Ethos of Pluralization: Volume 1

by William E. Connolly

A skeptical examination of the inclusiveness of pluralism.

How plural, really, is pluralism today? In this book a prominent political theorist reworks the traditional pluralist imagination, rendering it more inclusive and responsive to new drives to pluralization. Traditional pluralism, William E. Connolly shows, gives too much priority to past political settlements, allotments of public space and power relations already...

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0816626693
• ISBN13: 9780816626694
• Release Date: August 1995
• Publisher: University of Minnesota Press
• Length: 280 Pages
• Weight: 0.85 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.6" x 5.9" x 9.1"

Customer Reviews

Extremely provocative and intelligent

This is a dense, sophisticated work on how to achieve a truly multicultural society. Intellectually, it seems to owe a great deal to Nietzsche/Heidegger/Foucault/Derrida, ect...(and though this is 'poly-sci,' it is even more about social theory). The style/tone of writing is, to my mind, not haughty (as another reviewer suggests). That said, there is clearly a good dose of anxiety and frustration between the lines. His style of prose recalls Judith Butler (in short, an intellectual prose at an altogether other level). However, in many ways, this book is a lot of posturing, and not much in the way of substance. (Explaining why...would take some time.) Essentially it amounts to this: this book is a call for all leftist movements to get their acts together- and to stop fighting with each other, and instead fight the 'center' (i.e. fundamentalism (religious and secular) in the US. It's an extreme condemnation of conformity (in the broadest sense) in our society. His end is a 'treeless' society (one where there are no fundamentalisms about), but instead 'bushes and grasses) (i.e. cultural identities flowering and self-governing simultaneously)(a pipe-dream if there ever was one!). The entire argument is cast in one of violence. He argues, for instance, that the quantity of sovereignty is constant, yet the quality of it is constantly contested/contestible (therefore...fight!). Given the fact that Connolly wrote it during 92-3, I should think he'd be sickened by now. The fact is that the experiments, reflections, and intelligence of people past *has*, in fact, produced sound bases upon which to build a society (i.e. social democracy and capitalism need 'fine tuning', not to be wholly discarded, for ex.). Questioning all knowledge is fine, but to incite a rejection of certain postulates, one better not only have a good reason, but more importantly, a good response...solution. But, then, if there are truly many shapes/forms to reason, how possibly could we come to agree?! There's a lot here, and in many ways, I suppose it amounts to more than a crack of the whip. Highly recommended for committed leftists (feeling like they could use a little inspiration). For me, construing our times as one marked by 'culture wars' is fine, but to write a manifesto of sorts with the 'diciest' (as Connolly would say) ethics possible (which are: a 'generous sensibility marked by forbearance'..and to say that all ethical forms are contingent to time and place- only), and to frame the entire argument in a language of violence, is simply irresponsible. If such a work were written in the USSR, God knows, Connolly would have been shown to the gulag long ago. Provocative indeed...enjoy.

The best book in political theory written in the 90s.

Provocative and powerful. Takes political theory in bold new directions as it thematizes the competing forces of pluralization and fundamentalization that characterize the post Cold-War era.