Page 29 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 29 of 166 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
26
II: Cultural Embeddedness and Unitary Citizenship
Of the many recent challenges to liberalism, Bhiku Parekh's Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory (2006) is the major work on the subject, covering the theoretical, historical and practical aspects of the question. Parekh begins by taking up the politics of recognition and describing the various movements that assert identity and difference in the face of the homogenizing tendency of the wider society they live in. And although multiculturalism is the term associated with the diverse movements, Parikh holds that multiculturalism must be construed more narrowly:
Multiculturalism is not about difference and identity per se but about those that are embedded in and sustained by culture; that is, a body of beliefs and practices in terms of which a group of people understand themselves and the world and organize their individual and collective lives. Unlike differences that spring from individual choices, culturally derived differences carry a measure of authority and are patterned and structured by virtue of being embedded in a shared historically inherited system of meaning and significance. To highlight this distinction between the two kinds of differences, I shall use the term diversity to refer to culturally derived differences. Multiculturalism, then, is about cultural diversity or culturally embedded differences. (Parekh, 2006, 2-3)
Parekh's main charge against liberalism is that it is monistic. It is important to note that Parekh has been deeply influenced by Berlin's value pluralism, and applies this concept to culture. However, Parekh's aim is not merely to write of minority cultures, but to provide a much larger account of the nature of political theory.
Object Description
| Title | Negotiating pluralism and tribalism in liberal democratic societies |
| Author | Sadagopan, Shoba |
| Author email | sadagopa@usc.edu; shobasadagopan@gmail.com |
| Degree | Doctor of Philosophy |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Philosophy |
| School | College of Letters, Arts and Sciences |
| Date defended/completed | 2008-08-22 |
| Date submitted | 2008 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2008-10-15 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Lloyd, Sharon |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Dreher, John Keating, Gregory |
| Abstract | My aim in this dissertation is to enquire whether toleration as a practice is achievable. It is prior to the question of how it can be grounded as a virtue. I argue that in liberal democratic societies where there are struggles for recognition on the part of ethnocultural groups, it is possible to negotiate pluralism and tribalism in a way that a stable pluralist society can be maintained. My core thesis rests on a theory of interdependence based both on a theory of human nature and on the material fact of globalization. Insofar as we affirm our nature as human beings engaged in productive activity with other human beings, insofar as we value a world that facilitates that activity, toleration is desirable. It is achievable because with globalization there is a tendency towards homogenization that erodes cultural differences. There is less reason for conflict because what we have in common, our interdependence, goes far deeper than culture. A further sufficient condition may be found in well thought-out policies that are executed through education and dialogue. |
| Keyword | toleration; value pluralism; liberalism; cultural homogenization; globalization; common citizenship |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m1658 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Sadagopan, Shoba |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Sadagopan-2395 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume26/etd-Sadagopan-2395.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 29 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 26 II: Cultural Embeddedness and Unitary Citizenship Of the many recent challenges to liberalism, Bhiku Parekh's Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory (2006) is the major work on the subject, covering the theoretical, historical and practical aspects of the question. Parekh begins by taking up the politics of recognition and describing the various movements that assert identity and difference in the face of the homogenizing tendency of the wider society they live in. And although multiculturalism is the term associated with the diverse movements, Parikh holds that multiculturalism must be construed more narrowly: Multiculturalism is not about difference and identity per se but about those that are embedded in and sustained by culture; that is, a body of beliefs and practices in terms of which a group of people understand themselves and the world and organize their individual and collective lives. Unlike differences that spring from individual choices, culturally derived differences carry a measure of authority and are patterned and structured by virtue of being embedded in a shared historically inherited system of meaning and significance. To highlight this distinction between the two kinds of differences, I shall use the term diversity to refer to culturally derived differences. Multiculturalism, then, is about cultural diversity or culturally embedded differences. (Parekh, 2006, 2-3) Parekh's main charge against liberalism is that it is monistic. It is important to note that Parekh has been deeply influenced by Berlin's value pluralism, and applies this concept to culture. However, Parekh's aim is not merely to write of minority cultures, but to provide a much larger account of the nature of political theory. |
