Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6dbcb7884d-fw45b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-13T23:06:13.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Value Pluralism and Confucian Democratic Civil Society

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2014

Sungmoon Kim
Sungmoon Kim
Affiliation:
City University of Hong Kong
Get access

Summary

Larry Diamond, a renowned political scientist, points to pluralism as one of the defining features of democratic civil society. He says, “To the extent that an organization, such as a religious fundamentalist, ethnic chauvinist, revolutionary or millenarian movement, seeks to monopolize a functional or political space in society, crowding out all competitors while claiming that it represents the only legitimate path, it contradicts the pluralistic and market-oriented nature of civil society.” In this brief statement, we find three important points about the nature of democracy and democratic civil society: (1) liberal pluralism is integral to democratic civil society, (2) the center of pluralism is the market, and (3) at the center of pluralism is the plurality of material interests. In fact, many political scientists now widely agree that the democratic movements in Central and Eastern Europe, even if galvanized by the mass public’s anticommunist and procapitalistic spirit in civil society, occasionally faced difficulty transforming the national, ethically charged, civil society into various kinds of interest-based liberal pluralistic civil societies. For instance, Juan Linz and Alfred Stepan understand the most profound challenge to Polish democratic consolidation precisely in terms of the difficulty of liberal pluralism. “Ethical civil society represents ‘truth,’ but political society in a consolidated democracy normally represents ‘interest.’ In political society the actor is only seldom the ‘nation,’ the more routinely ‘groups.’ ‘Internal differences’ and ‘conflict’ are no longer to be collectively suppressed, but organizationally represented in political society. Compromise and institutionalization are no longer negative but positive values.” Undoubtedly, pluralism is at the core of modern civil society, but the empirical political scientists’ understanding of pluralism as plurality of material interest is significantly limited for the following two reasons. First, liberal pluralism in political science completely dismisses Hannah Arendt’s insight that what is really meaningful is the plurality of the selves (or human beings). In this regard, empirical political scientists make a critical mistake by understanding the core of the individual self solely in terms of material interest. Such a view is what (Nozickean) libertarianism champions, but libertarianism hardly represents the entire liberal tradition, and it certainly does not offer the best case of liberal pluralism. Second, empirical political scientists fail to appreciate Max Weber’s insight that there are two categorically different kinds of “interest” – material interest and so-called ideal interest.

Type
Chapter
Information
Confucian Democracy in East Asia
Theory and Practice
 , pp. 101 - 127
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Diamond, Larry, Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999), 223Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J. and Stepan, Alfred, Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), 272Google Scholar
Arendt, Hannah, The Human Condition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958)Google Scholar
Weber, Max, From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, trans. and ed. Gerth, Hans H. and Mills, C. W. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1958), 280Google Scholar
Wolin, Sheldon S., Politics and Vision (Boston: Little, Brown, 1960)Google Scholar
Galston, William A., “Two Concepts of Liberalism,” Ethics 105 (1995), 516–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutmann, Amy, Identity in Democracy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003)Google Scholar
Bell, Daniel A., East Meets West: Human Rights and Democracy in East Asia (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, David L. and Ames, Roger T., The Democracy of the Dead: Dewey, Confucius, and the Hope for Democracy in China (Chicago: Open Court, 1999)Google Scholar
Tan, Sor-hoon, Confucian Democracy: A Deweyan Reconstruction (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2003)Google Scholar
Fox, Russell A., “Confucian and Communitarian Responses to Liberal Democracy,” Review of Politics 59 (1997): 591–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spragens, Thomas A., Civic Liberalism: Reflections on Our Democratic Ideals (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999)Google Scholar
Neville, Robert C. argues that the Confucian ritual is “a complicated social dance form in which all can participate (democracy) and yet can play roles that recognize their vast differences from one another (pluralism)” (Boston Confucianism: Portable Tradition in the Late-Modern World [Albany: State University of New York Press, 2000], 80)Google Scholar
Rawls, John, Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993)Google Scholar
Rawls, John, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Belknap, [1971] 1999)Google Scholar
Glendon, Mary A., Rights Talk: The Impoverishment of Political Discourse (New York: Free Press, 1990), 52–4Google Scholar
Galston, William A., Liberal Pluralism: The Implications of Value Pluralism for Political Theory and Practice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah, “Two Concepts of Liberty,” in Four Essays on Liberty (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1969)Google Scholar
Macedo, Stephen, Diversity and Distrust: Civic Education in a Multicultural Democracy (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000), 172Google Scholar
Galston, William A., The Practice of Liberal Pluralism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 3–40Google Scholar
Galston, William A., Liberal Purposes: Goods, Virtues, and Diversity in the Liberal State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukuyama, Francis, The End of History and the Last Man (New York: Free Press, 1992)Google Scholar
Fingarette, Herbert, Confucius: The Secular as Sacred (New York: Harper, 1972)Google Scholar
Ames, Roger T., “Rites and Rights: The Confucian Alternative,” in Human Rights and the World’s Religion, ed. Rouner, Leroy S. (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1988), 201Google Scholar
Cua, Antonio S., “Confucian Vision and Human Community,” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 11 (1984), 227–38, 227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mouffe, Chantal, The Return of the Political (London: Verso, 1993)Google Scholar
Shun, and Wong, , Confucian Ethics; Dallmayr, Fred “‘Asian Values’ and Global Human Rights,” Philosophy East and West 52 (2002), 173–89Google Scholar
Chan, Joseph, “Moral Autonomy, Civil Liberties, and Confucianism,” Philosophy East and West 52 (2002), 281–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, Benjamin R., Consumed: How Markets Corrupt Children, Infantilize Adults, and Swallow Citizens Whole (New York: Norton, 2007)Google Scholar
Sandel, Michael J., Democracy’s Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy (Cambridge, MA: Belknap, 1996)Google Scholar
Brettschneider, Corey, Democratic Rights: The Substance of Self-Government (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007)Google Scholar
Angle, Stephen C., Sagehood: The Contemporary Significance of Neo-Confucian Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 204–9Google Scholar
Angle, , Contemporary Confucian Political Philosophy: Toward Progressive Confucianism (Cambridge: Polity, 2012), 139–42Google Scholar
Oakeshott, Michael, The Politics of Faith and the Politics of Scepticism, ed. Fuller, Timothy (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996)Google Scholar
Inclusion and Democracy [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000], 58
Chan, Joseph, “Confucian Attitudes toward Ethical Pluralism,” in Confucian Political Ethics, ed. Bell, Daniel A. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008), 115Google Scholar
Raz, Joseph, The Morality of Freedom [Oxford: Clarendon, 1986]Google Scholar
Sher, George, Beyond Neutrality: Perfectionism and Politics [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wall, Steven, Liberalism, Perfectionism and Restraint [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998])CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, Bae-ho, Han’guk jeongchimunhwawa munjujeongchi [Korean Political Culture and Democracy] (Seoul: Beopmunsa, 2003), 98Google Scholar
Park, Chong-Min and Shin, Doh Chull, “Do Asian Values Deter Popular Support for Democracy in South Korea?,” Asian Survey 46 (2006), 341–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryu, Su-young, “Han’gukinui yugyojeok gachicheukjeongmunhang gaebal yeon’gu” [Item Development for Korean Confucian Values], Korean Journal of Management 15 (2007), 171–205Google Scholar
Kim, Sungmoon, “Confucianism in Contestation: The May Struggle of 1991 in South Korea and Its Lesson,” New Political Science 31 (2009), 49–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kymlicka, Will, Multicultural Citizenship (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 76Google Scholar
Miller, David, On Nationality (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995)Google Scholar
Barber, Benjamin R., A Place for Us: How to Make Society Civil and Democracy Strong (New York: Hill and Wang), 53
Rawls, John, The Law of Peoples (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999)Google Scholar
Qing, Jiang, Zhengzhi Rujia: Dangdai Rujia de zhuanxiang, tezhi yu fazhan [Political Confucianism: Contemporary Confucianism’s Challenge, Special Quality, and Development] (Beijing: San lian shu dian, 2003)Google Scholar
Xiaoguang, Kang, Renzheng: Zhongguo zhengzhi fazhan de disantiao daolu [Humane Government: A Third Road for the Development of Chinese Politics] (Singapore: Global, 2005)Google Scholar
Kim, Sungmoon, “Michael Oakeshott and Confucian Constitutionalism,” in Michael Oakeshott’s Cold War Liberalism, ed. Nardin, Terry (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, forthcoming 2014), respectivelyGoogle Scholar
Barry, Brian, Culture and Equality (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001), 69Google Scholar
Krause, Sharon R., Civil Passions: Moral Sentiment and Democratic Deliberation [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008], 157)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, Adam, Democracy and the Market (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, Ian, The State of Democratic Theory (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003)Google Scholar
Galston, William A., “Pluralist Constitutionalism,” Social Philosophy and Policy 28 (2011), 228–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Rogers M.Stories of Peoplehood: The Politics and Morals of Political Membership (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, Richard, Uncivil Society: The Perils of Pluralism and the Making of Modern Liberalism (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2004)Google Scholar
Gutmann, Amy and Thompson, Dennis, Democracy and Disagreement: Why Moral Conflict Cannot Be Avoided in Politics, and What Should Be Done about It (Cambridge, MA: Belknap, 1996)Google Scholar
Macedo, Stephen, Liberal Virtues: Citizenship, Virtue, and Community in Liberal Constitutionalism (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990)Google Scholar
Dagger, Richard, Civic Virtues: Rights, Citizenship, and Republican Liberalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997)Google Scholar
Spragens, Thomas A., Civic Liberalism: Reflections on Our Democratic Ideals (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999)Google Scholar
Helgesen, Geir, Democracy and Authority in Korea: The Cultural Dimension in Korean Politics (Surrey: Curzon, 1998)Google Scholar
Rosenlee, Li-Hsiang L., Confucianism and Women: A Philosophical Interpretation (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2006)Google Scholar
Li, Chenyang (ed.), The Sage and the Second Sex: Confucianism, Ethics and Gender (Chicago: Open Court, 2000)Google Scholar
Bell, Daniel A., Beyond Liberal Democracy: Political Thinking for an East Asian Context (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bai, Tongdong, “A Mencian Version of Limited Democracy,” Res Publica 14 (2008), 19–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, Joseph, “Democracy and Meritocracy: Toward a Confucian Perspective,” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 34 (2007), 179–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oakeshott, Michael, On Human Conduct [Oxford: Clarendon, 1975], 311–17)Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×