Sure. But I don’t really recognise even the characterisation of critical race or critical disability theories here. I have had many conversations with colleagues about how meaningless the term “Critical” might be here, but I would characterise these two traits very differently. Far from being the absolutist stances that you ascribe to them, I’d situate them as historicising constructivist movements, which are pretty Lyotardian. To see one’s object of inquiry as historically and socially constructed, even while having a stance on its ethical purchase, doesn’t strike me as the a-historic, de-contextualised description that I interpreted in your post.