world where understanding oneself as autistic is often a fragmented and inaccessible journey. By providing tools, surveys, and information grounded in research, they offer an affordable, accessible entry point to self-recognition for autistic people who may have spent years, or even decades, living without the language to understand their own experiences. The work of Embrace Autism as an organisation stands out as a rare and essential effort. Led by neurodivergent people, they provide ethically grounded services at a price that many can afford, stepping into a gap that mainstream systems of diagnosis and support have left wide open. In a world where professional validation often feels like a luxury reserved for those with money, time, and privilege, Embrace Autism offers a lifeline for individuals navigating the complexities of identity and access.
Yet, their very existence highlights a troubling contradiction. Why should such an organisation need to exist in the first place? Why must autistic people prove their neurotype to gain basic support and recognition? The diagnostic process, as currently structured, commodifies autism—turning what is simply a way of being into something that must be officially verified to be considered legitimate. Diagnosis is framed as a gateway to accommodation and care, but it is also a gatekeeping mechanism, one that excludes far more people than it includes. This raises a deeper question: why has society allowed autism, like so many other human differences, to be packaged, priced, and sold back to those who need support? The existence of organisations like Embrace Autism is both a triumph of autistic-led advocacy and a stark indictment of the broader system’s failure to meet the needs of autistic people without imposing financial, emotional, and bureaucratic barriers.
The Commodification of Autism
Capitalism has an insidious way of commodifying every aspect of human experience, and autism is no exception. Neurodivergence, which simply reflects the natural diversity of human brains, has been turned into a product—a diagnosis to be bought and sold. The process of obtaining a formal diagnosis, far from being a neutral or purely medical act, has become a gatekeeping tool. It is a mechanism that privileges those who can afford the time, money, and emotional labour required to navigate complex systems, leaving countless others excluded. For those who have financial resources, a diagnosis often becomes a fast-tracked experience through private assessments, whilst those without these means are forced to rely on public systems that are underfunded, slow, and deeply inaccessible.
This commodification has stark consequences. Marginalised autistic people—those who are racialised, low-income, or otherwise vulnerable—are disproportionately left without formal recognition. They are either underdiagnosed, misdiagnosed, or worse, pathologised in ways that see their struggles criminalised rather than understood. Black and Indigenous autistic people, for instance, are far more likely to be labelled with behavioural disorders, subjected to institutionalisation, or even jailed, rather than supported. Diagnosis, within this framework, becomes a necessity not because it inherently benefits autistic people but because it serves as the key to a system designed to exclude by default. Without that official stamp of legitimacy, autistic people are often denied accommodations, resources, and understanding, forced to fight for basic recognition in a world that demands proof of their difference.
In this landscape, organisations like Embrace Autism play an essential and admirable role. They provide an affordable and accessible pathway to understanding and self-recognition, particularly for those who might otherwise be left behind. Their neurodivergent-led approach ensures that the services they provide are not only ethical but grounded in lived experience, making them a rare and vital resource. However, their existence also highlights a troubling contradiction. The fact that Embrace Autism must fill this gap reveals the failings of a broader system that forces people to buy access to recognition and accommodations. Whilst they work to make the process less exclusionary, the underlying problem remains: diagnosis, in its current form, is a commodified gateway rather than a universal right. The work of Embrace Autism deserves celebration, but it also serves as a stark reminder that the systems we operate within are fundamentally unjust. It is not enough to improve access to these systems; we must interrogate and challenge why they exist in this form at all.
Reform vs. Revolution
Most self-advocacy for autistic people, however well-intentioned, remains framed within the boundaries of reformist logic. Calls for “better funding,” “more affordable diagnosis,” or “expanded accommodations” are commonly seen as the solutions to the barriers faced by autistic individuals. These demands are not without merit; they often bring tangible relief to those struggling to navigate a system that excludes them. However, they ultimately address the symptoms of a deeper issue whilst leaving the capitalist system that underpins these barriers entirely intact. Reformist approaches perpetuate the very structures that commodify autism and neurodivergence, focusing on making these differences palatable to capitalism rather than challenging the system itself.
The reformist model privileges those who can profit from neurodivergence by framing it as a “market opportunity.” Industries spring up around diagnosis, therapy, and accommodations, offering products and services to make autistic people more “functional” in a capitalist sense. This approach centres the needs of employers and institutions to extract productivity, not the needs of autistic people themselves to live fulfilling lives in a more humane world. By contrast, the reality of many autistic people’s lives—particularly those who are non-speaking, require significant support, or are otherwise unable to conform to capitalist expectations—remains invisible within this reformist framework. These efforts to smooth the edges of neurodivergence for capitalism’s comfort only reinforce the exclusion of those who cannot or will not fit within its narrow definitions of value.
To truly understand the system’s failings, we need a Marxist analysis of its underlying contradictions. As Mao explains in On Contradiction, the primary contradiction of capitalism is that it commodifies human difference to extract profit whilst simultaneously denying the humanity of marginalised groups. Autism is both commodified—as a diagnosis to be sold, as a market for therapy and tools, as a source of exploitable labour for tech companies—and dehumanised, as those who don’t meet capitalist standards of “value” are excluded, pathologised, or ignored. This contradiction cannot be resolved through incremental reforms; it is a feature of the system, not a bug. The system is working exactly as designed, and that design is rooted in exploitation.
Lenin’s What Is to Be Done? further illustrates why reformism is insufficient. Lenin argues that meaningful change requires recognising that systems of oppression are not broken but are intentionally constructed to maintain the dominance of the ruling class. Reform can only tinker at the edges of a system built on exploitation, offering temporary and limited relief without ever challenging its foundations. Applying this lens to autism advocacy reveals that calls for better funding or expanded services, whilst necessary in the short term, do nothing to challenge the commodification of diagnosis or the exclusionary nature of capitalism itself. These reforms can even reinforce the system’s legitimacy, creating the illusion that it can be “fixed” whilst continuing to function as a tool of oppression.
True liberation for autistic people cannot come from reforming capitalism; it requires dismantling it. The system’s very structure is predicated on the exploitation and exclusion of those who do not conform to its narrow standards of productivity and profit. To move beyond reformism, we must embrace a revolutionary understanding of the problem, one that centres not on making autism more “acceptable” to capitalism but on creating a world where autistic people can live authentically, without commodification or exclusion.
A Neurodivergent Vanguard
To envision true systemic change for neurodivergent people, we must draw on Lenin’s concept of the vanguard party: a collective, organised group dedicated to dismantling systems of oppression, not merely making incremental reforms. Such a group would recognise that the capitalist system is not broken but functioning exactly as designed, and therefore it must be uprooted rather than patched over. A neurodivergent vanguard would be a movement grounded in the lived experiences of all neurodivergent people—autistic, ADHD, AuDHD, dyslexic, dyspraxic, and more—rejecting the commodification of neurodivergence and fighting for a society that centres care, equity, and solidarity. It is essential to note that such a movement would never receive support through existing frameworks like the Autism CARES Act or similar initiatives, which perpetuate the medicalisation and pathologisation of neurodivergence whilst prioritising projects that align with capitalist interests over true liberation.
A neurodivergent vanguard must centre the most vulnerable members of the community: non-speaking autistic people, those with multiple diagnoses, those in poverty, and those with significant support needs, as well as those whose experiences are consistently erased, such as racialised and queer neurodivergent individuals. This movement would not focus on making neurodivergence more “acceptable” to capitalism but instead demand a restructuring of society itself. True liberation cannot leave anyone behind. It requires a commitment to ensuring that all neurodivergent voices are heard and respected, especially those who cannot self-advocate in traditional ways or whose needs have been deliberately neglected. The neurodivergent vanguard would fight not only for accommodations and resources but for a complete reimagining of society, where care is universal, need is prioritised, and human worth is no longer measured by productivity or profit.
However, even within advocacy, there are risks that must be carefully avoided. Too often, efforts that claim to speak for the most vulnerable end up exploiting them instead. Tokenism and reformist optics frequently position individuals with significant support needs or those with intersectional marginalisations as symbols, whilst depriving them of actual resources, care, or decision-making power. Advocacy efforts that aim to make neurodivergence more palatable to the neuro-majority risk leaving the most vulnerable worse off, reinforcing exclusion rather than dismantling it. A neurodivergent vanguard must be vigilant against these tendencies, ensuring that it does not replicate the systems of oppression it seeks to dismantle.
At its heart, the neurodivergent vanguard must be rooted in solidarity. Solidarity demands recognising that the liberation of one group is inseparable from the liberation of all. Advocacy cannot succeed if it creates hierarchies among neurodivergent people, privileging those whose needs are seen as “easier” or more acceptable while marginalising others. The vanguard must uplift and support the most vulnerable members of the neurodivergent community, providing them with the care and resources they need while amplifying their experiences and perspectives. This is not a matter of speaking for those whose voices are not traditionally heard but of building systems that allow all voices to be recognised and valued. By centring solidarity and rejecting exploitation, the neurodivergent vanguard can model the kind of society it seeks to create: one where every individual is valued for who they are, not for what they can produce or contribute to a capitalist framework.
A Post-Capitalist Vision for Autism Advocacy
For many readers in the Global North, engaging with Marxist literature might seem like a daunting or even controversial idea. This is not an accident. The works of Marx, Lenin, Mao, Fanon, and others are often portrayed as outdated or dangerous, when in reality, they provide invaluable tools for understanding systemic oppression and imagining a better world. The systemic taboo against reading these texts—reinforced by cultural narratives, bans in schools, repressive laws, and the suppression of critical theory—exists to maintain the status quo. Without these tools, critiques of capitalism are often confined to calls for reform rather than addressing the root causes of exploitation. As part of this misconception, many misunderstand fundamental Marxist concepts, such as the distinction between private and personal property. Marxists do not want your toothbrush, your home, or your family heirlooms; the critique lies with private property—capital, resources, and land hoarded by the few at the expense of the many. Understanding these concepts opens the door to imagining a society beyond the commodification and exploitation of neurodivergent lives.
Imagine a world where support is universal, accessible, and based on trust rather than gatekeeping. In such a society, self-recognition and lived experience would be sufficient to access accommodations and care, without the need to navigate an expensive and exclusionary diagnostic process. Under capitalism, diagnosis has become a product, a commodity that individuals must purchase to gain access to basic supports. This process reflects the larger capitalist framework, where everything—even human difference—is monetised and controlled. Instead of this gatekeeping, a post-capitalist approach would prioritise community care and mutual aid, recognising that individuals know their needs best and that neurodivergent people are experts in their own experiences. Such a shift would dismantle the barriers imposed by capitalism, ensuring that all individuals, regardless of income or background, have the resources they need to thrive.
To achieve this, societal structures must centre the needs of the most vulnerable over the desires of the most greedy. Universal Basic Income (UBI), social housing, and universal healthcare would provide a foundation for dismantling the capitalist stranglehold on neurodivergent lives. These systems would ensure that no one is left without a home, food, or medical care, and that neurodivergent individuals have the support they need without being forced to justify their existence or value to a profit-driven system. Prioritising the most vulnerable not only creates a more equitable society but also ensures that care is designed inclusively, benefiting everyone.
To address a common misconception, it’s crucial to confront the narrative that socialist countries are inherently “backwards” or that “nothing works” in such societies. This framing ignores the systematic and multifaceted efforts by the United States and its allies to sabotage emergent socialist nations at every turn. From CIA-backed coups to embargos and financial blockades, these attacks are designed to destabilise and delegitimise any system that dares to prioritise collective need over capitalist profit. Take Cuba, for instance: despite its remarkable innovations in healthcare and education, the island has faced decades of crushing sanctions. Companies that consider doing business with Cuba risk being banned from SWIFT and other financial systems controlled by the Global North. This financial warfare ensures that socialist countries struggle to access even basic goods, not because their systems are flawed but because they are deliberately strangled by global capitalism. The struggles of these nations are not evidence of socialism’s failure, but of the lengths capitalist powers will go to maintain their dominance. Despite this relentless opposition, many socialist nations still manage to achieve feats of innovation and care that far exceed what is seen in wealthier capitalist states—a testament to the strength and potential of their systems when unimpeded.
In countries like the United States, the resources to achieve this vision already exist. Wealth and automation have reached levels that make universal care and housing not only possible but practical. The problem is not a lack of resources but a system that prioritises greed over humanity. The working class has not shared in the wealth they’ve created for decades, as inequality has spiralled out of control. Meanwhile, socialist countries like China and Cuba demonstrate that innovation is not tied to the profit motive. China’s DeepSeek technology and Cuba’s groundbreaking vaccines are clear examples of advancements driven by collective need, not corporate greed. In fact, capitalism often stifles innovation, as seen in the history of electrified vehicles being shelved by Big Oil a century ago. Time and again, profits have been prioritised over the health of the planet, leading us to the climate crisis we face today. Imagine what the world might look like if, instead of pursuing endless profit, we had embraced sustainable development a century ago. The potential for a healthier, more equitable planet has always been within our reach, but capitalism has stood in the way.
Achieving this vision requires systemic change, not as a distant utopia but as an urgent and practical step toward survival and dignity for all neurodivergent people. The inequalities of the current system are unsustainable, and the marginalisation of neurodivergent individuals is a symptom of a larger problem. By dismantling capitalism and centring care, equity, and sustainability, we can create a world where neurodivergence is no longer commodified or gatekept. This is not a fantasy—it is a necessity. A post-capitalist society would ensure that everyone, regardless of neurotype, has the support they need to live fully and authentically, free from the exploitation and exclusion that define the present system. This is not merely a call for change; it is a demand for justice.
Final thoughts …
Embrace Autism stands as a beacon of what ethical, community-centred support can look like in a world dominated by gatekeeping and commodification. Their work empowers neurodivergent people to understand themselves, to find language for their experiences, and to access resources that would otherwise be out of reach. Led by neurodivergent individuals, their approach challenges the paternalistic frameworks that so often dominate this space. They fill a critical gap with compassion and integrity, providing tools and services that are both accessible and affordable. Yet, as much as their efforts deserve celebration, we must also recognise the deeper injustice their existence reveals. The fight they are engaged in—the fight to help people access validation, care, and support—should not need to exist at all. It is the product of a system that has failed neurodivergent people at every turn, a system that commodifies their difference and forces them to buy their way into recognition and survival.
This is where the limits of reform become clear. To truly liberate neurodivergent people, and all marginalised groups, we must go beyond patchwork fixes and incremental improvements. As Lenin argued, systems of oppression are not broken; they are designed to work against us. Dismantling these systems requires more than better funding or expanded access—it requires a complete reimagining of how we structure society itself. A society where resources are distributed according to need, not profit. A society where the most vulnerable are centred in all decisions, and where care is universal, not conditional.
This is not an impossible dream; it is a necessary vision. The wealth, technology, and innovation already exist to create such a world. What stands in the way is a system that prioritises greed over humanity, exclusion over equity, and profit over care. The liberation of neurodivergent people depends on dismantling this system and building something better in its place—a society that values every person for who they are, not what they can produce.
Let us take inspiration from those who came before us, who refused to settle for reforms that left the roots of oppression intact. This is not just about accommodations or support; it is about liberation. It is about imagining and building a world where no one is forced to justify their existence, where care and community replace exploitation and alienation, and where solidarity binds us all together. This is the fight that lies ahead, and it is a fight we can and must win.