Page 149 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 149 of 166 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
147
fabric was torn apart. Other reports similarly recommended that fractured communities needed to become cohesive ones, uniting people around “a common sense of belonging regardless of race, culture or faith.” This is an instantiation of my argument in Chapter 2, that our interdependence is a necessary condition for toleration. The Cantle Commission, which was appointed to review the situation at a national level, drew upon these reports and came up with the concept of community cohesion.
Recognizing that it was a concept not very easy to define, the Report identifies three features that underpin the idea. 1) Individual commitments to common norms and values. 2) Interdependence arising from shared interests;
3) Individual identification with the group. Note that (2) supports the paradigm I have outlined in Chapter 2, the interdependence between individuals that goes beyond cultural difference. More difficult to define are common norms and values and the Report acknowledges the difficulty. For a while after the report’s release, there was considerable debate and disagreement as to what such a concept meant and whether it was a desirable policy or not. A year later, however, the Home Office along with the Local Government Association and other bodies issued a paper called the “Guidance on Community Cohesion” in which they put forward a broad definition.
Community cohesion aimed at promoting a common vision and a sense of belonging for all communities while at the same time the diversity of people’s backgrounds would be appreciated and positively valued. The
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 149 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 147 fabric was torn apart. Other reports similarly recommended that fractured communities needed to become cohesive ones, uniting people around “a common sense of belonging regardless of race, culture or faith.” This is an instantiation of my argument in Chapter 2, that our interdependence is a necessary condition for toleration. The Cantle Commission, which was appointed to review the situation at a national level, drew upon these reports and came up with the concept of community cohesion. Recognizing that it was a concept not very easy to define, the Report identifies three features that underpin the idea. 1) Individual commitments to common norms and values. 2) Interdependence arising from shared interests; 3) Individual identification with the group. Note that (2) supports the paradigm I have outlined in Chapter 2, the interdependence between individuals that goes beyond cultural difference. More difficult to define are common norms and values and the Report acknowledges the difficulty. For a while after the report’s release, there was considerable debate and disagreement as to what such a concept meant and whether it was a desirable policy or not. A year later, however, the Home Office along with the Local Government Association and other bodies issued a paper called the “Guidance on Community Cohesion” in which they put forward a broad definition. Community cohesion aimed at promoting a common vision and a sense of belonging for all communities while at the same time the diversity of people’s backgrounds would be appreciated and positively valued. The |
