Anger is crucial for activism, social movements and, as history testifies, for access to democratic participation. Anti-racists and feminist scholars have demonstrated how anger moves subordinated subjects closer to activism. In sharp contrast to this, the governing of people with intellectual disabilities has been, and still is, intertwined with silencing their voices and feelings, i.e. through institutionalisation and lobotomy, and obstructing them from taking part in democratic processes. Engaging with anti-racist and feminist theories of anger, this theoretical article shows that, as part of the denial of political citizenship, people with intellectual disabilities are encouraged to be happy and content, and not angry or demanding change. To challenge contemporary ‘anti-anger ideology’, social workers need to actively engage with conflicts around who is included in and excluded from democracy. This, in turn, can open up possibilities for social change.