构建统一的残疾人共同体:全国残疾人委员会关于残疾人权利审议制度统一的论述

Jessica M. F. Hughes
{"title":"构建统一的残疾人共同体:全国残疾人委员会关于残疾人权利审议制度统一的论述","authors":"Jessica M. F. Hughes","doi":"10.16997/JDD.248","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The National Council on Disability (NCD) is a federal agency that connects members of a broad disability community to federal policymakers within the deliberative system (Mansbridge, 2012) that constitutes the disability rights movement in the U.S. In this critical discourse analysis, the author considers the Council's depiction of the deliberative system in its publication Equality of opportunity: The making of the Americans with Disabilities Act (NCD, 2010). Paying particular attention to discourses of unity and difference within this history of the ADA and in NCD’s About Us web pages, the study looks to understand how the Council’s depiction of the disability community and portrayal of its own role within the deliberative system impacts their legitimacy within the disability rights movement. Interrogating the ways in which unity is privileged over diversity in NCD’s history of the ADA shows how the Council exhibits a consensus democratic orientation that presents the disability community as an unwavering force to be reckoned with, positions the National Council on Disability at a position of power within its deliberative system, and highlights the deliberative nature of NCD’s mission. However, the ways in which NCD’s history of the ADA downplays difference in favor of unity sidesteps stakeholder concerns and fails to engage with social difference as a resource for inclusion and collaboration. Further, NCD discourse works to define human worth in terms of work and deliberation in terms of consensus in ways that reinforce stigma around disability and exclude underrepresented groups. The author offers some practical suggestions aimed at helping the Council and other policymakers and leaders in social justice movements to incorporate more pluralist perspectives to address issues of exclusion.","PeriodicalId":147188,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Deliberation","volume":"115 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Constructing a United Disability Community: The National Council on Disability’s Discourse of Unity in the Deliberative System around Disability Rights\",\"authors\":\"Jessica M. F. Hughes\",\"doi\":\"10.16997/JDD.248\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The National Council on Disability (NCD) is a federal agency that connects members of a broad disability community to federal policymakers within the deliberative system (Mansbridge, 2012) that constitutes the disability rights movement in the U.S. In this critical discourse analysis, the author considers the Council's depiction of the deliberative system in its publication Equality of opportunity: The making of the Americans with Disabilities Act (NCD, 2010). Paying particular attention to discourses of unity and difference within this history of the ADA and in NCD’s About Us web pages, the study looks to understand how the Council’s depiction of the disability community and portrayal of its own role within the deliberative system impacts their legitimacy within the disability rights movement. Interrogating the ways in which unity is privileged over diversity in NCD’s history of the ADA shows how the Council exhibits a consensus democratic orientation that presents the disability community as an unwavering force to be reckoned with, positions the National Council on Disability at a position of power within its deliberative system, and highlights the deliberative nature of NCD’s mission. However, the ways in which NCD’s history of the ADA downplays difference in favor of unity sidesteps stakeholder concerns and fails to engage with social difference as a resource for inclusion and collaboration. Further, NCD discourse works to define human worth in terms of work and deliberation in terms of consensus in ways that reinforce stigma around disability and exclude underrepresented groups. The author offers some practical suggestions aimed at helping the Council and other policymakers and leaders in social justice movements to incorporate more pluralist perspectives to address issues of exclusion.\",\"PeriodicalId\":147188,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Public Deliberation\",\"volume\":\"115 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Public Deliberation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.16997/JDD.248\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Deliberation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16997/JDD.248","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

全国残疾人委员会(NCD)是一个联邦机构,它将广泛的残疾人社区成员与审议制度内的联邦决策者联系起来(Mansbridge, 2012),审议制度构成了美国的残疾人权利运动。在这一批判性话语分析中,作者考虑了该委员会在其出版物《机会平等:制定美国残疾人法案》(NCD, 2010)中对审议制度的描述。该研究特别关注《美国残疾人法》的历史以及NCD关于我们的网页中关于统一与差异的话语,旨在了解委员会对残疾人社区的描述及其在审议系统中自身角色的描述如何影响其在残疾人权利运动中的合法性。通过对《美国残疾人法》历史中统一优先于多样性的方式的考察,可以看出该委员会是如何展示出一种共识民主的方向,将残疾人群体视为不可动摇的力量,将全国残疾人委员会置于其审议制度中的权力地位,并突出了NCD使命的审议性质。然而,NCD在《美国残疾人法》的历史中淡化差异以支持团结的方式回避了利益相关者的关注,未能将社会差异作为包容和合作的资源。此外,非传染性疾病话语在工作和协商一致方面定义了人类价值,强化了对残疾的污名化,并排除了代表性不足的群体。作者提出了一些切实可行的建议,旨在帮助理事会和社会正义运动的其他决策者和领导人纳入更多的多元观点来解决排斥问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Constructing a United Disability Community: The National Council on Disability’s Discourse of Unity in the Deliberative System around Disability Rights
The National Council on Disability (NCD) is a federal agency that connects members of a broad disability community to federal policymakers within the deliberative system (Mansbridge, 2012) that constitutes the disability rights movement in the U.S. In this critical discourse analysis, the author considers the Council's depiction of the deliberative system in its publication Equality of opportunity: The making of the Americans with Disabilities Act (NCD, 2010). Paying particular attention to discourses of unity and difference within this history of the ADA and in NCD’s About Us web pages, the study looks to understand how the Council’s depiction of the disability community and portrayal of its own role within the deliberative system impacts their legitimacy within the disability rights movement. Interrogating the ways in which unity is privileged over diversity in NCD’s history of the ADA shows how the Council exhibits a consensus democratic orientation that presents the disability community as an unwavering force to be reckoned with, positions the National Council on Disability at a position of power within its deliberative system, and highlights the deliberative nature of NCD’s mission. However, the ways in which NCD’s history of the ADA downplays difference in favor of unity sidesteps stakeholder concerns and fails to engage with social difference as a resource for inclusion and collaboration. Further, NCD discourse works to define human worth in terms of work and deliberation in terms of consensus in ways that reinforce stigma around disability and exclude underrepresented groups. The author offers some practical suggestions aimed at helping the Council and other policymakers and leaders in social justice movements to incorporate more pluralist perspectives to address issues of exclusion.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信