There's got to be a better way: an autistic critique of capitalism
As an autistic person, I’ve experienced firsthand how the capitalist system fails to meet the needs of those who don’t fit neatly into its narrow conception of productivity and value. The constant pressure to sell one’s labour in order to survive, the lack of accommodations and support in the workplace, and the inadequacy of our social safety net all create immense barriers and challenges for people like me.
But as I’ve come to learn more about the history and dynamics of capitalism, I’ve realised that these struggles are not just the result of individual failings or a lack of understanding and acceptance of neurodiversity. Rather, they are the inevitable outcomes of a system that prioritises profit and growth above all else, and that systematically excludes and marginalises those who don’t conform to its demands.
Capitalism, at its core, is defined by the enclosure of commons and the creation of artificial scarcity. Throughout history, elites have privatised land, resources, and knowledge that were once held in common, forcing people to rely on wage labor to survive. For those of us who struggle to navigate the neurotypical world of work, this has meant a constant state of precarity and insecurity, as we are left with few options other than to sell our labour in a market that undervalues and misunderstands us.
Moreover, the drive for ever-increasing accumulation that is at the heart of capitalism necessarily requires the exploitation of both labour and nature. This creates a race to the bottom, as wages are depressed and environmental protections are weakened in the name of competitiveness and growth. For autistic people, who often require accommodations and support to thrive in the workplace, this can mean being seen as a “cost” to be minimised rather than a valuable member of the team.
But perhaps most fundamentally, capitalism is incompatible with true economic democracy. Even in countries with political democracy, the sphere of production and investment remains firmly in the grip of the capitalist class. As workers, we have little say over the decisions that shape our lives and livelihoods, and even less power to challenge the systemic ableism and inequality that permeate our economic system.
The result is a world that is hostile to neurodivergence and disability, and that sees human worth only in terms of one's ability to generate profit. It’s a world in which people like me are constantly struggling to get by, to access the resources and support we need to live full and dignified lives.
But it doesn’t have to be this way. A more democratic and inclusive economy is possible - one that prioritises human needs and well-being over the relentless pursuit of growth and accumulation. Imagine a world in which the wealth and resources of society are used to ensure that everyone has access to the accommodations, support, and opportunities they need to thrive, regardless of their neurotype or ability.
To get there, we will need a political movement that challenges the very foundations of capitalism and dares to envision a different kind of society. As autistic people, we have a crucial role to play in this movement, by sharing our experiences, advocating for our rights, and building solidarity with all those who are oppressed and marginalised by the current system.
It won’t be an easy or straightforward path. The forces of capital and the state are powerful and deeply entrenched. But as I look around at the growing resistance and the incredible resilience and creativity of our community, I have hope. By coming together and fighting for a world that values and supports us all, we can build a future in which neurodiversity is celebrated, and in which everyone has the chance to live a life of dignity, security, and joy.
Educate Yourself
Let’s say you wanted to know more about the points I’ve just made. You may head over to Wikipedia or ChatGPT. Doing so, the default responses would be necessarily positive / neutral about capitalism. If you asked ChatGPT, for example, to provide some key frameworks and perspectives on capitalism, you might get something like this:
Classical political economy (Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Thomas Robert Malthus, and John Stuart Mill): Emphasises the role of markets, division of labour, and individual self-interest in driving economic growth and prosperity.
Critique of political economy (John Rushkin, Karl Marx, and Friedrich Engels): Sees capitalism as a system of exploitation based on private ownership of the means of production and the extraction of surplus value from wage labour. Emphasises class struggle and the inherent contradictions and crisis tendencies of capitalism.
Weberian sociology: Focuses on the role of rationalisation, bureaucratisation, and the “spirit of capitalism” (rooted in Protestant ethics) in shaping the development of modern capitalism.
Austrian School (Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek): Emphasises the importance of individual entrepreneurship, market competition, and the price system in coordinating economic activity and generating innovation.
Keynesian economics: Stresses the role of aggregate demand and government intervention in managing the business cycle and promoting economic stability and growth.
Schumpeterian evolutionary economics: Focuses on the role of innovation, creative destruction, and entrepreneurship in driving economic change and development under capitalism.
Institutionalist economics (Thorstein Veblen, John Commons): Emphasises the role of social and legal institutions in shaping economic behaviour and the evolution of capitalism over time.
World-systems theory (Immanuel Wallerstein): Analyses capitalism as a global system based on the division of the world into core, periphery, and semi-periphery regions, with unequal exchange between them.
Feminist political economy: Examines the gendered dimensions of capitalism, including the role of unpaid reproductive labour, the gender division of labour, and the impact of capitalist development on women’s lives.
Ecological economics: Emphasizes the ecological limits to capitalist growth and the need to reshape economic systems to be more sustainable and respect planetary boundaries.
Varieties of Capitalism approach (Peter Hall, David Soskice): Stresses the diversity of capitalist systems across countries, shaped by different institutional configurations and comparative advantages.
Regulation theory (Michel Aglietta, Robert Boyer): Focuses on the role of social and institutional “modes of regulation” in stabilising capitalist accumulation and managing its contradictions in different historical periods.
These are just some of the many frameworks that have been developed to understand and analyse capitalism. Each offers a distinct lens through which to view the system, focusing on different aspects of its functioning, historical development, and social and economic implications. However, except for Marxism, all of these views accept the underlying premise of capitalism. They accept the premise, then seek to explain it from a particular point of view. Again, what I found interesting is that the default response is to provide mostly pro-capitalist references.
Critical perspectives on capitalism?
As we can clearly see, the above list does include several perspectives that are generally more favourable towards capitalism, seeking to explain its functioning and development rather than fundamentally critiquing it. This reflects the fact that much of the mainstream discourse on capitalism has been shaped by thinkers who, whilst not necessarily uncritical, operate within a broadly pro-capitalist framework.
However, there are many critical perspectives on capitalism that challenge its basic premises and highlight its negative social and environmental impacts. Some examples include:
Dependency theory (Raúl Prebisch, Andre Gunder Frank): Argues that the structure of the global capitalist system perpetuates the underdevelopment and dependence of the Global South.
Critical theory (Frankfurt School - Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Herbert Marcuse): Examines the cultural and ideological dimensions of capitalism and the way it shapes human consciousness and social relations.
Autonomist Marxism (Antonio Negri, Michael Hardt): Emphasises the creative potential of labour and social movements to resist and transcend capitalist control.
Eco-socialism (John Bellamy Foster, Joel Kovel): Integrates Marxist critique of capitalism with ecological concerns, arguing for a fundamental transformation of production and consumption patterns.
Postcolonial theory (Edward Said, Gayatri Spivak): Analyses the ongoing legacies of colonialism and imperialism in shaping global capitalism and the experiences of subaltern populations.
Anarchist economics (Peter Kropotkin, David Graeber): Rejects hierarchical economic relations and advocates for decentralised, cooperative forms of production and exchange.
Degrowth theory (Serge Latouche, Giorgos Kallis): Critiques the growth imperative of capitalism and calls for a socially just and ecologically sustainable economic model based on sufficiency and well-being.
These perspectives, among others, offer more radical critiques of capitalism that question its desirability and sustainability as a social and economic system. They highlight issues of exploitation, inequality, alienation, ecological destruction, and the concentration of power in ways that challenge the assumptions of more “mainstream” economic thinking.
Engaging with these critical perspectives alongside the explanatory frameworks in the first list can provide a better understanding of the debates surrounding capitalism in the Global North. But what about the Global South?
Critical perspectives on capitalism from the Global South
Perspectives on capitalism from the Global South and former colonies are incredibly important for understanding the global dimensions and impacts of the capitalist system. These perspectives often highlight the ways in which capitalism has been intertwined with histories of colonialism, imperialism, racism, and ongoing power imbalances in the world economy. Some key perspectives include:
Postcolonial theory (Frantz Fanon, Aimé Césaire, Edward Said): Analyses the cultural, psychological, and economic legacies of colonialism and how they continue to shape the experiences of former colonial subjects within the global capitalist system.
Dependency theory (Raúl Prebisch, Andre Gunder Frank, Samir Amin): Argues that the structure of the global capitalist economy perpetuates the underdevelopment and dependence of the Global South, through unequal terms of trade, foreign debt, and the extraction of resources and surplus value by multinational corporations.
Subaltern studies (Ranajit Guha, Gayatri Spivak, Dipesh Chakrabarty): Focuses on the experiences and agency of marginalised and oppressed groups (such as peasants, workers, and women) within the context of colonial and postcolonial capitalist societies.
Latin American structuralism (Raúl Prebisch, Celso Furtado): Emphasises the structural barriers to development faced by Latin American economies within the global capitalist system, such as deteriorating terms of trade and the concentration of technological progress in the core countries.
African socialism (Julius Nyerere, Kwame Nkrumah): Advocated for a non-capitalist path to development based on collective ownership, self-reliance, and Pan-African solidarity as a response to the legacies of colonialism and the challenges of post-independence development.
Islamic economics (Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, Umer Chapra): Critiques capitalism from an Islamic perspective, emphasising the principles of social justice, redistribution, and the prohibition of interest and speculative activities.
These perspectives challenge Eurocentric and universaliaing narratives about capitalism, highlighting the diverse experiences and resistances of peoples in the Global South. They underscore the importance of situating analyses of capitalism within the historical context of colonialism and ongoing global power asymmetries.
By centering the voices and agency of those who have been marginalised and exploited by the global capitalist system, these perspectives offer crucial insights into the workings of capitalism on a global scale and the struggles for alternative, more equitable and self-determined forms of economic and social organization.
It’s important for any comprehensive analysis of capitalism to engage with these perspectives from the Global South and take seriously their critiques and proposals for transformation. This can help to denaturalise and provincialise dominant understandings of capitalism, and to envision more just and inclusive economic futures.
Disability?
I then wondered about it’s response to a direct question about a specific example. Given all of these scholars, how would it respond to my asking about where they see capitalism helping the disabled and disadvantaged?
You see, the lack of a strong social safety net and adequate public services in the US has led to devastating consequences for people with disabilities, who often face poverty, isolation, and lack of access to basic necessities.
The US has one of the weakest “welfare states” among developed countries, with a patchwork system of means-tested programs and limited public services that leave many people falling through the cracks. For people with disabilities, who often have higher medical expenses and may face barriers to employment, this lack of support can be particularly catastrophic.
The statistics paint a grim picture:
Poverty: People with disabilities are more than twice as likely to live in poverty as those without disabilities. Many rely on meager benefits like Supplemental Security Income (SSI), which often fails to provide enough to cover basic needs.
Healthcare: Despite the existence of programs like Medicaid and Medicare, many people with disabilities still lack access to comprehensive, affordable healthcare. They may face high out-of-pocket costs, limited provider networks, and lack of coverage for necessary services and equipment.
Housing: Accessible, affordable housing is in short supply, leaving many people with disabilities in substandard or institutional settings. Homelessness is also a significant problem, with people with disabilities overrepresented among the homeless population.
Education: Students with disabilities often face underfunded and inadequate special education services, leading to lower educational attainment and limited opportunities later in life.
Employment: People with disabilities face significant barriers to employment, including discrimination, lack of accommodations, and the risk of losing essential benefits if they work too much. As a result, they are much less likely to be employed than those without disabilities.
These poor conditions are not inevitable, but rather the result of policy choices that have prioritised low or no taxes for corporations, austerity, and the interests of the wealthy over the needs of the most vulnerable. The US spends far less on social programs as a percentage of GDP compared to other developed countries, and what spending does exist is often targeted towards the elderly rather than working-age people with disabilities.
Moreover, the dominance of neoliberal ideology in US politics has led to a demonisation of welfare and a valorisation of “personal responsibility” that blames individuals for their poverty and marginalises those who are seen as “dependent” on public aid. This has created a hostile political climate for advocates seeking to expand and improve services for people with disabilities.
Addressing these poor conditions will require a major shift in our political and economic priorities. It will require significant investment in public services, including healthcare, housing, education, and transportation, to ensure that people with disabilities have access to the resources they need to live full and dignified lives. It will require the creation of a more robust and inclusive safety net, with programs that provide adequate income support and don't punish people for attempting to work.
It will also require challenging the stigma and discrimination that people with disabilities face in all areas of life, and creating a more accessible and inclusive society. This means enforcing existing civil rights laws, like the Americans with Disabilities Act, as well as enacting new protections and supports.
Ultimately, creating a society that truly values and includes people with disabilities will require a fundamental rethinking of our economic system and a rejection of the logic of capitalism that treats people as disposable and expendable. It will require a vision of a society based on solidarity, mutual aid, and the recognition of our interdependence and shared humanity.
This is no small task, but it is an essential one if we are to build a world in which all people can thrive and reach their full potential. It will require the active leadership and participation of the disability community, as well as the support and allyship of all those committed to social justice and equality. More on that in a future article …
December 2024 Update
As we close out 2024, it feels impossible to ignore the seismic shifts that have taken place in the United States since I first wrote this article. The recent election has brought a stark realisation to the forefront: a small handful of exceedingly wealthy individuals (including the world’s richest human) now wield an unprecedented level of influence over the nation, their money having effectively purchased the presidency. This isn’t hyperbole—it’s a reality we must confront if we are to understand what lies ahead.
The incoming President, propelled into office by a torrent of “dark money,” serves as a glaring symbol of this oligarchic stranglehold. Campaigns were awash with funds from super PACs, shadowy donor networks, and an unrelenting deluge of media buys. These resources weren’t just used to promote policies or ideologies; they were wielded to shape perceptions, manufacture consent, and drown out dissenting voices. Democracy, as many have noted, has increasingly become a commodity—something to be bought and sold rather than practiced as a shared civic endeavour.
The New Kings of America
Let’s not mince words: the individuals funding this proxy presidency are now the de facto rulers of the United States. Through their wealth, they have crafted a political machine that prioritises their interests above all else. These interests include deregulation, tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy, and the dismantling of what remains of the social safety net. Policies that benefit the masses—accessible healthcare, robust public education, and climate action—are portrayed as “unsustainable” or “un-American” by the media apparatus they control.
It’s worth asking: is this a failure of democracy, or is this democracy functioning exactly as designed within a capitalist framework? After all, the system has always privileged those with money and power. What we’re witnessing now is simply the culmination of centuries of wealth consolidation and systemic inequality. The difference today is the sheer scale and brazenness of it.
The Role of the Media
The media, largely owned or influenced by these same wealthy individuals, has played a crucial role in normalising this state of affairs. Coverage of the election framed it as a battle of personalities rather than a reckoning with systemic issues. Investigative journalism, which might have shone a light on the darker corners of campaign financing and policy-making, has been steadily eroded by years of budget cuts and corporate consolidation.
Social media, too, has been co-opted. Algorithms prioritise sensationalism over substance, amplifying polarisation and suppressing nuanced debate. Independent voices are drowned out by the sheer volume of paid content and coordinated disinformation campaigns. The digital public square, once heralded as a tool for democratic engagement, now feels more like a marketplace for manipulation.
The Anti-Trans Agenda and Capitalism's Bogeyman
This election also highlighted another troubling trend: the sheer amount of money spent on anti-trans advertisements and campaigns. These ads, designed to stoke fear and division, were a cornerstone of the culture war rhetoric that dominated political discourse. The figures are staggering—millions of dollars poured into vilifying a marginalised community. One can’t help but wonder how much good that money could have done if it had been invested in healthcare, education, or housing instead.
But capitalism always seems to need a bogeyman. The targeting of trans people isn’t just about prejudice; it’s a strategic distraction. By creating an “enemy” to rally against, those in power divert attention from the systemic issues they perpetuate. It’s a tale as old as capitalism itself: blame the most vulnerable whilst consolidating wealth and power. This tactic ensures that outrage and fear are directed away from the true sources of inequality and exploitation.
For those of us who are already marginalised—disabled people, neurodivergent individuals, LGBTQ+ communities, and people of colour—the implications of this election are especially dire. The incoming administration’s policy agenda is unlikely to prioritise equity or inclusion. Instead, we can expect further rollbacks of civil rights protections, reduced funding for social programs, and an emboldened push to criminalise dissent.
What This Means for the Marginalised
The disability community, for instance, faces a growing threat as public services come under attack. The proposed privatisation of Medicaid and Social Security, the erosion of accessibility standards, and the demonisation of “dependence” all signal a bleak future. Similarly, for neurodivergent people, the lack of support in education, employment, and healthcare is likely to worsen as austerity measures take hold. And for LGBTQ+ individuals, particularly trans people, the rise in anti-trans rhetoric and legislation is a grim reminder of how quickly hard-won rights can be stripped away.
Building Resistance
So where do we go from here? It’s tempting to despair, but despair serves the status quo. Instead, we must channel our anger and frustration into action. This means building coalitions across movements, recognising our shared struggles under this system, and refusing to be divided by the tactics of those in power.
Mutual aid networks, grassroots organising, and community-based solutions will be more important than ever in the coming years. These are not just survival strategies; they are acts of defiance against a system that seeks to render us powerless. By supporting one another, we can create pockets of resistance that challenge the hegemony of wealth and privilege.
It’s also crucial to reclaim the narrative. Independent media and citizen journalism must rise to fill the gaps left by corporate outlets. Social media, despite its flaws, can still be a tool for organising and amplifying underrepresented voices if used strategically. Education, both formal and informal, remains a vital battleground for shaping public consciousness and inspiring future generations to fight for a fairer world.
A Call to Action
This Boxing Day, as we reflect on the year behind us and prepare for the year ahead, let us recommit ourselves to the struggle for justice. Let us reject the notion that the current state of affairs is inevitable or immutable. History has shown us that power can be challenged, systems can be changed, and new possibilities can be imagined.
The fight will not be easy, but it is necessary. And as we move forward, let us remember that our strength lies in solidarity, in the connections we forge with one another, and in the unwavering belief that a better world is possible.