State Toleration, Religious Recognition and Equality

Publikation: Bidrag til bog/antologi/rapportBidrag til bog/antologiForskningpeer review

Resumé

In debates about multiculturalism, it is widely claimed that ‘toleration is not enough’ and that we need to go ‘beyond toleration’ to some form of politics of recognition in order to satisfactorily address contemporary forms of cultural diversity (e.g. the presence in Europe of Muslim minorities as a result of immigration). Such claims are usually based on specific understandings of the concepts of toleration and recognition, namely as consisting in non-interference despite disapproval and active accommodation expressing public affirmation, respectively. In this paper I address this line of argument. I first note that this purely conceptual argument for going ‘beyond toleration’ is inconclusive, since it is far from clear whether, and, if so, how, the classic notion of toleration applies to institutions like the state. States are non-personal institutions regulating society, so it is not immediately clear in what, if any, sense they can be the subjects of the attitudes of disapproval required for toleration, and it is also not obvious that non-interference has the same meaning in relation to a political authority regulating society through general rules as in relation to individual conduct. I then proceed to offer a positive proposal for how institutional toleration can be understood. The question is whether there is still, at this institutional level, conceptual reasons for going ‘beyond toleration’ to recognition? I approach this theoretical question in a problem oriented manner through an examination of the particular Danish case of state recognition of religious minorities. The case is used to illustrate the complexities of institutional toleration and recognition and the differences between various conceptions of institutional toleration. But the case is also used to mount a criticism of the conceptual argument for going ‘beyond toleration’: at the institutional level, recognition, as well as toleration, may be inadequate and inappropriate from the point of view of multicultural accommodation of cultural difference. My diagnosis therefore is that the toleration-recognition issue is not about a conceptual question of whether the relation between states and minorities can be categoriseized in terms of recognition or toleration, but about a normative question of whether and how toleration and recognition secures equality. When toleration is inadequate, this is often because it institutionaliseizes and upholds specific inequalities. But politics of recognition may equally well institute inequalities, and in such cases unequal recognition may not be preferable to toleration.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TitelTolerance, Intolerance and Respect : Hard to Accept?
RedaktørerJan Dobbernack, Tariq Modood
Antal sider25
ForlagPalgrave Macmillan
Publikationsdato24 jun. 2013
Sider52-76
Kapitel2
ISBN (Trykt)978-0-230-39088-1
StatusUdgivet - 24 jun. 2013
NavnPalgrave Politics of Identity and Citizenship Series

Emneord

  • tolerance
  • anerkendelse
  • stat
  • religiøse minoriteter
  • friskoler
  • multikulturalisme

Citer dette

Lægaard, S. (2013). State Toleration, Religious Recognition and Equality. I J. Dobbernack, & T. Modood (red.), Tolerance, Intolerance and Respect: Hard to Accept? (s. 52-76). Palgrave Macmillan. Palgrave Politics of Identity and Citizenship Series
Lægaard, Sune. / State Toleration, Religious Recognition and Equality. Tolerance, Intolerance and Respect: Hard to Accept?. red. / Jan Dobbernack ; Tariq Modood. Palgrave Macmillan, 2013. s. 52-76 (Palgrave Politics of Identity and Citizenship Series).
@inbook{a87b82cbe75b4a6392d9d98d7d22779a,
title = "State Toleration, Religious Recognition and Equality",
abstract = "In debates about multiculturalism, it is widely claimed that ‘toleration is not enough’ and that we need to go ‘beyond toleration’ to some form of politics of recognition in order to satisfactorily address contemporary forms of cultural diversity (e.g. the presence in Europe of Muslim minorities as a result of immigration). Such claims are usually based on specific understandings of the concepts of toleration and recognition, namely as consisting in non-interference despite disapproval and active accommodation expressing public affirmation, respectively. In this paper I address this line of argument. I first note that this purely conceptual argument for going ‘beyond toleration’ is inconclusive, since it is far from clear whether, and, if so, how, the classic notion of toleration applies to institutions like the state. States are non-personal institutions regulating society, so it is not immediately clear in what, if any, sense they can be the subjects of the attitudes of disapproval required for toleration, and it is also not obvious that non-interference has the same meaning in relation to a political authority regulating society through general rules as in relation to individual conduct. I then proceed to offer a positive proposal for how institutional toleration can be understood. The question is whether there is still, at this institutional level, conceptual reasons for going ‘beyond toleration’ to recognition? I approach this theoretical question in a problem oriented manner through an examination of the particular Danish case of state recognition of religious minorities. The case is used to illustrate the complexities of institutional toleration and recognition and the differences between various conceptions of institutional toleration. But the case is also used to mount a criticism of the conceptual argument for going ‘beyond toleration’: at the institutional level, recognition, as well as toleration, may be inadequate and inappropriate from the point of view of multicultural accommodation of cultural difference. My diagnosis therefore is that the toleration-recognition issue is not about a conceptual question of whether the relation between states and minorities can be categoriseized in terms of recognition or toleration, but about a normative question of whether and how toleration and recognition secures equality. When toleration is inadequate, this is often because it institutionaliseizes and upholds specific inequalities. But politics of recognition may equally well institute inequalities, and in such cases unequal recognition may not be preferable to toleration.",
keywords = "tolerance, anerkendelse, stat, religi{\o}se minoriteter, friskoler, multikulturalisme, toleration, recognition, state, religious minorities, free schools, multiculturalism",
author = "Sune L{\ae}gaard",
year = "2013",
month = "6",
day = "24",
language = "English",
isbn = "978-0-230-39088-1",
pages = "52--76",
editor = "Jan Dobbernack and Tariq Modood",
booktitle = "Tolerance, Intolerance and Respect",
publisher = "Palgrave Macmillan",

}

Lægaard, S 2013, State Toleration, Religious Recognition and Equality. i J Dobbernack & T Modood (red), Tolerance, Intolerance and Respect: Hard to Accept?. Palgrave Macmillan, Palgrave Politics of Identity and Citizenship Series, s. 52-76.

State Toleration, Religious Recognition and Equality. / Lægaard, Sune.

Tolerance, Intolerance and Respect: Hard to Accept?. red. / Jan Dobbernack; Tariq Modood. Palgrave Macmillan, 2013. s. 52-76.

Publikation: Bidrag til bog/antologi/rapportBidrag til bog/antologiForskningpeer review

TY - CHAP

T1 - State Toleration, Religious Recognition and Equality

AU - Lægaard, Sune

PY - 2013/6/24

Y1 - 2013/6/24

N2 - In debates about multiculturalism, it is widely claimed that ‘toleration is not enough’ and that we need to go ‘beyond toleration’ to some form of politics of recognition in order to satisfactorily address contemporary forms of cultural diversity (e.g. the presence in Europe of Muslim minorities as a result of immigration). Such claims are usually based on specific understandings of the concepts of toleration and recognition, namely as consisting in non-interference despite disapproval and active accommodation expressing public affirmation, respectively. In this paper I address this line of argument. I first note that this purely conceptual argument for going ‘beyond toleration’ is inconclusive, since it is far from clear whether, and, if so, how, the classic notion of toleration applies to institutions like the state. States are non-personal institutions regulating society, so it is not immediately clear in what, if any, sense they can be the subjects of the attitudes of disapproval required for toleration, and it is also not obvious that non-interference has the same meaning in relation to a political authority regulating society through general rules as in relation to individual conduct. I then proceed to offer a positive proposal for how institutional toleration can be understood. The question is whether there is still, at this institutional level, conceptual reasons for going ‘beyond toleration’ to recognition? I approach this theoretical question in a problem oriented manner through an examination of the particular Danish case of state recognition of religious minorities. The case is used to illustrate the complexities of institutional toleration and recognition and the differences between various conceptions of institutional toleration. But the case is also used to mount a criticism of the conceptual argument for going ‘beyond toleration’: at the institutional level, recognition, as well as toleration, may be inadequate and inappropriate from the point of view of multicultural accommodation of cultural difference. My diagnosis therefore is that the toleration-recognition issue is not about a conceptual question of whether the relation between states and minorities can be categoriseized in terms of recognition or toleration, but about a normative question of whether and how toleration and recognition secures equality. When toleration is inadequate, this is often because it institutionaliseizes and upholds specific inequalities. But politics of recognition may equally well institute inequalities, and in such cases unequal recognition may not be preferable to toleration.

AB - In debates about multiculturalism, it is widely claimed that ‘toleration is not enough’ and that we need to go ‘beyond toleration’ to some form of politics of recognition in order to satisfactorily address contemporary forms of cultural diversity (e.g. the presence in Europe of Muslim minorities as a result of immigration). Such claims are usually based on specific understandings of the concepts of toleration and recognition, namely as consisting in non-interference despite disapproval and active accommodation expressing public affirmation, respectively. In this paper I address this line of argument. I first note that this purely conceptual argument for going ‘beyond toleration’ is inconclusive, since it is far from clear whether, and, if so, how, the classic notion of toleration applies to institutions like the state. States are non-personal institutions regulating society, so it is not immediately clear in what, if any, sense they can be the subjects of the attitudes of disapproval required for toleration, and it is also not obvious that non-interference has the same meaning in relation to a political authority regulating society through general rules as in relation to individual conduct. I then proceed to offer a positive proposal for how institutional toleration can be understood. The question is whether there is still, at this institutional level, conceptual reasons for going ‘beyond toleration’ to recognition? I approach this theoretical question in a problem oriented manner through an examination of the particular Danish case of state recognition of religious minorities. The case is used to illustrate the complexities of institutional toleration and recognition and the differences between various conceptions of institutional toleration. But the case is also used to mount a criticism of the conceptual argument for going ‘beyond toleration’: at the institutional level, recognition, as well as toleration, may be inadequate and inappropriate from the point of view of multicultural accommodation of cultural difference. My diagnosis therefore is that the toleration-recognition issue is not about a conceptual question of whether the relation between states and minorities can be categoriseized in terms of recognition or toleration, but about a normative question of whether and how toleration and recognition secures equality. When toleration is inadequate, this is often because it institutionaliseizes and upholds specific inequalities. But politics of recognition may equally well institute inequalities, and in such cases unequal recognition may not be preferable to toleration.

KW - tolerance

KW - anerkendelse

KW - stat

KW - religiøse minoriteter

KW - friskoler

KW - multikulturalisme

KW - toleration

KW - recognition

KW - state

KW - religious minorities

KW - free schools

KW - multiculturalism

M3 - Book chapter

SN - 978-0-230-39088-1

SP - 52

EP - 76

BT - Tolerance, Intolerance and Respect

A2 - Dobbernack, Jan

A2 - Modood, Tariq

PB - Palgrave Macmillan

ER -

Lægaard S. State Toleration, Religious Recognition and Equality. I Dobbernack J, Modood T, red., Tolerance, Intolerance and Respect: Hard to Accept?. Palgrave Macmillan. 2013. s. 52-76. (Palgrave Politics of Identity and Citizenship Series).