Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
LIBERALISM -III TOLERATION AND DIVERSITY (INTRODUCTION (VIEWS ON…
LIBERALISM -III
TOLERATION AND DIVERSITY
INTRODUCTION
ALONG WITH LIBERTY , TOLERATION IS A VALUE OF LIBERALISM
IDEA OF TOLERATION IS NECESSARY FOR REALIZATION OF IDEA OF LIBERTY
OR LIBERTY CAN BE ENJOYED ONLY IN A TOLERANT SOCIETY
DERIVED FROM WORD TOLERRARE:WHICH MEANS TO BEAR OR TO ENDURE
TOLERATION IS CONSIDERED AS SUBSTANTIVE HEART OF LIBERALISM
TOLERATION IS SELF RETRAINS
TOWARDS THOSE THINGS WHICH IF NOT TOLERANT WOULD LEAD TO USE OF FORCE
TOLERATION IS PERSONAL, SOCIAL AND AS WELL AS POLITICAL VIRTUE
CONTEXT OF TOLERATION DEBATE:
ORIGINATED SO AS TO MANAGE DIVERSITY
VIEWS ON TOLERATION:
JOHN RAWLS:
SUGGEST THAT TOLERATION IS A CONCEPT OF LIBERAL SOCIETIES
BECOZ PEOPLE IN LIBERAL SOCIETIES CAN CONTINUE TO POSSES DIFFERENT COMPREHENSIVE DOCTRINES AND DEVELOP A OVERLAPPING CONSENSUS ON POLITICAL CONCEPTION OF JUSTICE
JOHN LOCKE
FREEDOM OF CONSCIOUNCE WHERE STATE SHOULDN'T INTERFERE
JS MILL
HARM PRINCIPLE: STATE SHOULDN'T INTERFERE IN PERSONAL SPHERE UNLESS IT IS HARM TO OTHERS
EVOLUTION OF POLICY OF TOLERATION:
EUROPEAN MODEL
CONTEXT : RELIGIOUS WARS IN EUROPE
IDEA OF RENISSANCE, MACHIAVILLI
THAT PAVED FOR SECULARISM: SEPERATING RELIGION FROM POLITICS:
UNIVERSAL CITIZENSHIP
SO THAT THE PEOPLE OF DIFFERENT COMMUNITY CAN LIVE TOGETHER
IDEAS OF SECULARISM WAS PROMOTED AND NATIONALISM WAS ITS UNIFYING BOND
IDEA OF NATIONALISM IS BASED ON UNIVERSAL CITIZENSHIP:
WHICH MEANS EVERYONE IS EQUALFOR STATE
WHILE MAKING POLICES STATE WILL NOT TAKE INTO CONSISERATION THE RELIGION OF CITIZENS
WHICH EVENTUALLY LEAD TO ESD. OF UCC
BASED ON UNITY IN UNIFORMITY
BASED ON RELIGIOUS NEUTRALITY: KEEP DIVERSITY IN PRIVATE SPHERE
THERE ARE TWO MODELS:
FRENCH MODEL:
BASED ON STRICT SEPERATION OF RELIGION AND PUBLIC LIFE: LIFE BAN ON BURKHA WEAING BY MUSLIM WOMEN
USA MODEL
BASED ON CONCEPT OF MELTING POT OR ASSIMILATION
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM OF CONSCIOUS ... AMALGATING INTO AMERICAN IDENTITY RATHER RELIGIOUS IDENTITY
BUT CURRENTLY GROWTH OF IDENTITY POLITICS: EVEN IN WESTERN COUNTIES
ACC. TO WILL KIMLIKA:
(LIBERAL MULTICULTURALIST)
GIVES FOLLOWING REASONS TO GROWTH OF IDENTITY POLITICS
DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGE
HIGH SCALE OF IMMIGRATION
GROWING CONSCIOUS ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS
NEGLECT OF MINORITES: SO MINORITES BECOME ASSERTIVE
SECURITIZATION OF ETHINIC RELATIONS:
PROJECT A CERTAIN ETHINICTY AS SECURITY CHANGES
AS NEW CHALLENGE TO TOLERATION ARE EMERGING
IT IS CHALLENGING THE FRENCH AND USA MODEL OF TOLERATION
SO NEW MODEL MULTICULTURALISM NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED
AS CANNADA AUSTRALIS PUBLICALLY DECALRED OF ADPTING MULTICULTURALISM
EU ALSO ADHERE TO MULTICULTURAL APPROACH IN ONE OF THE LATEST CONS.
MULTICULTURALISM:
MULTICULTARISM IS A IDEOLOGY REPRESENTING INTEREST OF NON-DOMINANT COMMUNITY
LIKE: MINORITY, IMMIGRANTS, REFUGEE
DIFFRENCE OF CONCEPTION OF MAN:
TRADTIONAL LIBERALS: ATOMISTIC VIEW OF MAN: THAT'Y WENT FOR UCC
MUTILCULTARALIST DESCRIBE: ABOVE VIEW OF MAN AS ABSTRACT INDIVIDUAL: BECOZ IT DOESN'T GIVE PICTURE ABOUT REAL MEN
REAL MEN : MAN CAN'T BE ISOLATED OR ABSTRACTED FROM HIS CULTURE OR IDENTITY
BECOZ NOT EVERY MAN IS RATIONAL
CONCEPT OF CULTURE
ACC. TO BHIKU PAREKH
(POST COLONIAL MULTICULTURALIST)
: MAN IS CULTURALLY EMBEDDED
IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO REPECT MAN BUT NOT HIS CULTURE
IF WE EXTEND RIGHTS TO PERSON BUT DIDN'T ACCEPT RIGHT OF PERSON TO PERSON'S CULTURAL RECOGNITION : THIS APPROACH IS UNREALISTIC AND UNFAIR
IT IS IMPRACTICAL TO ACCPET THAT MAN WILL FORGET HIS CULTURE WHEN HE COMES TO PUBLIC SPHERE
CULTURE IS THE GLASS THROUGH WHICH WE UNDERSTAND REALITY
JUST LIKE BIODIVERSITY IS GOOD: SIMILARLY CULTURAL DIVERSITY IS NEEDED(EACH CULTURE IS RATIONAL)
IN NAME OF UNVERSALIAM AND RATIONALIM : LIBERALS TRYS TO ENFORCE CULTURE OF MAJORITY ON MINORITY
VIEWS OF WILL KIMLIKA:
IN MULTICULTURAL CITIZENSHIP: A LIBERAL THEORY OF MINORITY RIGHT
HELD THAT MULTICULTURALIAM IS NATURAL AND INEVITABLE IN EVOLUTION OF LIBERALISM
HE BELIEVES THAT ONLY LIBERALS CAN ADOPT MULTICULTURALISM
SUGGEST THAT GOVT. SHOULD GIVE SPECIAL RIGHTS TO MINORITES
SUGGEST 3 CATOGORIES OF RIGHTS
SPECIAL REPSENTATION RIGHTS
SELF GOVERANCE RIGHTS IF COMMUNITY IN PARTICULAR AREA
POLY ETHINIC RIGHTS : SUGGEST GOVT. SHOULD GIVE EXEMPTION TO MINORITIES
FOR EG: MUSLIM GIRLS TO BE ALLOWED TO WAR SCARFF
SIKH TO BE ALLOWED WEAR TURBAN
HOWEVER SUGGEST THESE RIGHT SHOULD BE LIMITED TO NATIONAL MINORITES: NOT IMMIGRANTS AND RUFUGEES
IMMIGRANTS:ENTER INTO COUNTRY AS A MATTER OF CHOICE.. SO SHOULD ADOPT CULTURE OF LAND
COUNTRIES CAN'T BE FORCED TO TAKE BURDEN OF ANOTHER COUNTRIES
VIEWS OF BHIKU PAREKH
HOWEVER BHIKU AGREES WITH MOST OF THOUGHTS OF KIMLIKA BUT DISAGRESS ON TWO
MULTICULARALISM CAN ONLY BE BROUGHT TO LIBERAL SOCIETIES
SPECIAL RIGHTS NOT TO BE EXTENDED TO IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGGES
BHIKU SUGGEST LIBERAL INHERIT FEELING OF SUPERIORTY
BHIKU SUUGEST:
DIALOGUE B/W CIVILIZATIONS SO THAT WE CAN ARRIVE AT SOME BASIC MINIMUM VALUES: ACCEPTABLE TO ALL
HUMAN DIGNITY IS ONE SUCH PRINCIPLE
ON WHICH COMMEN VALUES WILL EMERGE THROUGH DIALOGUE WHICH CAN BE APPLICABLE AT COSMOPLOITAN LEVEL
PROPOSES:APPLICATION OF HARM PRINCIPLE:
IF DERE IS NO CONCRETE HARM TO ANYONE WRT CULTURAL PRACTISE THAN THAT CULTURAL PRACTISE NOT TO BE RESTRICTED
HARM PRINCIPLE WILL BALANCE THE AUTONOMY AND CULTURE
ISIAH BERLIN : VALUE PLURALISM
VALUE MONISM IS ONE VALUE DETERMING ALL CHOICES: LIKE UTI. WHERE ONLY UTILITY IS FACTOR(PLEASURE VS PAIN)
BUT PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT VALUES... IF SOME ONE BELIEVES THAT LIBERTY HAS A PRIORTY OVER EQUALITY..
THAN NO. OF ARGUMENTS CAN BE GIVEN TO CONVIVE PERSON FOR EQUALITY OVER LIBERTY
HENCE ONE SHOULD NOT PRIORTISE VALUES : FOR EG: LIBERAL COUNTRIES GIVE PRIMACY TO LIBERTY
THERE CAN BE MANY SUCH VALUES WHICH ARE EQUALLY CORRECT BUT ARE IN CONFLICT WITH EACH OTHER
LIKE LIBERTY AND EQUALITY
PROBLEM BECOME MORE COMPLEX BECOZ VALUES ARE INTANGIBLE
HENCE HE SUGGEST : LIBERAL STATES NOT TO PRIORTISE VALUES
LIKE BHIKU HE IS ALSO OPTIMISTIC AS HE BELIEVES THAT A SAHRED SET OF VALUES CAN BE AGREED UPON
CRITICS OF MULTICULTURALISM:
LIBERALS: BRAIN BERY
MULTICULTURALISM PROMOTES POLITICS OF IDENTITY & DIVIDE PEOPLE & UNDERMINES POLITICS OF DEVELOPMENT
AMARTYA SEN
MULTICULTURALISM RESULT INTO GHETTOIZATION
NOT GOOD FOR NATINAL UNITY
COSMOPOLITAN MULTICULTURALIST: JEREMY WALDRON
MUTICULTURALISM UNDERESTIMATE PEOPLE CAPCITY TO ADAPT TO DIFFERENT CULTURE .. THUS THIS CREATE DIFFERENT OBSTACLE IN COSMOPOLITITAN CULTURE
BRUCE BANNER: SUGGEST NOT TO BE TOLERANT TOWARDS INTOLERANT: IT IS ONLY APPEASMENT BUT ALSO THREAT TOWARDS INTOLERANT
END OF HISTORY &
CLASH OF CIVILAZTION
END OF HISTORY: FRANSIS FUKUYAMA
VIEW OF POST COLD WAR WORLD ORDER
PUBLISHED IN BOOK: END OF HISTORY AND THE LAST MAN
END OF HISTORY MEANS:
END OF IDEOLOGICAL EVOLUTION OF MAN
SUGGESTING: LIBERALISM AND LIBERAL DEMOCRACY IS ULTIMATE FORM OF GOVT.
IT ESTD. SUPREMACY OF LIBERALISM AND OF OF WEST
IT CLAIMS LIBERALISM WON HISTORICAL BATTLE OF IDEOLOGIES
FUKUYAMA'S CONCEPT IS APPLICATION OF MARX AND HEGEL EXPLANATION OF END OF HISTORY
HOWEVER NEITHER SOVIENT UNION WAS END OF HISTORY , NOR GERMAN STATE UNDER HITLER WAS
FUKUYAMA'S THESIS IS CRITICISED BY: SAMUL P HUNTINGTON
FARID ZAKARIA
DERRIDA
HOWEVER FUYAMA REVISED ITS IDEAS AND BALMED GEORGE W BUSH'S ACTION AFGANISTHAN AND IRAQ FOR DECLINE OF US HEGEMONY AND RISE OF IDENTITY CONSCIOUSNESS
CLASH OF CIVILATION: SAMUL P HUNTINGTON
HELD THAT END OF HISTORY DON'T REPRESENT THE REALITY OF POST COLD WAR WORLD ORDER
PREDICTED CLASH OF CIVILAZTION
HELD THAT CLASH OF CIVILIZATION HAS A LONG HISTORY
THERE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN WAR & CONFLICTS B/W CULTURES - FOR A SHORT TIME FOR HISTORY THEIR IS CONFLICT B/W IDEOLOGIES
SO CAPITALISM VS COMMUNISM IDEOLOGICAL DIFFRENCES GETS RESOLVED BUT CULTURAL AND RELIGIOUS DIFFRENCES RE DIFFICULT TO RESOVE
SAMEUL IN BOOK CLASH OF CIVILIZATION MENTIONED 8 CIVILIZATION:
CHINESSE
JAPANESSE
HINDU (INDIAN)
ORTHODOX (RUSSIAN)
ISLAMIC
WESTERN
AFRICAN
LATIN AMERICAN
ACC. TO HELD THAT: THERE IS POSSIBILTY OF CONFLICT B/W
ISLAMIC VS WESTERN CIVILIZATION
CHINEESE V/S WESTERN
CALLS RUSSIAN AND INDIAN CIVILIZATION A SWING STATE
MAIN CONFLICT PREDICTED
CONFLICT B/W CORE STATES: CHINESSE VS WESTERN
FAULT LINE CONLICT : B/W WESTERN AND ISLAMIC
THERE IS NO CORE STATE IN ISLAMIC STATE
HOWEVER THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT ISLAMIC WORLD COMBINES TO LAUNCH A ATTACK AGAINST WEST
WHY CONFLICT B/W WEST AND ISLAMIC
BECOZ BOTH ARE MISSIONARY RELIGIONS
DUTY GIVEN BY GOD
BOTH AGAINST NON-BELIEVERS
BOTH ARE UNIVERSALIST
REASON FOR ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM:
US POLICY IN MIDDLE EAST
LACK OF DEMOCRACY
FRUSTRATION AMONG MUSLIM YOUTH
CRITCISM OF CLASH OF CIVILIZATION:
ACC. TO CRITICS:THERE IS NO TRUTH IN CLASH OF CIVILIZATION THESIS
IT RATHER PROVIDES BASIS OF JUSTIFICATION OF US INTERVENTION IN MIDDLE EAST AND OTHER REGION: IT AIMS TO STRENGTHEN US HEGEMONY