Regimes of Pluralism: Tolerance Beyond Liberal Democracy

Abstract

Toleration is widely regarded as a quintessential liberal value. Can non-liberal multireligious regimes sustain religious difference without relying on toleration? If so, how and of what kind? This dissertation argues that religious pluralism, understood as the peaceful accommodation of religious difference, can be sustained in different ways in some pluralistic regimes beyond the liberal-democratic order. Drawing on the political thought of eighteenth century French political philosopher Montesquieu and the case studies of the Roman Empire and Singapore, I show that some non-liberal regimes sustained religious pluralism without relying on toleration. These societies grounded their practices of pluralism in principles, values, and norms that were specific to the context and features of their regime. In the end, I contend that the concept of pluralism is a valuable complement to the existing framework of toleration. The concept of pluralism decenters the debate on toleration away from its existing focus on liberal accounts of toleration, and reorients it towards other non-liberal modes of sustaining difference that we might have overlooked. Recognizing the different ways that pluralistic non-liberal societies can manage difference gives us more resources for responding to the challenge of religious diversity, and assessing the value and blind spots of liberal toleration.