|
The Necessary Limits of Pluralism
by Richard Burrows
This past month, we have been deeply engaged in exploring pluralism: a political philosophy holding that people of different beliefs, backgrounds, and lifestyles can coexist in the same society. This is in perfect accordance with our UU values of inclusion and the celebration of diversity, often appearing as a cornerstone of our 8 principles.
How could anyone argue with that? It fits seamlessly with our commitment to honoring all lifestyles. And yet…
The limits of pluralism are difficult to define. History shows us that pluralism can become a convenient way to avoid conflict, even when dealing with injustice. I would argue that the largest rejection of pluralism in US history resulted in the Civil War. Many in the Northern states sought to avoid conflict by accommodating the expansion of slavery in the South, arguing for a "pluralistic" coexistence of two systems. Even Lincoln was willing to consider a constitutional amendment that would have protected slavery where it already existed. Ultimately, this "pluralistic" viewpoint was rejected, and slavery was defeated, albeit at a catastrophic cost.
We can also consider the limits of our acceptance in today's society. It is easy for us to decry anti-LGBTQ+ attitudes and misogyny when they come from some claiming Christian Nationalism as their guiding light. We see that as a clear antithesis to our values. It is far more challenging when we encounter similar attitudes in the practices of some Muslim, Orthodox Jewish, or Black Christian denominations.
Where do we draw the line?
Ultimately, I think our first principle provides the best guidance. Our desire for tolerance and acceptance of different cultures must be balanced against the need to recognize the inherent worth and dignity of all. This requires us to move past mere tolerance and toward active engagement. It means we can support and celebrate an identity group, or respect its place in our society, while still finding specific customs or attitudes of its members unacceptable or harmful.
This balancing act is incredibly difficult, and we must keep in mind that others will find our own customs and practices unacceptable as well. However, to truly act on our values, we cannot remain silent in the face of injustice. True pluralism requires us to challenge intolerance rather than simply tolerate it.
|