On toleration /

On Toleration is a meditation on the achievement of tolerance, defined as the peaceful coexistence of contentious groups or individuals. Walzer does not aim at social harmony, but at a more vibrant democratic politics that would blend "a defense of group differences [with] an attack on class differences." The volume is sparse (three of the chapters are less than seven pages long). Least satisfying is an abstract and unwieldy delineation of five archetypal regimes or modes of achieving toleration in widely divergent cultural contexts. More cogent is Walzer's exploration of the prospects for tolerance in the contemporary US. Like Tocqueville, Walzer views politically active groups as the antidote to individual alienation. Unlike Tocqueville, he defends the political mobilization of cultural groups--their formation into factions--for the sake of equality rather than self-government. Civic virtues, civility, and liberated yet socially anchored individuals will be cultivated along the way. Having shown that it is possible to advocate the politics of difference without rancor or cynicism, Walzer has yet to show that his approach to US political life is as good as either the founders' or Tocqueville's at avoiding idealism. Undergraduate and above. P. K. Jensen; Kenyon College

Based on the Castle Lectures in Ethics, Politics, and Economics that Walzer (social scientist at the Institute for Advanced Study, an editor of Dissent and the author of Spheres of Justice) delivered at Yale in 1996, this brief book explores international examples not of political toleration but of "cultural, religious, and way-of-life differences." He begins historically, with five societal models: antidemocratic empire; the respect for sovereignty within the international order; multinational states, such as Switzerland and Belgium, that have a respect for their constituent nationalities built into their constitutions; nation-states; and immigrant societies that respect individual rights. He then looks at some hard cases, such as the pressure of immigration on French national identity, the multiple tensions in Israel, the secessionary impulses in Quebec and aboriginal Canada. He concludes by reflecting on the contemporary American tendency toward group distinctions, as well as on the countering call for the hegemony of a shared culture. He supports the empowerment of locally based groups in running schools, housing and museums, believing (rather optimistically) that such particularization will weaken rather than strengthen ethnic group difference. He's on stronger ground, however, when he argues that multiculturalism can't succeed without an attack on class difference. Walzer offers interesting insights into power, class, gender, religion, education and civil religion: e.g., the common identity fostered by the latter (Independence Day, etc.) is especially important in immigrant societies like ours. Still, he might have augmented his thesis with some attention to the roles of popular culture and constitutional law. Reader's Subscription selection. (May) (c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved

Political philosopher (Princeton's Institute for Advanced Study; The Spheres of Justice, 1983, etc.) and social critic Walzer delivers elegantly turned, highly nuanced reflections on what it takes in a democratic society for different groups to live together in peace. Walzer regards toleration--making room in society for people whose beliefs and practices you don't share--as the principal work of democratic citizens. Toleration embraces a continuum of attitudes, from simple indifference to differences; resigned acceptance of them; principled recognition of the right to be different; to curiosity and even enthusiasm about human variation. Walzer identifies five historical models or regimes that encourage toleration and ultimately presents an analysis and defense of the approach that he believes works best for a multicultural US on the threshhold of the 21st century. Unlike other multiethnic models, such as multinational empires (like the USSR, which could be repressive but ruled more evenhandedly than local majorities were likely to do) or nation-states (in which one group shapes national life but tolerates members of minority groups as individual citizens), ours is an immigrant society, and Walzer explores the distinctive qualities that tend to keep the manifold parts of America's ``dispersed diversity'' cohesive, despite recent contentious assertions of various group identities in public life. Since contemporary American society is not only a pluralism of groups, but also a pluralism of individuals, there's a synergy between the pull of associational life and radical individualism that functions to knit us together. Walzer speaks of the paradoxes of power in democratic society with clarity and eloquence. He not only maintains that the US has become socially (though not economically) more egalitarian over the last 50 years, but he also confirms its capacity for further evolution, while conceding that this process may not always be harmonious.