Suchergebnisse

Classical liberalism, as opposed to traditional concepts, has established a notion of justice that envisages the equality of individual (negative) freedoms & (tutelary) rights. Under the influence of socialist criticism, modern-day liberals have been trying to include within the concept of justice the problem of the distribution of positive freedoms & rights. The already classic attempt of solving this problem is the theory of justice by John Rawls. Rawls defines justice as fairness, whose basic principles are the equality of basic freedoms of individuals compatible with the freedom of other individuals; the distribution of goods that will most benefit the least privileged; & the primacy of freedom over social equality & justice over economic efficiency. In a pluralist society these principles should facilitate the establishment of the "overlapping consensus" among divergent social groups on the issues of the basic social structure. In his attempt to solve the problems of social equality that Rawls's theory leaves open-ended, Michael Walzer postulates the principle of complex equality, which requires different ways of distribution for different types of goods. These types cannot be specified in advance; however, their distribution is the most remarkable skill of liberal politics. Finally, the author claims that the problem of a just political organization of multicultural societies can be solve by applying Rawls's principle of fairness on the negotiating processes & on achieving consensus among divergent cultural groups on certain issues. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractFor liberalism, values such as respect, reciprocity, and tolerance should frame cultural encounters in multicultural societies. However, it is easy to disregard that power differences and political domination also influence the cultural sphere and the relations between cultural groups. In this essay, I focus on some challenges for cultural pluralism. In relation to Indian political theorist Rajeev Bhargava, I discuss the meaning of cultural domination and epistemic injustice and their historical and moral implications. Bhargava argued that as a consequence of colonialism, "indigenous cultures" were inferiorized, marginalized, and anonymized. Although cultures are often changing due to external influences, I argue that epistemic injustice implies that a culture is forced to subjection, disrespected, and considered as inferior and that it threatens the dominated people's epistemic framework, collective identity, and existential security. Finally, I refer to John Rawls's theory of political liberalism as a constructive approach to avoid parochialism and Western cultural domination.

This new and updated edition of Norgren and Nanda's classic text brings their examination of American cultural pluralism and the law up to date through the Clinton administration. While maintaining their emphasis on the concept of cultural diversity as it relates to the law in the United States, new and updated chapters reflect recent, relevant court cases dealing with culture, race, gender, and class, with particular attention paid to local and state court opinions. Drawing on court materials, statutes and codes, and legal ethnographies, the text analyzes the ongoing negotiations and accommodations via the mechanism of law between culturally different groups and the larger society. An important text for courses in American government, society and the law, cultural studies and civil rights.

An analysis of Sir Isaiah Berlin's concept of liberal cultural pluralism considers George Kateb's charges that Berlin's views are chiefly aesthetic & anti-universalist. The author characterizes Berlin as a "liberal rationalist" yet aware of rationalism's limits. Arguing that Berlin espoused the notion of minimal individual rights -- a position held throughout history well before the emergence of the modern notion of "human rights" -- the author concludes that Berlin's liberal pluralism is not far from Mill's notion of utilitarian liberalism. K. Coddon

Assesses the special difficulties faced by a liberal democratic system that seeks to maintain its democratic credentials when governing a culturally diverse society. Focus is on the analysis of cultural pluralism developed in 1993 & 1994 works of Bhikhu Parekh. Parekh's attempt to reconcile cultural pluralism & liberal democracy through operative public values is shown to be inadequate. It is questioned whether a liberal democratic system is able to achieve lasting well-being in a situation of cultural diversity. 9 References. Adapted from the source document.