Not more than a week ago, somebody progressive chided me for putting Pluralism at the bottom of the Old School Core Values. None of the values are in any order, but.. Just last evening, we in TCB have begun our own discussion about the meaning of the word.
I'd like to do some explaining about the context and my original intent in writing:
Pluralism We believe in a tolerant and open society, and we welcome all people to enjoy its benefits and responsibilities.
This is going to be difficult.
I guess I start with the basic premise of loving America. And then I say, whom do I love America for? My favorite toast is, "To us, and those like us.", the appropriate response is "Damned few left." But it is hardly a toast I would have as America's motto which is, I believe; "In God We Trust". In God We Trust is much more general than in "I have accepted Jesus Christ as my own personal savior." or any of a thousand creeds. You are very likely to hear me say "We believe in one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church". I think it is an unquestionable axiom of our nations' first principles that as strange as that creed may sound to some people, that as an American citizen, you are bound to tolerate it. Not to accept it. Not to give it credibility. Not to trash it. But to tolerate it.
What is tolerance?
As I was writing it, that question was left mostly dangling. What I intended to stress was a rejection of intolerance, most specifically religious and racial bigotry.
Fifteen years ago, I read Harold Cruse's 'Plural but Equal', and the clearest thing I can say in summary is that 'Plural but Equal' means exactly the same thing as 'Separate but Equal' except that the separation is completely voluntary. If you're Mormon, you are free to hang out in any city in any state of the Union, but if you'd rather hang out in Salt Lake, we understand and we're cool with that. No love lost. To each his own. Live and let live.
But I recongize that such platitudes are unacceptable for zealots and activists. For many Americans are engaged in a struggle. They want to continually wage a Culture War. They are threatend by the status quo and they desire to persuade. They run the gamut from gentle persuasion to radicalism. But all of them have something in common, a creed, a dedication to goals they feel are superior to those of the average American.
When I was such an activist, I was progressive. To a certain extent I still am progressive. I was a reformer in every dimension. Now I am not. I am more interested in keeping that which works working, and I have lost all measure of contempt for the average American.
Inclusion vs Openness
I don't believe that America is inclusive. It is open. That means that this is a kind of first-come first-served society. There is an implicit open invitation to participate in the society at any level you can compete. But there is not any particular effort to make sure that everyone gets and explicit invitation. We figure that if you're all about it, you'll show up.
I think this is eminently fair and appropriate to a society as large and complex as ours. In fact, I don't think it should be any other way. So when I'm talking about a plural society I mean that the expectations should be largely the same for each of us. We rise according to our abilities and luck. This is a major virtue.
Inclusiveness, on the other hand is a minor virtue, but it is not something that should be handled as a large scale goal for society. It is one thing to build community, it is another to build a nation.
Recent Comments