I believe the very idea of a pluralist state is an abstract
concept. The writer mentions that in a pluralist state the state will act as a
neutral umpire and referee. However it is important to note that a neutral
umpire/referee acts in accordance to set principles, these principles
themselves could be the subject of a bias. Every individual is likely to have a
different thought process, due to ones own personal prejudices, whether this is
on purpose or not is not important, but the net result is not likely to be
completely immune from criticisms from the competing parties involved and
affected by it.
As far as the role of the state is concerned, I believe this
changes from one political govt. to another, thus no country is likely to have
a fixed role of the state. This role is ultimately determined by the individual
voters whose preferences are determined by a host of factors such as party
manifestos, personal loyalties, political ideologies. This does not mean that the role of the state
can undergo a 180-degree change due to a change in govt., rather it means the
role of the state is flexible within certain polar points.
2 comments:
Hassan I agree with your take on the concept of Pluralism but I think there can be another interesting plot in the discussion too, that if we agree to your stance then there can never be a perfectly or at least substantially pluralist state, right? Human nature, psychology, all makes sense and do support the reasons for one’s undeliberate biases against or in favor of certain classes/religious groups but if this is so a pluralist state can never have a fairly elected authority, as the difference in the density of minorities and majorities will substantially affect the election process and the person being elected can never be made sure of neutrality.
So yes, the role of state, including pluralist states, has different roles depending on the nature of the society, the mentality of the inhabitants, etc. It changes, as we change the geography.
Overall, well thought points I must say. Had I not read your post I would have not given the concept Pluralism this much thought for now.
Good summary about pluralism and thoughtful comment Faseeh. In fact, your comment is an exemplar of a good reply. Good job both of you!
Post a Comment