How do we live with one another despite our deepest differences? Over at The Hedgehog Review, Washington University law professor John Inazu introduces us to “confident pluralism.” He writes:
Confident pluralism insists [that] our shared existence is not only possible, but necessary. Instead of the elusive goal of E pluribus unum (“Out of many, one”), confident pluralism suggests a more modest possibility—that we can live together in our “many-ness.” It does not require Pollyanna-ish illusions that we will resolve our differences and live happily ever after. Instead, it asks us to pursue a common existence in spite of our deeply held differences.
Inazu argues that pluralism will only work if we “redefine” and “re-imagine” three aspects of “constitutional doctrine”: the right of association, public forms, and public funding. Three fundamental virtues must drive such “confident pluralism.” They are tolerance, humility, and patience.”