Advertisement

Diversity and Equality: ‘Toleration as Recognition’ Reconsidered

  • Andrea Baumeister
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Global Justice book series (JUST, volume 7)

Abstract

While toleration is widely considered a fundamental political principle in liberal societies, for critics of traditional conceptions of this principle, such as Anna Elisabetta Galeotti, the idea of toleration as non-interference is increasingly unsuited to respond to the type of pluralism characteristic of these societies. For Galeotti, the most important cases of toleration in contemporary liberal societies arise not due to the plurality of individual values and beliefs, but stem from the coexistence of diverse groups and cultures with unequal standing. When socially despised groups seek to exhibit their differences in the public sphere in an attempt to secure equal social standing and respect, Galeotti proposes a positive form of ‘toleration as recognition’. This paper argues that, while Galeotti’s analysis offers a powerful critique of conceptions of pluralism that seek to confine difference and diversity to the non-political private sphere, her notion of ‘toleration as recognition’ ultimately fails to provide an adequate response to the complex issues of power and identity central to her critique of traditional conceptions of toleration. For, not only does her conception of ‘toleration as recognition’ remain ambiguous, but Galeotti pays insufficient attention to the social and political processes that shape the very identities that are to be recognised.

Keywords

Powerful Critique Collective Identity Muslim Woman Public Realm Minority Identity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Benhabib, Seyla. 2002. The Claims of Culture. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Carens, Joseph. 2000. Culture, Citizenship and Community: A Contextual Exploration of Justice as Evenhandedness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Deveaux, Monique. 2006. Justice and Gender in Multicultural Liberal States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Galeotti, Anna Elisbabetta. 2002. Toleration as Recognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Honig, Bonnie. 1999. My Culture Made me Do It. In J. Cohen, M. Howard and M.C. Nussbaum (eds.), Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 35–40.Google Scholar
  6. Jones, Peter. 2006. Toleration, Recognition and Identity. The Journal of Political Philosophy 14(2): 123–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Loenen, T. 2002. Family Law Issues in a Multicultural Setting: Abolishing or Reaffirming Sex as a Legally Relevant Category? A Human Rights Approach. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights 20(4): 423–443.Google Scholar
  8. Lukes, Steven. 1997. Toleration and Recognition. Ratio Juris 10(2): 213–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mendus, Susan. 2003. Book Review of Anna Elisabetta Galeotti, Toleration as Recognition. Ethics 113(2): 699–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Parekh, Bhikhu. 2000. Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  11. Phillips, Anne. 2007. Multiculturalism without Culture. Princeton, NJ and Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Rorty, Amelie. 1994. The Hidden Politics of Cultural Identification. Political Theory 22(1): 152–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Seglow, Jonathan. 2003. Recognition as Liberalism? Res Publica 9(1): 57–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Shachar, Ayelet. 2001. Multicultural Jurisdictions: Cultural Differences and Women’s Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sunder, Madhavi. 2006. Piercing the Veil. The Yale Law Journal 112: 1399–1471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Taylor, Charles. 1992. The Politics of Recognition. In Amy Gutmann (ed.), Multiculturalism: Examining the Politics of Recognition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of StirlingStirlingUK

Personalised recommendations