Notes

Introduction 1. For a discussion of the emergence of new social groups, see Michael J. Piore, Beyond Individualism (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995). 2. See e.g., Falling Down (1993, dir. Joel Schumacher, with Michael Douglas). 3. Rodney Barker, “A Future for Liberalism or a Liberal Future?” in The Liberal Political Tradition, ed. James Meadowcroft (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1996), 181. 4. For a summary statement, see Gray’s review article “Autonomy is not the Only Good,” The Times Literary Supplement ( June 13, 1997), 30. This debate is well rehearsed in the issue of Social Research devoted to replies to Gray’s charge that Rawlsian liberalism “at no point touches the real dilemmas of liberal society.” Gray also responds to his critics. Social Research 61, 3 (Fall 1994). Amy Gutmann also refers to the need to write political philosophy for a less than ideal society in “Responding to Racial Injustice,” in K. Anthony Appiah and Amy Gutmann, Color Conscious: The Political Morality of Race (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), 109. 5. This is also the theme of Glen Newey’s After Politics: The Rejection of Politics in Contemporary Liberal Philosophy (New York: Palgrave, 2001). Newey argues that contemporary political philosophers have been more concerned with for- mulating ideal prescriptions than with describing actual politics, as a result chiefly of their preoccupation with normative theorizing and applied ethics. 6. Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Toward a Radical Democratic Politics (London: Verso, 1985). See also the collected essays in Mouffe (ed.), Dimensions of Radical Democracy: Pluralism, Citizenship, Community (London: Verso, 1992), and Mouffe, ed., The Return of the Political (London: Verso, 1993). 7. Iris Marion Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990). Young differentiates between claims for recognition of group identity, and claims to remedy structural disadvantage in Inclusion and Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 102–7. 8. For a sympathetic discussion of postmodernism and political theory, see Stephen K. White, Political Theory and Postmodernism (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991). 9. Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference, 45–6. 10. As Will Kymlicka has pointed out in his response to the separate line of attack taken by communitarians, this is to some extent a “straw person” version of 150 / notes

liberalism. Historically, in fact, liberal thinkers such as John Stuart Mill have always assumed that individuals are embedded in and shaped by the social context in which they live, and that a certain kind of identity is required for the formation of the liberal state. Kymlicka, Liberalism, Community and Culture (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), 207–9. I discuss Kymlicka’s arguments in more detail in chapter 3. 11. See e.g., Chandran Kukathas, “Are There Any Cultural Rights?” Political Theory 20 (1992): 105–39. 12. Brian Barry, Culture and Equality (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2001). Nancy Fraser addresses the relationship between redistribution and recognition from a different perspective in “From Redistribution to Recognition? Dilemmas of Justice in a ‘Post-Socialist’ Age,” in Cynthia Willett, ed., Theorizing Multiculturalism: A Guide to the Current Debate (Oxford: Blackwell, 1998), 19–49. 13. John Rawls, Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993); Charles Larmore, The Morals of Modernity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); J. Donald Moon, Constructing Community: Moral Pluralism and Tragic Conflicts (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993). 14. Rawls, Political Liberalism, 303. 15. It is at this point that the “imagined community,” as Benedict Anderson calls the modern nation, arises. See Anderson, Imagined Communities, rev. ed. (London: Verso, 1991), ch. 3. What is also significant in its emergence is that people from different classes, increasingly educated and literate, are able to read the same newspapers and popular literature, and thus to imagine the same community. 16. For the classic statement, see Robert Dahl, Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961). Dahl restates and clarifies his views in Democracy and Its Critics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989). 17. Paul Hirst, Associative Democracy: New Forms of Economic and Social Governance (Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press, 1994). 18. Will Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995) and Liberalism, Community and Culture; Yael Tamir, Liberal Nationalism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993); Charles Taylor, “The Politics of Recognition,” in Multiculturalism, ed. Amy Gutmann (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994). 19. Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000). 20. David Miller, On Nationality (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 4–6. 21. Ibid., 193. 22. Ibid., 120. 23. Miller argues that “the principle of nationality supports equal citizenship rather than a form of politics that is fragmented along group lines.” See On Nationality, 153. But his charge that identity politics leads to social fragmenta- tion is unsupported by evidence. Moreover, he oscillates between seeing nation- alism as a deep source of identity on the one hand, and formal common citizenship on the other. 24. For example, Melissa Williams, whose work I discuss in chapter 5, admits the difficulty in doing this—and does not pursue it. See Williams, Voice, Trust and notes / 151

Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), 220.

Chapter One Identity Politics and the Limits of Moral Pluralism 1. Amy Gutmann, Identity in Democracy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003), 30. 2. Paul Hirst distinguishes these “communities of fate” from voluntary associa- tions in Associative Democracy: New Forms of Economic and Social Governance (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1994), 49–56. I discuss Hirst’s work in detail in chapter 3. I should note here that “fate” in the sense I am using it refers to the fate of ascription—and nothing either more metaphysical or natural. Further, it is not always impossible to leave communities of fate: people can sometimes move between classes, occasionally “pass” as members of another race or ethnic group, conceal a religious identity and even change sex. But exit is not a simple matter of deciding no longer to belong, as it is from voluntary associations. 3. Gutmann, Identity in Democracy, 13. 4. Iris Marion Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990), 44. Young provides an extended definition of the con- cept of a social group, on which I draw, at 42–5. There does exist nevertheless a closer relationship between social group and associational membership than theorists of each, such as Young and Hirst, admit. I explore the importance of this for liberalism in my conclusion. 5. K. Anthony Appiah, “Race, Culture, Identity: Misunderstood Connections,” Color Conscious: The Political Morality of Race, K. Anthony Appiah and Amy Gutmann (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), 30–105. 6. Ian Hacking discusses the process by which types of individuals or groups are brought into existence by our naming of them, which he terms “dynamic nomi- nalism,” in “Making Up People,” in Reconstructing Individualism: Autonomy, Individuality and the Self in Western Thought, ed. Thomas C. Heller, Morton Sosna, and David E. Wellbery (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1986), 222–36. 7. For an exploration of this see: The Making of the Modern Homosexual, ed. Kenneth Plummer (London: Hutchinson, 1981). 8. Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference, 43. 9. Two important examples in a large body of work are: Sara Ruddick, Maternal Thinking: Towards a Politics of Peace (Boston: Beacon, 1989) and Carol Gilligan, In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1982). 10. I borrow this term from Appiah, who distinguishes it from race as a biological category. Appiah, “Race, Culture, Identity,” 32. 11. W.E.B. DuBois, Dusk of Dawn: An Essay Toward an Autobiography Of a Race Concept (Milwood: Kraus-Thomson, 1975), 116–17, cited in Appiah, “Race, Culture, Identity,” 75. 12. John D’Emilio, Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities: The Making of a Homosexual Minority in the United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983). 152 / notes

13. Stephen Cornell, The Return of the Native: American Indian Political Resurgence (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 72. 14. Susan Wolf, “Comment,” in Multiculturalism, ed. Amy Gutmann (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), 76. 15. See John C. Turner et al., Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory (Oxford: Blackwell, 1987). 16. K. Anthony Appiah, “Identity, Authenticity, Survival: Multicultural Societies and Social Reproduction,” in Multiculturalism, ed. Gutmann, 160. 17. Hacking, “Making Up People,” 230. 18. Appiah, “Race, Culture, Identity,” 78. 19. See e.g., Will Kymlicka: a culture “provides its members with meaningful ways of life across the full range of human activities, including social, educational, religious, recreational and economic life, encompassing both public and private spheres.” Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), 76. Gutmann cites this to support her own distinction between cultural and ascriptive groups in Identity in Democracy, 216, fn. 36. 20. Ibid., 90. The example Appiah gives of cultural geneticism (of which he is crit- ical) is that of a black man who knows nothing about jazz, and yet “owns” it in a way that a white jazzman cannot. 21. See my discussion of Kymlicka in chapter 3. 22. Shane Phelan, “All the Comforts of Home: The Genealogy of Community,” in Revisioning the Political: Feminist Reconstructions of Traditional Concepts in Western Political Theory, ed. Nancy J. Hirschmann and Christine Di Stefano (Boulder: Westview, 1996), 244. 23. Appiah, “Race, Culture, Identity,” 95–6. 24. Toni Morrison, Playing in the Dark: Whiteness and the Literary Imagination (New York: Vintage, 1993). 25. Andrew Hacker, Two Nations: Black and White, Separate, Hostile, Unequal (New York: Scribner’s, 1992), 32 and chapter 3 in general. 26. Appiah, “Identity, Authenticity, Survival,” 151. 27. Charles Taylor, “The Politics of Recognition,” in Multiculturalism, ed. Gutmann, 25. 28. Ibid., 39. 29. See Zillah Eisenstein’s discussion of the implications of engendering bodies in The Female Body and the Law (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), 79–91. There is also a discussion of specific group needs in: Nancy Fraser, Unruly Practices (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989). 30. As Gutmann concludes, there may be reasons for granting autonomy and self- government to minority national groups, but this cannot be justified on the false assumption that the group provides an all-encompassing cultural identity for its members. Gutmann, Identity in Democracy, 53. 31. John Locke, A Letter Concerning Toleration, ed. James H. Tully (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1983). 32. Phillips, Democracy and Difference (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1993), 139. 33. As Charles Larmore points out, moral pluralism may be understood either philosophically or sociologically. In the philosophical sense, assumed by Isaiah Berlin, human ideals are not all compatible, and the fulfillment of some will notes / 153

make others impossible. Both theory and ordinary experience force us to recog- nize a plurality of values, and to accept that there exists no single set of unified moral truths, nor any “final harmony in which all riddles are solved, all contra- dictions reconciled.” Because there can be no single correct answer to questions of competing values, Berlin argues that government cannot be justified in prescribing or supporting any one conception of the good. It must instead allow people the “negative freedom” to pursue whichever ends they choose. In the sociological sense, reasonable individuals will inevitably disagree about concep- tions of the good, whether or not any unified hierarchy of moral values exists in a philosophical sense. For the purposes of my argument, it is not necessary to decide between these. Whether or not moral pluralism exists ultimately in a philosophical sense, as Larmore points out, most liberal pluralists assume the sociological definition, which ties moral plurality to actually existing social groups. See Charles Larmore, The Morals of Modernity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 152–74; Isaiah Berlin, “Two Concepts of Liberty,” in Four Essays on Liberty (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1969), 167–72. See also, “The Pursuit of the Ideal” and “The Decline of Utopian Ideas in the West,” in Berlin’s The Crooked Timber of Humanity (New York: Knopf, 1991), 20–48. For a detailed discussion of the types and sources of moral pluralism that does not, however, venture much on its implications for liberal political theory, see Steven Lukes, “Making Sense of Moral Conflict,” in Liberalism and the Moral Life, ed. Rosenblum (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989), 127–42. 34. This term is Rawls’s: Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993). I use it here to refer generally to liberals who argue from moral pluralism. 35. I borrow these terms from Anne Phillips, who points out that the politics of ideas has proved inadequate to dealing with problems of minority group exclu- sion. Phillips argues that excluded groups must be brought themselves into political debate. See Anne Phillips, “Dealing with Difference: A Politics of Ideas or a Politics of Presence?” Constellations 1, 1 (1994): 74–91. 36. Locke, Letter Concerning Toleration, 27. 37. See Michael Walzer, “The Communitarian Critique of Liberalism,” Political Theory 18, 1 (February 1990): 6–23. 38. See e.g., Michael Sandel, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), and Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1984). 39. A crude form of this position is popular amongst conservative opponents of multicultural education. For an instance of its influence on liberal thinkers, see Arthur Schlesinger Jr., The Disuniting of America (New York: Norton, 1992). 40. Charles Taylor remarks that it is only by clarifying ontological issues that the debate between liberals and communitarians can be seen as “the complex, many-leveled affair that it really is.” See Charles Taylor, “Cross-Purposes: The Liberal-Communitarian Debate,” in Liberalism and the Moral Life, ed. Nancy Rosenblum (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989), 182. 41. The suggestion that the liberal–communitarian debate ignores sociological analysis was made to me by Isaac Kramnick. It is echoed in another context by Nancy Rosenblum, who remarks that if communitarianism is to provide the “strong dose of sociological realism” that liberal theory lacks, it cannot afford to 154 / notes

ignore pluralism. See Nancy L. Rosenblum, “Pluralism and Self-Defense,” in Liberalism and the Moral Life, ed. Rosenblum, 208. 42. See Introduction, note 4. 43. As Kymlicka points out in Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990), 226. 44. This is also the view elaborated by Ronald Dworkin in his article often taken to be definitional of modern liberalism: “Liberalism,” in Public and Private Morality, ed. Stuart Hampshire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978), 127. 45. Joseph Raz, The Morality of Freedom (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), 398. 46. William Galston refers to the political liberalisms I examine here as “freestand- ing monist” approaches to political theory. See Galston, Liberal Pluralism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 8. 47. John Rawls, “Justice as Fairness: Political—Not Metaphysical,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 14 (1988): 223–51. 48. John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1971). 49. Rawls, Political Liberalism, xvi. 50. Ibid., xvi, 36, 37. 51. Rawls first discusses this in “Overlapping Consensus,” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 7 (February 1987): 1–25. 52. Rawls, Political Liberalism, 40. 53. Ibid., xviii. This shift suggests a prima facie answer to Gray’s criticism, if not, the latter maintains, a satisfactory one. 54. Ibid., 93. 55. Ibid., 98. 56. Ibid., 38. 57. Ibid., 57. 58. Ibid., 68, 270. 59. Susan Okin draws attention to this inconsistency in her review of Political Liberalism in American Political Science Review 87, 4 (December 1993): 1011. 60. Rawls, Political Liberalism, 37. 61. See e.g., Okin’s review of Political Liberalism, at 1011. 62. See John Gray’s critical review of Political Liberalism: “Can We Agree to Disagree?” The New York Times Book Review Sunday, May 16, 1993. 63. Rawls, Political Liberalism, 181. 64. Ibid., 318–19. 65. J. Donald Moon, Constructing Community: Moral Pluralism and Tragic Conflicts (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993). 66. Ibid., 23. 67. Ibid., 24. 68. Ibid., 26–8. 69. Ibid., 33. 70. Ibid., 42. 71. Ibid., 45. 72. Ibid. 73. Ibid., 48. 74. Ibid., 51. 75. Ibid., 46. notes / 155

76. Ibid., 49. 77. Ibid., 10–11, 63. 78. Ibid., 66. 79. In fact, citizen identity is often articulated through shared membership in other groups, expressed in “hyphenated” forms of identity. 80. Charles E. Larmore, Patterns of Moral Complexity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 42–8, 50–5. Larmore distinguishes between moral plu- ralism and reasonable disagreement in “Pluralism and Reasonable Disagreement,” in Cultural Pluralism and Moral Knowledge, ed. Ellen Frankel Paul, Fred D. Miller, Jr., and Jeffrey Paul (Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 61–79. 81. Ibid., 53–4. 82. Ibid., 65. 83. Ibid., 64–5. 84. See e.g.: Seyla Benhabib, Situating the Self: Gender, Community and Post Modernism in Contemporary Ethics (Cambridge: Polity, 1992); Taylor, “Politics of Recognition,” in Multiculturalism, ed. Gutmann. 85. Larmore, Patterns of Moral Complexity, 106. 86. Ibid., 126. 87. Galston, Liberal Pluralism, 55. Galston seems to suggest that the fact that there exist internal dissent within cultural groups and mixing between cultures means that cultural communities have no political significance beyond the moral positions they produce. 88. Richard E. Flathman, The Philosophy and Politics of Freedom (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), 173–4. Stanley Benn argues that we attrib- ute value to autonomy because of our capacity to be autarchic, or to have agency—the minimal capacity for human choice. Autonomy represents thus the ideal human state possible, given agency. See Stanley Benn, “Freedom, Autonomy and the Concept of the Person,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 76 (1975–1976): 109–30. 89. Loren Lomasky describes agents as “project pursuers” in Persons, Rights and the Moral Community (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987). 90. Rawls, Theory of Justice, 93. 91. Flathman, Philosophy and Politics of Freedom, 174. 92. David Johnston, The Idea of a Liberal Theory: A Critique and Reconstruction (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), 23. 93. Gerald Dworkin, The Theory and Practice of Autonomy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 20. 94. Rawls, Theory of Justice, 408. 95. Johnston, Idea of a Liberal Theory, 26. 96. Raz, Morality of Freedom, 133. 97. Ibid., 372. 98. Nancy Rosenblum, Another Liberalism: Romanticism and the Reconstruction of Liberal Thought (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987). 99. David Johnston draws an interesting connection between the project-pursuing characteristics of agents and industry as Hobbes and Locke use the term to denote the capacity to formulate complex plans and the actions required to carry them out. We might conclude that if project- pursuing is part of 156 / notes

self-creation, as Romanticism understands autonomy, then the anti-industrial Romantic ideal owes more than it acknowledges to the culture of industrialization. See Johnston, Idea of a Liberal Theory, 83, fn. 26. 100. Lomasky, Persons, Rights and the Moral Community, 44. 101. Sandel, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice, 57–9. 102. Ibid., 152. 103. Ibid., 59. 104. Ibid., 62–3. 105. See e.g.: Amy Gutmann, “Communitarian Critics of Liberalism,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 14, 3 (Summer 1985), 319. 106. Sandel, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice, 63. 107. Walzer, “Communitarian Critique,” 21. 108. This form of reflection and evaluation would not be strong enough for some liberals. I am not arguing, as John Gray does, that what is involved here is a distancing of the autonomous agent from her social environment and the influence of others. See John Gray, Mill on Liberty: A Defence (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983), 74. 109. Dworkin, Theory and Practice of Autonomy, 17. 110. If the members of a group autonomously develop aims and goals that are con- tinually thwarted by prejudice and economic powerlessness, they may over time give up developing such purposes (become the victims of cultural despair) and lose even this aspect of their autonomy. 111. Joshua Cohen, “Moral Pluralism and Political Consensus,” in The Idea of Democracy, ed. David Copp, Jean Hampton, and John E. Roemer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 274. 112. See e.g., Fay Ginsburg, Contested Lives: The Abortion Debate in an American Community (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989), conclusion. 113. See e.g., Peter Jones, “Respecting Beliefs and Rebuking Rushdie,” in Liberalism, Multiculturalism and Toleration, ed. John Horton (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993), 114–38. Charles Taylor also invokes the Rushdie case in “The Politics of Recognition,” in Multiculturalism, 62. 114. Tariq Modood, “Muslims, Incitement to Hatred and the Law,” in Liberalism, Multiculturalism and Toleration, ed. Horton, 139. 115. Ibid., 152.

Chapter Two Class, Nation, and Character in Nineteenth-Century Liberal Thought 1. See Isaiah Berlin’s essays: “Two Concepts of Liberty” and “John Stuart Mill and the Ends of Life,” in Berlin, Four Essays on Liberty (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1969), 118–72 and 173–206. Some critics have claimed that Mill in fact asserted a paternalistic moralism, in which liberty was less impor- tant than, and less instrumental in, the achievement of social progress and reform. For a recent statement, see Joseph Hamburger, John Stuart Mill on Liberty and Control (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999). I do no more than note these arguments here, as my own are centered not on the ulti- mate value of liberty for Mill, but on his views concerning the relationship between group membership and moral belief. notes / 157

2. Will Kymlicka, Liberalism, Community and Culture (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), 208–9. 3. Shirley Robin Letwin, The Pursuit of Certainty (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965), 252. See also Graeme Duncan, who refers to Mill’s lib- eral politics as “democratic—or even bourgeois democratic—Platonism,” because of the emphasis he gives to the guiding role of the intellectual elite. Graeme Duncan, Marx and Mill: Two Views of Social Conflict and Social Harmony (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), 259. 4. Bhikhu Parekh, Rethinking Multiculturalism (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000), 43–4. 5. Contrary to Parekh’s assertion (see my note 4 earlier), Mill does not assume that the social structure provides equal opportunities for success for different characters and ways of life. His arguments for the representation of women and the working classes explicitly refer to the importance of securing political and economic power for these groups. 6. Gerald Gaus argues that the liberalisms articulated by Locke and James Mill “share a vision of men as essentially independent, private and competitive beings who see civil association mainly as a framework for the pursuit of their own interests.” See Gaus, The Modern Liberal Theory of Man (London: Croom Helm, 1983), 7. 7. Janice Carlisle discusses the relationship between Mill’s construction of his own character and his analysis of the influences upon character development in John Stuart Mill and the Writing of Character (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1991). 8. Stefan Collini, “The Idea of ‘Character’ in Victorian Political Thought,” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th series, 35 (1983), 33. 9. Anthony Appiah distinguishes these as the collective and personal dimensions of identity, in “Identity, Authenticity, Survival: Multicultural Societies and Social Reproduction,” in Multiculturalism, ed. Amy Gutmann (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), 151. 10. Ibid., 31. 11. In “On Liberty,” e.g., Mill asserts that only people sharing in a specific national character—that of advanced Western societies—are fit to enjoy the liberties ensured by democratic government. See J.S. Mill, “On Liberty,” in On Liberty and Other Writings, ed. Stefan Collini (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 13–14. 12. Collini, “The Idea of ‘Character,’ ” 36. 13. C.B. Macpherson makes this argument in Democratic Theory: Essays in Retrieval (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973), 32. For a more sympathetic discussion, see Nancy L. Rosenblum, Another Liberalism: Romanticism and the Reconstruction of Liberal Thought (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987), espe- cially 15–16. 14. Wendy Donner discusses the Aristotelian aspects of Mill’s thought on character. See W. Donner, The Liberal Self: John Stuart Mill’s Moral and Political Philosophy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1991), 120–1. 15. Richard Bellamy, “Introduction,” in Victorian Liberalism: Nineteenth-Century Political Thought and Practice, ed. Richard Bellamy (London: Routledge, 1990), 9. See also Michael Freeden, The New Liberalism: An Ideology of Social Reform (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978), 170–2. 158 / notes

16. Richard Ashcraft, “Class Conflict and Constitutionalism in J.S. Mill’s Thought,” in Liberalism and the Moral Life, ed. Nancy L. Rosenblum (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989), 107. As Ashcraft argues in a later essay, Mill’s criticism of Bentham here forms part of his more general reorientation of political theory to reflect social structures and the distribution of power within society. See Richard Ashcraft, “John Stuart Mill and the Theoretical Foundations of Democratic Socialism,” in Mill and the Moral Character of Liberalism, ed. Eldon J. Eisenach (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998), 171. 17. See John Stuart Mill, “Bentham,” in The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, 33 volumes, ed. J.M. Robson (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974–1991), vol. X, 77–115. 18. John Stuart Mill, “The Subjection of Women,” in On Liberty and Other Writings, ed. Collini, 139. 19. Mill, “Bentham,” 90–1. 20. John Stuart Mill, “A System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive,” in Collected Works, VIII, 869. 21. Ibid. 22. Ibid., 904. 23. Mill, “A System of Logic,” 868. 24. Georgios Varouxakis discusses the importance for Mill of comparisons between France and England in Mill on Nationality (London: Routledge, 2002), ch. 4. 25. Varouxakis surveys recent competing and contradictory interpretations of Mill’s attitude toward nationalism in Mill on Nationality, 5–7. 26. John Stuart Mill, “Vindication of the French Revolution of February 1848,” in Collected Works, XX, 347; “Considerations on Representative Government,” 549–50. 27. John Stuart Mill, “Considerations on Representative Government,” in Collected Works, XIX, 547. 28. Mill, “Considerations on Representative Government,” ch. II, 383–98. 29. Georgios Varouxakis discusses these two aspects of the relationship between national character and political institutions in “National Character in John Stuart Mill’s Thought,” History of European Ideas, 24, 6 (1998): 376. 30. Mill, “Considerations on Representative Government,” 549. 31. Uday Mehta, Liberalism and Empire: A Study in Nineteenth-Century British Liberal Thought (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999). 32. Ibid.,149, 191. Mehta argues that this failure stems in part from the tendency of Victorian liberals (whom he compares unfavorably to Burke and Rousseau) to overemphasize national markers such as shared language and religion, and to discount the importance of shared territory. Such an emphasis is consistent with my argument here that nationality is crucial for Mill because of the way in which it shaped individual identity. 33. John Stuart Mill, “Vindication of the French Revolution of February 1848,” Collected Works, XX, 348. 34. Mill, “On Liberty,” 13–14; “Considerations on Representative Government,” ch. IV, 413–21. 35. Kymlicka, Liberalism, Community and Culture, 209. 36. As C.B. Macpherson has pointed out, the existence of a working-class dependent solely on the sale of their labor underpinned Bentham’s prescribed notes / 159

economic system. Moreover, Bentham assumed differences between categories of people, such as the different sensibilities of the sexes and social classes. But he made no attempt formally to incorporate group membership into his system of ethics or political representation. See C.B. Macpherson, The Life and Times of Liberal Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977), 28, 30. 37. John Stuart Mill, “The Claims of Labour,” in Collected Works, IV, 369. 38. Macpherson, Life and Times of Liberal Democracy, 49. 39. Mill, “Considerations on Representative Government,” 441–7. 40. Ashcraft, “Mill and the Theoretical Foundations of Democratic Socialism,” 179. 41. J.W. Burrow, Whigs and Liberals: Continuity and Change in English Political Thought (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), 106. 42. Ashcraft, “Class Conflict and Constitutionalism,” 111. 43. Mill, “Bentham,” 90. 44. Ibid., 109. 45. Mill, “On Liberty,” 10. 46. In his early work (such as “The Reorganization of the Reform Party”) Mill was most concerned with opposition between the rising middle classes and the aristocracy. Later his attention shifted to relations between the middle- and the (most numerous) working classes. On this, see Duncan, Marx and Mill, 219. 47. Mill, “The Subjection of Women,” 38. 48. John Stuart Mill, “Principles of Political Economy,” Collected Works, III, 819–20. 49. As Duncan comments of “The Reorganization of the Reform Party”: “It is the moral quality imputed to the radicals which takes the breath away....” Duncan, Marx and Mill, 223. 50. Mill, “Principles of Political Economy,” Collected Works, II, 367; III, 763, 770. 51 Mill, “The Claims of Labour,” 380. 52. John Stuart Mill, “De Tocqueville on Democracy in America [II],” Collected Works, XVIII, 181. 53. John Stuart Mill, “Thoughts on Parliamentary Reform,” Collected Works, XIX. 54. Mill, “The Subjection of Women,” 169. 55. Mill, “Considerations on Representative Government,” 404. 56. Ibid., 405. Mill’s views on the necessity for representation of minorities are discussed by Bruce Baum in “Freedom, Power and Public Opinion: J.S. Mill on the Public Sphere,” History of Political Thought, XXII, 3 (Autumn 2001), 508–10. 57. Janice Carlisle, “Mr. J. Stuart Mill, M.P., and the Character of the Working Classes,” in Mill and the Moral Character of Liberalism, ed. Eldon J. Eisenach, (College Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1999), 143–67. 58. John Stuart Mill, speech to the House of Commons on The Representation of the People bill, Collected Works, XXVIII, 61. 59. Mill, “Considerations on Representative Government,” 467–8. 60. Mill, “On Liberty,” 57. 61. Mill, on The Representation of the People bill, 65. 62. John Stuart Mill, “Chapters on Socialism,” Collected Works, V, 707. 63. Mill, “Considerations on Representative Government,” 446. 64. Mill, “On Liberty,” 10. 65. Mill, “Considerations on Representative Government,” ch. VII. 160 / notes

66. Mill, “The Reorganization of the Reform Party,” Collected Works, VI, 469. 67. Donner, The Liberal Self, 120–1. 68. The dominance of this Romantic conception in later liberal thought is clear from Rawls’s reference to it in the form of a “plan of life.” Rawls derives the term from the American Idealist Josiah Royce, who was himself a disciple of T.H. Green. See John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1971), 408. 69. Mill, “On Liberty,” 57. 70. Ibid., 58–9. 71. John Stuart Mill, “Autobiography,” in A. Ryan, Autobiography and Other Writings, ed. Jack Stillinger (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1969), 93. Alan Ryan discusses the failures of Mill’s attempt thus to reconcile free will and determin- ism in John Stuart Mill (New York: Pantheon, 1970) and in “Mill’s Political Thought,” in A Cultivated Mind: Essays on J.S. Mill Presented to John M. Robson, ed. John M. Robson and Michael Laine (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1991), 135. 72. Mill, “A System of Logic,” 840–1. 73. Mill, “Considerations on Representative Government,” 459. 74. For an extended discussion of the importance of Mill’s socialism, see Ashcraft, “Class Conflict and Constitutionalism,” 114–16. 75. Gaus, The Modern Liberal Theory of Man, 120. 76. See Martin Pugh, State and Society: A Social and Political History of Britain, 1870–1997, second edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), ch. 3. 77. This is well discussed by Ian Bradley in I. Bradley, The Optimists: Themes and Personalities in Victorian Liberalism (London: Faber and Faber, 1980), 82–4. Many (emerging) liberals earlier in the century had supported Greek independ- ence, although not all; Fred Rosen argues that an “authoritarian” (or paternalis- tic) strand of liberal thinking developed in India was in fact opposed to Greek self-determination. See Fred Rosen, Bentham, Byron and Greece (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), 149–51. 78. Ibid., 83. 79. Steven Lukes, Individualism (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1973), 20–1. 80. G.W.F. Hegel, The Philosophy of History, trans. J. Sibree (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1991), 39. 81. T.H. Green, Prolegomena to Ethics (Oxford: Kraus, 1969), 218. 82. Ibid., 219. 83. Ibid., 232. 84. For Green, of course, liberty also meant freedom from irrational desires—thus opening the gates to more extensive social legislation designed to “liberate” the working classes from their selfish animal or “lower” desires. Green’s conception of individual liberty and the role of choice is famously distinguished from Mill’s by Berlin in “Two Concepts of Liberty.” 85. The concept of a gradually extending community of fellows dates to Tocqueville, who, as David Boucher has pointed out, argues that civility is at first practiced amongst people recognized as being of one’s own kind, but is then extended as excluded classes are incorporated into one’s moral community. Boucher discusses the significance of this idea in the work of R.G. Collingwood and in contemporary communitarian thinking in “Tocqueville, Collingwood, notes / 161

History and Extending the Moral Community,” British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 2, 3 (2000) 326–51. 86. T.H. Green, “Lectures on the Principles of Political Obligation,” in Lectures on the Principles of Political Obligation and Other Writings, ed. Paul Harris and John Morrow (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 97. 87. Green, Prolegomena to Ethics, 251. 88. Ibid., 288. 89. Green, “Lectures on the Principles of Political Obligation,” 181. 90. Andrew Vincent and Raymond Plant, Philosophy, Politics and Citizenship: The Life and Thought of the British Idealists (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1984), 29. 91. T.H. Green, “Lectures on Liberal Legislation and Freedom of Contract,” in Lectures on the Principles of Political Obligation, ed. Harris and Morrow, 195–6. 92. L.T. Hobhouse, The Metaphysical Theory of the State (London: Allen and Unwin, 1918), 29–30. 93. L.T. Hobhouse, “Liberalism,” in Liberalism and Other Writings, ed. James Meadowcroft (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 64. 94. Ibid., 77. 95. L.T. Hobhouse, “Sociology,” in Sociology and Philosophy: A Centenary Collection of Essays and Articles, intr. Morris Ginsberg (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966), 39. 96. Ibid., 40. Elsewhere, Hobhouse examines the role of voluntary associations and argues that liberal principles may also be enjoined to protect individuals against associations that act oppressively toward their members. See Hobhouse, “Liberalism,” 18. 97. Hobhouse, The Metaphysical Theory of the State, 85. 98. Ibid. 99. L.T. Hobhouse, Social Development (London: Allen and Unwin, 1924), 154–5. 100. Hobhouse points out that class relations in fact cut across state borders. Ibid., 103. 101. This inconsistency in Hobhouse’s views is discussed by Gaus in Modern Liberal Theory of Man, 92–3. 102. Stefan Collini, Liberalism and Sociology: L.T. Hobhouse and Political Argument in England 1880–1924 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 97. 103. Ibid., 126. 104. Ibid., 128. 105. Vincent and Plant, Philosophy, Politics and Citizenship, 65. 106. Ibid., 66. 107. For discussions of the attitudes of later nineteenth-century liberals toward the women’s suffrage movement, see Martin Pugh, “Liberals and Women’s Suffrage, 1867–1914,” in Citizenship and Community, ed. Eugenio Biagini (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 45–65, and Peter Clarke, Liberals and Social Democrats (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978), 138. 108. John Morrow argues that Bosanquet regarded class identity as serving the larger social whole. Collective solidarity amongst the working class promoted social identification, and was a desirable end in spite of its possible implications 162 / notes

for liberal conceptions of property rights under capitalism. See John Morrow, “Community, Class and Bosanquet’s ‘New State,’ ” History of Political Thought, XXI, 3 (Autumn 2000): 495. 109. Vincent and Plant, Philosophy, Politics and Citizenship, 121–2. 110. Christopher Kent, Brains and Numbers: Elitism, Comtism and Democracy in Mid-Victorian England (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1978), xi–xii; Christopher Harvie, The Lights of Liberalism: University Liberals and the Challenge of Democracy 1860–86 (London: Allen Lane, 1976), 11–15. 111. Berlin, “Two Concepts of Liberty,” 167–72. 112. Joseph Raz, The Morality of Freedom (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), 398. 113. See e.g. K. Anthony Appiah, “Identity, Authenticity, Survival: Multicultural Societies and Social Reproduction,” in Multiculturalism, ed. Gutmann, 156–63. 114. Iris Marion Young addresses this issue in Inclusion and Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 81–120. See also Melissa Williams, Voice, Trust, and Memory; Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998). 115. Young, Inclusion and Democracy, 119. 116. It should also be noted that affirmative action is defended as a temporary measure, which will be unnecessary once historical injustices have adequately been compensated for. At that point, supporters of the policy argue, minori- ties will be represented in universities and the workplace in proportion to their numbers. Similarly, Mill believed that group representation would eventually become unnecessary once human progress had integrated and equalized the relations between social groups.

Chapter Three Interest Pluralisms and the Erasure of Social Identity 1. John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, ed. Peter Nidditch (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975), 335; David Hume, Treatise of Human Nature (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1992), 251–63. 2. Albert O. Hirschman, The Passions and the Interests (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977). 3. Ibid., 42–4. 4. See e.g.: Leviathan, ed. Michael Oakeshott (New York: Macmillan, 1962), ch. 6. 5. Hirschman, Passions and Interests, 38–9, 54. 6. Ibid., 48. 7. Interest is not entirely subsumed by class for Mill; people also share certain interests irrespective of their social and economic status. Thus, utility is justi- fied as the arbiter of ethical questions as long as it is “grounded in the perma- nent interests of man as a progressive being.” John Stuart Mill, “On Liberty,” in On Liberty and Other Writings, ed. Stefan Collini (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 14. 8. This suggests that the persistence of the underlying liberal concept of the person as infinite consumer, despite what Macpherson has called the develop- mental democracy phase of the nineteenth century, might be due not only to the liberal commitment to capitalist economic relations, as Macpherson suggests, but also to the simultaneous development of the idea of class notes / 163

interest. This latter idea was paradoxically, of course, part of the liberal critique of unrestrained capitalism. See C.B. Macpherson, Democratic Theory: Essays in Retrieval (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1973), 32–3. 9. Paul Hirst, Associative Democracy (Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press, 1994). 10. Michael Freeden discusses the permeation by liberal ideas of the thought of Laski and Cole in chapter 8 of Liberalism Divided (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986). 11. Harold J. Laski, A Grammar of Politics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1925), 22. 12. Harold J. Laski, Authority in the Modern State (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1919), 275. 13. Laski, Grammar of Politics, 31. 14. Harold J. Laski, Studies in the Problem of Sovereignty (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1917), 19. While in his early writings Laski saw the state as simply one association among many, he came in his later work to recognize it as a uniquely compulsory organization that assumes the special role of moderating the activities of associations to ensure equality between citizens. In Grammar of Politics, although still an organization of individual wills, the state has become the “fundamental instrument of society” or “the source of ultimate reference.” See Laski, Grammar of Politics, 39, 34. The task of the state is to coordinate functions, to balance competing interests, and to satisfy the common needs of men and women as citizens. 15. Laski, Grammar of Politics, 247. Rosenblum discusses the Romantic “penumbra of privacy” in Another Liberalism, at 65–6. 16. Ibid., 67. 17. Ibid., 256. 18. Harold J. Laski, The Foundations of Sovereignty and Other Essays (London: Allen and Unwin, 1921), 67–8. 19. Ibid., 139–40. 20. In The Foundations of Sovereignty, Laski argues for the real corporate personal- ity of the group—that it has a “mind” of its own, distinct from its members. In later work, notably the Grammar, he moves away from this. See Bernard Zylstra, From Pluralism to Collectivism (Assen: van Gorcum, 1968), 54. 21. Ibid., 54. 22. Laski, Authority in the Modern State, 26. 23. Laski, Foundations of Sovereignty, 68. 24. Laski, A Grammar of Politics, 18–19. Laski, like Mill, suggests that the cultiva- tion of reason can allow persons to escape the determinism of social class, adding to the above that: “careful examination” allows the individual rationally to shape his will against that of the institution. 25. Harold J. Laski, The State in Theory and Practice (New York: Viking Press, 1935), 95. 26. Ibid. 27. G.D.H. Cole, “Conflicting Social Obligations,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, xv (1914–1915), 144. 28. Ibid., 145. 29. Ibid. 164 / notes

30. Henry Mayer Magid, English Political Pluralism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1941), 35. 31. G.D.H. Cole, Social Theory (New York: Stokes, 1920), 189. 32. Ibid., 1. 33. Ibid., 26. 34. Ibid., 25–6. 35. G.D.H. Cole, Labour in the Commonwealth (London: Swarthmore Press, 1918), 57. 36. G.D.H. Cole, Guild Socialism Restated (London: Leonard Parsons, 1920), 25. 37. Cole, Social Theory, 26. 38. Ibid., 37. 39. Ibid, 7. 40. Ibid., 34. 41. Ibid, 78. 42. Cole, Labour in the Commonwealth, 42. 43. Ibid., 46. 44. Cole, Social Theory, 2. 45. Ibid, 26. 46. Hirst, Associative Democracy, 2. 47. Paul Q. Hirst (ed.), The Pluralist Theory of the State (London: Routledge, 1989), 40–1. 48. F.A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1944), 35. 49. Ibid., 214. 50. John G. Gunnell, The Descent of Political Theory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993), 106. Gunnell discusses at length the enthusiastic recep- tion of English pluralism in American political theory circles during the 1920s. 51. Ibid., 133. 52. The most important texts were: David Truman, The Governmental Process (New York: Knopf, 1951), and Robert Dahl, Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961). 53. Robert Dahl, Democracy and Its Critics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), 233. 54. Ibid., 252. 55. Ibid., 254. 56. Ibid., 255. 57. Ibid. 58. Hirst, Associative Democracy, 24. 59. Ibid., 11. 60. Ibid, 29–30. 61. Ibid., 13. 62. Ibid., 13–14. 63. Ibid., 14. 64. Ibid., 33. 65. Ibid., 45. 66. Ibid., 51. As I have already noted, Hirst’s communities of fate are what I refer to as ascriptive communities. This latter terms emphasizes the constructed, rather than essential nature of these groups—although as I discuss later, Hirst also regards his fated communities as artificial constructs. notes / 165

67. Ibid., 54. 68. Ibid., 53. 69. Hirst, Associative Democracy, 54. 70. Ibid. 71. Hirst’s claim that nonvoluntary community membership is not constitutive of identity is easily dismissed on the level of history as well as theory. See e.g., Primo Levi’s description of the effects of incarceration in Auschwitz—the quin- tessential nonvoluntary community—upon individual moral character in Survival in Auschwitz (New York: Collier Books, 1993). 72. Marilyn Friedman makes a similar distinction between communities of choice and those she terms “communities of place,” into which persons are born. She also describes the complex interrelationship between the two forms of mem- bership, and concludes that while chosen communities help to define individu- als, most people are probably ineradicably constituted by their membership in communities of place. See Marilyn Friedman, “Feminism and Modern Friendship: Dislocating the Community,” in Communitarianism and Individualism, ed. Shlomo Avineri and Avner De-Shalit (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), 118. 73. See e.g., Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., The Disuniting of America (New York: Norton, 1992).

Chapter Four Multicultural Liberalism 1. See e.g., Joshua Cohen, Matthew Howard, and Martha C. Nussbaum (eds.), Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999). 2. Discussed at length in Will Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995). 3. Kymlicka, Liberalism, Community and Culture (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), 207–8; Multicultural Citizenship, 52–3. 4. Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship, 82–4. 5. Kymlicka, Liberalism, Community and Culture, 164. 6. Kymlicka emphasizes the importance of culture to freedom in Multicultural Citizenship, ch. 5. 7. Ibid., 89. This argument is also made by Avishai Margalit and Joseph Raz, “National Self-Determination,” Journal of Philosophy 87, 9 (September 1990): 447–9. 8. Michael Walzer, “Comment,” in Multiculturalism and the Politics of Recognition, ed. Amy Gutmann (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992), 100–1. 9. Will Kymlicka, “Ethnic Associations and Democratic Citizenship,” Freedom of Association, ed. Amy Gutmann (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), 180–1. 10. Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship, 18. 11. Ibid., 19. 12. Ibid., 18. 13. Ibid., 76. 14. Kymlicka, Liberalism, Community and Culture, 168. 15. Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship, 17–20. 16. Ibid., 19. 166 / notes

17. Thomas W. Pogge, “Group Rights and Ethnicity,” in Ethnicity and Group Rights (NOMOS XXXIX) ed. Ian Shapiro and Will Kymlicka (New York: New York University Press, 1997), 187–221. 18. Pogge, “Group Rights and Ethnicity,” 198. 19. Yael Tamir, Liberal Nationalism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993). 20. The freedom to leave exclusive religious groups in which a child has been raised is an issue the courts have failed to address in cases concerning parental rights. See Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 and Quiner v. Quiner 59 Cal. Rptr.503, both of which are discussed by Kent Greenawalt in “Freedom of Association and Religious Association,” in Freedom of Association, ed. Gutmann, 109–44. 21. Pogge, “Group Rights and Ethnicity,” 198–200. 22. In his unfinished Ideas on the Philosophy of the History of Mankind (1784–1791), cited in Raymond Williams, Keywords Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society, Revised edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 1976), 89. 23. See E.P. Thompson, “The Patricians and the Plebs,” in Customs in Common: Studies in Traditional Popular Culture (New York: The New Press, 1993), 16–96. 24. Gareth Stedman Jones, “Working Class Culture and Working-Class Politics in London, 1870–1990: Notes on the Remaking of a Working Class,” in Languages of Class (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), 182–3. 25. For a thoughtful discussion of the role of language in cultural definition, in a particular case, see Audra Simpson, “Paths Toward a Mohawk Nation; Narratives of Citizenship and Nationhood in Kahnawake,” in Political Theory and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, ed. Duncan Ivison, Paul Patton, and Will Sanders (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 132–4. 26. Brian Walker, “Modernity and Cultural Vulnerability: Should Ethnicity be Privileged?” in Theorizing Nationalism, ed. Ronald Beiner (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999), 149–50. 27. This is in fact often the view that dominant groups take of minorities. As Andrew Hacker writes: “In the eyes of white Americans, being black encapsu- lates your identity. No other racial or national origin is seen as having so perva- sive an effect on personality or character.” Andrew Hacker, Two Nations: Black and White, Separate, Hostile and Unequal (New York: Scribner’s, 1992), 32. 28. These identity intersections are discussed in: Kimberle Crenshaw, “Whose Story is It Anyway? Feminist and Antiracist Appropriations of Anita Hill” and Christine Stansell, “White Feminists and Black Realities: The Politics of Authenticity,” both in Race-ing Justice, Engendering Power, ed. Toni Morrison (New York: Pantheon, 1992), 402–40, 251–68. 29. Michael Walzer, “The Communitarian Critique of Liberalism,” Political Theory 18, 1 (February 1990): 6–23. 30. This form of reflection and evaluation would not be sufficient for autonomy according to some liberals. I am not arguing, as John Gray does e.g., that what is involved here is a distancing of the autonomous agent from her social envi- ronment and the influences of others. See John Gray, Mill on Liberty: A Defence (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983), 74. 31. See W.E.B. Du Bois, “The Concept of Race,” in Dusk of Dawn: An Essay Toward an Autobiography of a Race Concept (Milwood: Kraus-Thomson, 1975) and Sandra Harding’s useful discussion of feminist standpoint theory in Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Thinking from Women’s Lives (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1991), 119–34. notes / 167

32. I must note here that Kymlicka’s following characterization of Quebecois culture as traditional, conservative, and dominated by the Church, and the Quiet Revolution as its sudden and dramatic entry into modernity is in fact debatable. Pierre Trudeau has famously defended this interpretation of French Canadian history in “The New Betrayal of the Intellectuals” (in Federalism and French Canadian Society [Montreal: HMH, 1967]). Claude Couture argues that this characterization of Quebecois history is the product of colonial attitudes amongst anglophone social scientists. He suggests that pre–Quiet Revolution Quebec was not culturally or ideologically monolithic, but rather diverse, and subject to the same influences of urbanization and industrialization as anglophone Canada. See Claude Couture, Paddling With the Current: Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Etienne Parent, Liberalism and Nationalism in Canada (Edmonton: University of Alberta Press, 1998), chs. 1 and 2. I am indebted to an anonymous reviewer for Palgrave for drawing this to my attention. 33. Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship, 87. 34. Amelie Oksenberg Rorty, “The Hidden Politics of Cultural Identification,” Political Theory 22, 1 (February 1994): 153–65. 35. Ibid., 158. 36. See e.g., the introduction to The Invention of Tradition, ed. Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), 1–14. 37. Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship, ch. 8. 38. Kymlicka, Liberalism, Community and Culture, 197. 39. Ibid., 149. 40. It is in fact the imposition of traditional Western liberal models that in some cases has led to that patriarchal rule. See James Tully, Strange Multiplicity: Constitutionalism in an Age of Diversity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 193. 41. Cohen, Howard, and Nussbaum, Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? See also Chandran Kukathas, “Are There Any Cultural Rights?” Political Theory 20, 1 (February 1992): 105–39; and “Cultural Rights Again,” Political Theory 20, 4 (November 1992): 674–80. 42. See end note 41. 43. Yael Tamir, Liberal Nationalism chs. 1 and 2. 44. Ibid., 33. 45. Ibid, 36–7. 46. Yael Tamir, “Siding with the Underdogs,” in Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? ed. Cohen, Howard, and Nussbaum, 47–52. 47. Kymlicka, “Rights of Minority Cultures,” 143. 48. Bernard Yack, “Reconciling Liberalism and Nationalism,” Political Theory (February 1995): 174. 49. Tamir, Liberal Nationalism, 7. 50. Ibid., 95–102. 51. Yael Tamir, “The Enigma of Nationalism,” World Politics 47 (April 1995): 432. 52. As James Clifford argues in “Identity in Mashpee,” The Predicament of Culture (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988), 277–346. 53. Will Kymlicka, “Misunderstanding Nationalism,” Dissent (Winter 1995): 135. 54. Tamir, Liberal Nationalism, 149–50. 55. Ibid., 25. 56. Ibid., 71. 168 / notes

57. Tamir, Liberal Nationalism, 73. 58. Ibid., 96–9. 59. Ibid., 99. 60. Ibid., 102. 61. Ibid. 62. Charles Taylor, “The Politics of Recognition,” in Multiculturalism, ed. Amy Gutmann (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), 60–1. 63. Ibid., 32–5, fn. 9 and 10. Taylor bases his theory of dialogical identity forma- tion on the work of Mikhail Bakhtin. See also the useful discussion in Mikhail Bakhtin: Creation of a Prosaics, Gary Saul Morson and Caryl Emerson (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1990), 189–92. But his claims are also supported by object relations theory, the psychological theory of personality development that holds that the infant human psyche is constructed through relations with others (particularly of course the mother). For a basic statement see D.W. Winnicott, “Mirror-role of Mother and Family in Child Development,” in Playing and Reality (London: Tavistock, 1971), 111–18. 64. Taylor, “The Politics of Recognition,” 32. 65. Ibid., 25. 66. Ibid., 38. Taylor’s contention here is similar to that of Margalit and Halbertal, who argue for the right to cultural survival on the grounds that their particular communal cultural identity forms a crucial part of the self-conception of individuals. See note 7 earlier. 67. Ibid., 60–1. 68. See Taylor’s discussion of Kymlicka in “The Politics of Recognition,” 40–1, fn. 16. 69. Ibid., 25, 27. 70. See e.g., Michael Sandel, Democracy’s Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996). 71. Kymlicka, “Misunderstanding Nationalism,” 137. 72. Albert O. Hirschman, The Passions and the Interests (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977), 133. 73. Kymlicka, “Misunderstanding Nationalism,” 137. 74. Gerda Lerner made an early argument for this kind of recovery in The Majority Finds Its Past: Placing Women in History (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979). 75. Margalit and Raz directly address this problem when they acknowledge that their description of groups entitled to self-determination would apply as equally to social classes, which “clearly do not have a right to self-determination.” Margalit and Raz, “National Self-determination,” 448. 76. For discussions of these issues, see Simpson, “Paths Toward a Mohawk Nation”; Manuhuia Barcham, “(De)Constructing the Politics of Indigeneity,” in Political Theory and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, ed. Ivison, Patton, and Sanders, 137–51; John Bern and Susan Dodds, “On the Plurality of Interests: Aboriginal Self-government and Land Rights,” in Political Theory and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, ed. Ivison, Patton and Sanders, 163–79. 77. A system currently operating in New Zealand, where specific seats are set aside for Maori voters only. 78. See e.g., Lani Gunier, “The Representation of Minority Interests,” in Classifying By Race, ed. Paul E. Peterson (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995), 21–49. notes / 169

Chapter Five Group Representation and Deliberative Liberalism 1. Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 19–20. 2. For a critique of the paradigm (to which I will later return) see Lynn M. Sanders, “Against Deliberation,” Political Theory 25, 3 ( June 1997): 347–76. 3. For example, Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson, Democracy and Disagreement (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1996), 1–5. 4. Iris Young terms this previously dominant paradigm the “aggregative model.” See Inclusion and Democracy, 19–21. 5. For an influential early assessment from a theoretical perspective, see Carole Pateman, Participation and Democratic Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976). See also the essays in J.R. Pennock and J.W. Chapman, eds., Participation in Politics (NOMOS XVI) (New York, 1975). 6. See chapter 1 earlier, note 35. 7. These criticisms are detailed by Nancy Rosenblum in Membership and Morals: The Personal Uses of Pluralism in America (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), 319–39. See also K. Anthony Appiah, “Identity, Authenticity, Survival: Multicultural Societies and Social Reproduction,” in Multiculturalism, ed. Gutmann, 149–63. 8. John S. Dryzek, Deliberative Democracy and Beyond (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 1. 9. Robert Gooding-Williams defends deliberation in a multicultural society along these lines in “Race, Multiculturalism and Democracy,” Constellations 5, 1 (1998): 30–4. 10. Young, Inclusion and Democracy, 81–120. 11. See e.g., Ian Shapiro “Enough of Deliberation: Politics is about Interests and Power” and Iris Marion Young, “Justice, Inclusion and Deliberative Democracy,” both in Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement, ed. Stephen Macedo (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 28–38, 151–8. 12. In an early statement, Joshua Cohen argued that deliberative outcomes should be settled only by reference to the reasons offered by participants. See Cohen, “Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy,” in The Good Polity: Normative Analysis of the State, ed. Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1989), 23. For an argument that reasons need to be acceptable to a hypotheti- cal third party, see Jodi Dean, Solidarity of Strangers: Feminism after Identity Politics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996). 13. Jurgen Habermas, Between Facts and Norms (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996). 14. Gutmann and Thompson, Democracy and Disagreement, 2–3. 15. Ibid., 95–101. 16. Young, Inclusion and Democracy, 37–40. See also Sanders, “Against Deliberation,” 347–76. 17. Young argues for “communicative,” rather than “deliberative” democracy, on the grounds that the former allows more latitude in the forms of speech recog- nized. Communicating ideas becomes crucial, rather than arguing them. See Young, “Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy,” in Seyla Benhabib, ed., Democracy and Difference: Changing Boundaries of the Political (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), 122–5. 170 / notes

18. Young, “Communication and the Other,” 124. 19. Ibid., 122–5. 20. Benhabib, “Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy,” in Benhabib, ed., Democracy and Difference, 82–3. 21. Sanders, “Against Deliberation,” 370–3. 22. See e.g., the case of Senator Carol Moseley Braun’s response to the Senate’s con- sideration of the renewal of a patent on the Confederate flag insignia, routinely granted to the Daughters of the Confederacy. Braun launched an emotional and impassioned appeal against the patent, in which she testified to African Americans’ self-understanding of their identity in terms of the legacy of slavery. Reported in “Ms. Moseley Braun’s Majestic Moment,” New York Times July 24, 1993, 18. 23. In the late 1980s, the United States apologized to (and compensated) Japanese Americans who had been interned during the Second World War. Over the next decade (and this is not an exhaustive list) the Roman Catholic Church apologized for its failure to prevent the deportation and murder of French Jews during the Holocaust. British Prime Minister Tony Blair apologized for Britain’s mistreatment of the Irish during the potato famine. The Canadian government apologized for its mistreatment of indigenous peoples, and the British Crown apologized for its fail- ure to fulfil treaty obligations owed to the Maori people of New Zealand. 24. Plato, “The Apology” in Great Dialogues of Plato, trans. W.H.D. Rouse (New York: Mentor, 1956), 423. 25. Frow, “A Politics of Stolen Time,” Meanjin, 57, 2 (1998): 362–3. 26. In 1997, Democratic House member Tony Hall proposed a bill for the federal government to apologize for slavery. 27. This practice has arguably amounted to attempted genocide. See Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Enquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families (Sydney: Commonwealth of Australia, 1997). 28. For a useful discussion see Mitchell F. Rice and Martin Carcasson, “The Promise and Failure of President Clinton’s Race Initiative of 1997–1998: A Rhetorical Perspective,” Rhetoric and Public Affairs 2, 2 (1999): 249–50. 29. In the Australian case, see the letter from Senator Herron, the minister for abo- riginal affairs, to Father Frank Brennan, cited in Robert Manne, “In Denial, the Stolen Generations and the Right,” Australian Quarterly Essay 1 (2001): 75. In the American case, see “Clinton Opposes Slavery Apology,” US News and World Report, April 6, 1998, 7. A parliamentary resolution was eventually passed in Australia in 1999, expressing regret for past injustices. It was a vague statement, however, which did not refer to specific practices. 30. See this chapter, fn. 27. 31. Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy, 58. 32. Gutmann and Thompson, Democracy and Disagreement, 137. 33. This is a frequent charge made by opponents of apology and reparations. See e.g., Armstrong Williams, “Presumed Victims,” in Should America Pay? ed. Raymond Winbush (New York: Harper Collins, 2003), 165–71. 34. See e.g., Jean Bethke Elshtain, “Politics and Forgiveness,” in Burying the Past: Making Peace and Doing Justice after Civil Conflict, ed. Nigel Biggar (Washington DC: Georgetown University Press, 2001), 44. notes / 171

35. Nancy Fraser discusses the role of weak or “counter” publics in Justice Interreptus: Critical Reflections on the “Postsocialist” Condition (New York: Routledge, 1997), 72–7. 36. Melissa S. Williams, Voice, Trust and Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998). 37. Ibid.,57–82. 38. Ibid., 70–5. 39. Ibid., 13. 40. There are currently seven Maori seats. See “New Zealand’s Electoral System: The Maori Electoral Option,” New Zealand Electoral Commission at http://www.elections.org.nz/esyst/mroll.html. 41. See David Liddle, “Djerrkura Wants Black Seats in Parliament,” Land Rights Queensland March 1998. 42. Williams, Voice, Trust and Memory, 209–10. 43. See e.g., Lani Gunier, The Tyranny of the Majority: Fundamental Fairness in Representative Democracy (New York: Free Press, 1994) and Douglas J. Amy, Real Choices/New Voices: The Case for Proportional Representation Elections in the United States (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993). 44. Phillips, The Politics of Presence, 80. 45. In her discussion of intersectionality, Kimberle Crenshaw suggests an excellent example of the way in which the groups that should be consulted in determin- ing policy toward an issue area emerge out of the facts of the issue itself. In a study of social policies dealing with domestic violence, Crenshaw demonstrates that policies concerning the provision of services and funds to victims have been set by white, middle-class women in government and social authorities. They are, however, ineffective in addressing the problems of poor, minority women who are victims of domestic violence. Bringing in women with differ- ent class and race intersecting identities to help determine how shelters are run and funds are spent will result in more effective policy solutions. See Kimberle Crenshaw, “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics and Violence Against Women of Color,” in The Public Nature of Private Violence ed. Martha Albertson Fineman and Rixanne Mykitiuk (New York: Routledge, 1994), 93–118. 46. From The Equal Opportunity Act, 1964. Cited in Pedro A. Noguera, “Transforming Urban Schools by Increasing Community Control,” In Motion Magazine, May 20, 1999. 47. James Jennings, “The Politics of Black Empowerment in Urban America: Reflections on Race, Class and Community,” in Dilemmas of Activism: Class, Community and the Politics of Local Mobilization, ed. Joseph S. King and Prudence S. Posner (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990), 128. The movement for community control of schools suffered a major setback when conflict between parents and teachers over governance at a school in the Oceanhill-Brownsville section of Brooklyn led to a city-wide strike by the United Federation of Teachers in 1968. 48. Gregory Streich discusses the role of these “mediating groups” in public discus- sions about race in “Constructing Multiracial Democracy: To Deliberate or Not to Deliberate,” Constellations 9, 1 (March 2002): 127–53. 172 / notes

49. Peter Finn, Citizen Review of Police: Approaches and Implementation (US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, 2001). 50. Richard J. Terrill, “Civilian Oversight of the Police Complaints Process in the United States: Concerns, Developments and More Concerns,” in Complaints against the Police: The Trend to External Review, ed. Andrew J. Goldsmith (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991). 51. Finn, Citizen Review of Police: Approaches and Implementation, 85. 52. Cathy J. Cohen, “Straight Gay Politics: The Limits of an Ethnic Model of Inclusion,” in Ethnicity and Group Rights, ed. Shapiro and Kymlicka, 575; Donald B. Rosenthal, “Regime Change and Gay and Lesbian Politics in Four New York Cities,” in Culture Wars and Local Politics, ed. Elaine B. Sharp (Lawrence, KA: University of Kansas Press, 1999), 66. 53. John Zeh, “Council OKs Police Review Board but...,” Rainbow Cincinnati, January 26, 1999. 54. These events are summarized by Dan Horn in “Civility Turned to Anarchy: How It Happened,” Cincinnati Enquirer, April 16, 2001. 55. “Thomas’ Death Seen as Catalyst for Change,” staff report, Cincinnati Post, April 16, 2001. 56. “Race Panel Leadership Takes Shape,” Cincinnati Enquirer, May 18, 2001. 57. For a comprehensive mission statement and list of activities, see http:// www.cincinnatican.org/About/index.htm. 58. Richelle Thompson, “First We Talk: Community Meetings Produce Results,” Cincinnati Enquirer, April 7, 2002. 59. In this way, groups act as both weak publics formulating opinion on race- related issues, and as strong publics in driving policy formation. See Streich, “Multiracial Democracy,” 139–40. 60. See e.g., Sanders, “Against Deliberation,” 362–9. 61. See note 52 earlier.

Chapter Six Cultural Recognition and the Claims of Muslim Immigrant Communities 1. Probably because of the assumption that religious belief is a fundamental aspect of personal identity, Muslims in the West have generally not been characterized simply as interest groups. 2. For an excellent survey of the development of relations between Muslim immi- grants and Western host countries see Muslims in the West: From Sojourners to Citizens, ed. Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002). 3. Jane I. Smith, Introduction to Muslims in the West, 6. 4. Tariq Modood, “Muslims and the Politics of Difference,” in The Politics of Migration: Managing Opportunity, Conflict and Change, ed. Sarah Spencer (Oxford: Blackwell for Political Quarterly Publishing, 2003), 102–3. 5. Ibid., 103. 6. Ibid., 104. 7. Jorgen S. Nielsen, Muslims in Western Europe (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1992). The Honeyford affair in this period, in which racist notes / 173

accusations about minorities were made publicly by the white headmaster of a school in Bradford, with a large proportion of South Asian and Muslim stu- dents, helped reinforce a newly emerging political consciousness amongst Muslims. 8. David Herbert, “Islam, Identity and Globalization: Reflections in the Wake of 11 September 2001,” in Religion, Identity and Change: Perspectives on Global Transformations, ed. Simon Coleman and Peter Collins (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004), 156. 9. As established in Mandla v. Dowell Lee, [1983] 2 AC, 548. 10. See Bob Hepple and Tufyal Choudhury, “Tackling Religious Discrimination: Practical Implications for Policy Makers and Legislators,” Home Office Research Study 221 (Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, February 2001), 20. 11. See National Statistics, UK, at:http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget. asp?idϭ 293. 12. Iftikhar H. Malik, Islam and Modernity: Muslims in Europe and the United States (London: Pluto Press, 2004), 66. 13. Steven Vertovec, “Islamophobia and Muslim Recognition in Britain,” in Muslims in the West, ed. Haddad, 29. 14. Herbert, “Islam, Identity and Globalization,” 156. 15. See e.g., “War on Terrorism or Muslims,” The Muslim News Online, Friday 28, September 2001, at http://www.muslimnews.co.uk/paper/index.php?articleϭ409. 16. Vikram Dodd, “Muslims Face More Suspicion,” The Guardian Tuesday, November 5, 2002. At: http://www.guardian.co.uk/ukresponse/story/ 0,11017,830107,00.html. 17. Bobby Sayyid, A Fundamental Fear: Eurocentrism and the Emergence of Islamism (London: Zed, 1997), 16. 18. Herbert, “Islam, Identity and Globalization,” 159. 19. Guardian/ICM poll, reported in Paul Kelso and Jeevan Vasagar, “Muslims Reject Image of Separate Society,” The Guardian, Monday, June 17, 2002. The same surveys showed that while older Muslims thought their community should be more closely integrated into British society, the younger generation tended to think there was already enough or too much integration. 20. Pnina Werbner, “Public Spaces, Political Voices: Gender, Feminism and Aspects of British Muslim Participation in the Public Sphere,” in Political Participation and Identities of Muslims in Non-Muslim States, ed. W. Shadid and P. van Koningsveld (Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1996), 68. 21. Karen Leonard, “South Asian Leadership of American Muslims,” in Muslims in the West, ed. Haddad, 233. 22. Aminah Beverly McCloud, African American Islam (New York: Routledge, 1995). 23. Mohamed Nimer, “Muslims in American Public Life,” in Muslims in the West, ed. Haddad, 169. 24. Leonard, “South Asian Leadership of American Muslims,” 234. 25. Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad, “Muslims in U.S. Politics: Recognized and Integrated, or Seduced and Abandoned?” SAIS Review XXI, 2 (Summer–Fall 2001): 93. 174 / notes

26. Dale E. Eickelman and James Piscatori, Muslim Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996). 27. Garbi Schmidt, “The Complexity of Belonging: Sunni Muslim Immigrants in Chicago,” in Muslim Minorities in the West: Visible and Invisible, ed. Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad and Jane I. Smith (Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press, 2002), 48–9, 114. 28. Leonard, “South Asian Leadership of American Muslims,” 241. 29. Though the transition from ethnicity to religion as the fundamental marker of identity appears to be slower in the United States than in Britain. Garbi Schmidt concludes that ethnic affiliation is still the strongest argument against a unified Muslim American community. See Garbi Schmidt, Islam in Urban America: Sunni Muslims in Chicago (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2004), 191. 30. Nathan Glazer, “The Emergence of an American Ethnic Pattern,” in From Different Shores: Perspsectives on Race and Ethnicity in America, ed. Ronald Takaki (New York, Oxford University Press, 1994), 11–23. 31. Leonard, “South Asian Leadership of American Muslims,” 234. 32. Nimer, “Muslims in American Public Life,” 172–4. 33. Kathleen Moore, “The Politics of Transfiguration: Constitutive Aspects of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998,” in Muslim Minorities in the West, ed. Haddad and Smith, 34. 34. Agha Saeed, “The American Muslim Paradox,” in Muslim Minorities in the West: Visible and Invisible, ed. Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad and Jane I. Smith (Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press, 2002), 48–9. 35. Saeed, “The American Muslim Paradox,” 53. 36. Samuel Huntington, “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs 72, 3 (Summer 1993): 22–49. 37. Schmidt, Islam in Urban America, 8. 38. See e.g., “ ‘Islam is Peace’ Says President,” White House press release, September 17, 2001, at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/ 20010917-11.html. 39. Gary Gerstle, “Pluralism and the War on Terror,” Dissent (Spring 2003): 34. See e.g., “(Re)embracing Diversity in NYC Schools,” part of Columbia University’s Muslim Communities in New York City Project, reported at: http://www.sipa. columbia.edu/muslim-nyc/education/reembracing_diversity.html. 40. Malik, Islam and Modernity, 179. 41. Karim H. Karim, “Crescent Dawn in the Great White North: Muslim Participation in the Canadian Public Sphere,” in Muslims in the West, ed. Haddad, 262. 42. Daood Hassan Hamdani, “Canada’s Muslims: An Unnoticed Part of Our History,” address on the occasion of Eid-al-Adha to the Canadian Parliament, Ottawa, May 2, 1996. At: http://muslim-canada.org/cdnmuslm.htm. 43. Karim, “Crescent Dawn in the Great White North,” 268. 44. The term veil is commonly used in the West to denote any headcovering worn by Muslim women, from the full Afghani burqa to a simple headscarf. As I dis- cuss later, in many cases these head coverings reflect local, cultural, or national, rather than religious practices. The Arab word hijab refers to covering or mod- esty, and is often used generically, to refer to all headcoverings worn for religious notes / 175

purposes. Niqab is the term for face-covering, and jilbab for a loose robe that covers clothes. I note that veiling is a controversial word to use in the context of these discussions, because of the way in which it has been eroticized in Western discussions of Muslim women. 45. See Katherine Bullock, “Challenging Media Representations of the Veil: Contemporary Muslim Women’s Re-Veiling Movement,” The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 17, 3 (2001): 22–53. 46. See e.g., Susan Moller Okin, “Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women?” in Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? ed. Joshua Cohen, Matthew Howard, and Martha C. Nussbaum (Princeton: Princeton University Press). Okin in fact refers only briefly to the veil, concentrating on what she sees as more serious forms of cultural and social oppression of women, justified by multiculturalism. 47. Leila Ahmed, Women and Gender in Islam: Historical Roots of a Modern Debate (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992), ch. 8. 48. See Muslim Women in the United Kingdom and Beyond, ed. Haifaa Jawad and Tansin Benn (Leiden: Brill, 2003), xiv. 49. Nancy Hirschmann, The Subject of Liberty: Towards a Feminist Theory of Freedom (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003), 171. When, e.g., the Bush administration went public to justify its attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan, First Lady Laura Bush spoke publicly about the cruelties and oppression enforced upon women by the Taliban, and their need to cast off their veils. 50. See Irene Donohoue Clyne, “Muslim Women: Some Western Fictions,” in Muslim Women in the United Kingdom and Beyond, Experiences and Images, ed. Haifaa Jawad and Tansin Benn (Leiden: Brill, 2003,) 28–30. 51. Bullock, “Challenging Media Representations of the Veil,” 42. For a particu- larly strong example of media criticism of the wearing of hijab in Canada, see Michele Lemon, “Understanding does not Always Lead to Tolerance,” Facts and Arguments, Globe and Mail, Tuesday, January 31, 1995. In fact, popular and media feminist criticism of the veil has been much stronger than that of feminist academics. Okin (see note 46 earlier) has little to say about the veil except that it is far less important an issue to Muslim women immigrants than polygamous marriage. 52. There is an extensive discussion in: Anne Sofie Roald, Women in Islam: The Western Experience (London: Routledge, 2001), ch. 12. 53. The status of hijab in the hadiths is discussed by L. Clarke in “Hijab According to the Hadith: Text and Interpretation,” in The Muslim Veil in North America, ed. Alvi, Hoodfar, and McDonough (Toronto: Women’s Press, 2003), 214–86. Clarke concludes that both conservatives and liberals on the subject of women’s dress can produce plausible exegeses of the hadiths to support their positions. 54. See e.g., Homa Hoodfar, “More Than Clothing: Veiling as an Adaptive Strategy,” in The Muslim Veil in North America, ed. Alvi, Hoodfar, and McDonough, 17–18. 55. Singapore has taken similar action. 56. See the detailed discussion in: Jeremy Jennings, “Citizenship, Republicanism and Multculturalism in Contemporary France,” British Journal of Political Science 30 (2000): 575–98. 176 / notes

57. Jocelyne Cesari, “Islam in France: The Shaping of a Religious Minority,” in Muslims in the West, From Sojourners to Citizens, ed. Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 37. 58. Jane Kramer, “Taking the Veil: How Frances’s Public Schools Became the Battleground in a Culture War,” The New Yorker, November 22, 2004, 66. 59. In the French case, debate has centered around the threat allegedly posed by scarves to laïcité—the concept of separation of church and state in France. 60. “Chirac Calls Muslim Veils ‘Aggressive’ in Schools,” Reuters, December 6, 2003. 61. Elle France, Monday, December 8, 2003. Reported in Elaine Sciolino, “French Panel Recommends Banning Headscarves in Schools,” The New York Times, December 11, 2003. 62. See “Chirac’s Hijab Remark Antagonizes French Muslims,” Islam Online, December 7, 2003. At: http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2003-04/ 22/article02.shtml. Also the International Helsinki Foundation statement at: http://www.ihf-hr.org/viewbinary/viewhtml.php?doc_idϭ5259. 63. There has been considerable confusion about the French law, which states that it applies only to “religious” forms of dress, and specifically exempts, e.g., Sikh turbans, claiming that these are “ethnic” and not “religious.” This created an uproar. 64. Nelly Olin, a member of the Stasi Commission, claimed (without evidence) that one-third of girls wearing the hijab in schools are forced to do so. Le Monde, July 3, 2003. 65. Kramer, “Taking the Veil,” 66–7. 66. See the interview with Saida Kada, a prominent defender of the veil, in “Daughters of France, Daughters of Allah,” by Marie Brenner, Vanity Fair, April 2004. 67. Kramer, “Taking the Veil,” 63. 68. See Brenner, “Daughters of France.” 69. Hugh Schofield, “Jewish Dad Backs Headscarf Daughters,” BBC News, Wednesday, October 1, 2003. At: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/ 3149588.stm. 70. Kimberly Conniff Taber, “Isolation Awaits French Girls in Headscarves,” Women’s e-News, March 5, 2004. At: http://www.womense-news.org/article. cfm/dyn/aid/1738/context/archive. 71. Francoise Gaspard and Farhad Khosrokhavar, Le Foulard et la Republique (Paris: La Decouverte, 1995), 204. 72. See “Banning of Headscarves is an Attack on Fundamental Freedoms Says FCO Minister,” Islamic Foundation Press Release, February 6, 2004. At http://www.mcb.org.uk/OBrien0204.pdf. 73. “Luton School Lifts Headscarf Ban,” The Guardian, March 4, 2004. 74. Polly Toynbee, “Behind the Burka,” The Guardian, September 28, 2001. 75. See e.g., Katharine Viner, “Feminism as Imperialism,” The Guardian, Saturday, September 21, 2002. 76. Natasha Walter, “When the Veil Means Freedom,” The Guardian, Tuesday, January 20, 2004. 77. Fareena Alam, “British Press Unite in Hysteria over Jilbab,” Times Educational Supplement, June 25, 2004. notes / 177

78. In “Women and the Veil: Personal Responses to Global Process,” by Helen Watson, in Islam, Globalization and Postmodernity, ed. Akbar S. Ahmed and Hastings Donnan (London: Routledge, 1994), 151. 79. See Malik, Islam and Modernity, 87–8. 80. “Muslim Girl in Oklahoma Public School O’Kd to Wear Headscarf,” Dallas Morning News, November 12, 2004. 81. See “School Alters Dress Code after Muslim Student Complains,” Associated Press, January 21, 2005. Also: “Suit Continues over Headscarf Incident in LA School,” Associated Press, February 1, 2005. 82. Emily Wax, “The Fabric of Their Faith,” Washington Post, May 19, 2002, C01. 83. Ibid. 84. Schmidt, Islam in Urban America, 106. 85. Reported in the United States Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (Department of State) International Religious Freedom Report 2004—Canada. Available at: http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2004/ 35529.htm. 86. Patricia Kelly Spurles, “Coding Dress: Gender and the Articulation of Identity in a Canadian Muslim School,” in The Muslim Veil in North America: Issues and Debates, ed. Alvi, Hoodfar, and McDonough 56. 87. Ibid., 58–9. 88. See e.g., Naheed Mustafa, “My Body is My Own Business,” The Globe and Mail, Tuesday, June 29, 1993, A26. 89. Centre for Research and Information on Canada survey, July 2004. Reported at http://www.cric.ca/pdf_re/new_canada_redux/new_canada_ redux_summary. 90. Alvi, Hoodfar, and McDonough, eds., The Muslim Veil in North America, 15. 91. Statement of Mihad Fahmy, in Sheila McDonough, “Voices of Muslim Women,” in The Muslim Veil in North America, ed. Alvi, Hoodfar and McDonough, 106. 92. See the narratives in Homa Hoodfar, “More Than Clothing: Veiling as an Adaptive Strategy,” in The Muslim Veil in North America, ed. Alvi, Hoodfar and McDonough, 3–40. 93. Carmen G. Cayer, “Hijab, Narrative and the Production of Gender among Second Generation, Indo-Pakistani, Muslim Women in Greater Toronto” (MA thesis, Social Anthropology, York University, 1996), 184, cited in: Bullock, “Challenging Media Representations of the Veil,” 35. 94. Katherine Bullock, “The Hijab Experience of Canadian Muslim Women,” Islamic Horizons, March/April 1998. 95. Hoodfar, “More Than Clothing,” 29. 96. Ibid., 32. 97. In a similar argument about the status of the veil as a symbol of subordination, Nancy Hirschmann concludes that the veil itself is not oppressive, but rather “its deployment as a cultural symbol and practice may provide (and often had done so) a form and mode by which patriarchy oppresses women in specific contexts.” See Hirschmann, The Subject of Liberty, 171. 98. Bhikhu Parekh, “A Varied Moral World,” in Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? ed. Cohen, Howard, and Nussbaum, 73. 178 / notes

Chapter Seven Conclusion: Reconstructing Liberal Pluralism 1. See Introduction in this book, p. 1. 2. C.B. Macpherson, The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke (London: Oxford University Press, 1962). 3. Steven Lukes, Individualism (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1973), ix. 4. Philip Green, “Review Essay on Robert Dahl’s Democracy and Its Critics,” in Social Theory and Practice 16, 2 (Summer 1990): 227–8. Green notes in this that “race” appears nowhere in the index to Dahl’s book, and he seems equally oblivious to political claims associated with gender. 5. Joseph Raz, Morality of Freedom (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), 254. 6. Richard Bellamy, “Pluralism, Liberal Constitutionalism and Democracy: A Critique of John Rawls’s (meta)Political Liberalism,” in The Liberal Political Tradition ed. James Meadowcroft (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1996), 85. 7. Nancy L. Rosenblum, Membership and Morals: The Personal Uses of Pluralism in America (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), 61. 8. Ibid., 180. 9. George Kateb, “Notes on Pluralism,” Social Research 61, 3 (Fall 1994): 511–37. 10. Ibid., 524. 11. Rosenblum, Membership and Morals, 325. 12. It should also be noted here that there are many examples of voluntary associa- tions in which a vocal majority determines policies that don’t necessarily com- mand widespread support amongst members, but that prevail due to member apathy or the procedural difficulties that ordinary members face in forcing them to be changed. 13. Rosenblum, Membership and Morals, 350. 14. This is not to say that national independence could not be defended on other grounds, such as the overwhelming support of group members, geographical separateness, or the existence of separate political and legal institutions in the national minority community. 15. Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference, especially ch. 2. 16. Iris Marion Young, “Together in Difference: Transforming the Logic of Group Political Conflict,” in The Rights of Minority Cultures ed. Will Kymlicka (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 165. 17. See Introduction, note 7 in this book. 18. Nancy Fraser, “From Redistribution to Recognition? Dilemmas of Justice in a ‘Post-Socialist’ Age,” in Theorizing Multiculturalism: A Guide to the Current Debate ed. Cynthia Willett (Oxford: Blackwell, 1998), 26. 19. For a definitive statement of the class instead of race argument, see Richard D. Kahlenberg, The Remedy: Class, Race and Affirmative Action (New York: Basic Books, 1997). 20. Amy Gutmann summarizes and discusses these arguments in “Responding to Racial Injustice,” in Color Conscious: The Political Morality of Race K. Anthony Appiah and Amy Gutmann (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), 111. 21. Appiah and Gutmann, Color Conscious, 131–2. 22. Ibid., 169–73. Note that this is a problematic aim, though, as there can be no guarantee that minority graduates will see their identities and commitments notes / 179

primarily in terms of group membership. Nor is it morally justifiable to place minority professionals under any greater obligation to serve the needs of their communities than whites are under. 23. See e.g., Richard Rodruigez, Hunger of Memory (New York: Bantam, 1982), 141–73. 24. Anne Philips, “Feminism and the Politics of Difference: Or, Where Have All the Women Gone?” in Visible Women: Essays on Feminist Legal Theory and Political Philosophy ed. Susan James and Stephanie Palmer (Oxford: Hart, 2002), 21. Bibliography

Books and Articles Ahmed, Leila. Women and Gender in Islam: Historical Roots of a Modern Debate (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992). Alvi, Sajida Sultana, Homa Hoodfar, and Sheila McDonough (eds.). The Muslim Veil in North America: Issues and Debates (Toronto: Women’s Press, 2003). Amy, Douglas J. Real Choices/New Voices: The Case for Proportional Representation Elections in the United States (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993). Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities (London: Verso, 1991). Appiah, Anthony. “Identity, Authenticity, Survival: Multicultural Societies and Social Reproduction” in Amy Gutmann (ed.) Multiculturalism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994). ———. “Race, Culture, Identity: Misunderstood Connections” in K. Anthony Appiah and Amy Gutmann, Color Conscious: The Political Morality of Race (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996). Ashcraft, Richard. “Class Conflict and Constitutionalism in J.S. Mill’s Thought” in Nancy L. Rosenblum (ed.) Liberalism and the Moral Life (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989). ———. “John Stuart Mill and the Theoretical Foundations of Democratic Socialism” in Eldon J. Eisenach (ed.) Mill and the Moral Character of Liberalism (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998). Barker, Rodney. “A Future for liberalism or a Liberal Future?” in James Meadowcroft (ed.) The Liberal Political Tradition (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1996). Barry, Brian. Culture and Equality (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2001). Baum, Bruce. “Freedom, Power and Public Opinion: J.S. Mill on the Public Sphere” History of Political Thought, XXII, 3 (Autumn 2001). Bellamy, Richard. “Introduction” in Richard Bellamy (ed.) Victorian Liberalism: Nineteenth-Century Political Thought and Practice (London: Routledge, 1990). ———. “Pluralism, Liberal Constitutionalism and Democracy: A Critique of John Rawls’s (Meta)Political Liberalism” in James Meadowcroft (ed.) The Liberal Political Tradition (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1996). Benhabib, Seyla. Situating the Self: Gender, Community and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics (Cambridge: Polity, 1992). ——— (ed.). Democracy and Difference: Changing Boundaries of the Political (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996). Benn, Stanley. “Freedom, Autonomy and the Concept of the Person” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 76 (1975–1976): 109–30. 182 / bibliography

Berlin, Isaiah. Four Essays on Liberty (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1969). ———. The Crooked Timber of Humanity (New York: Knopf, 1991). Boucher, David. “Tocqueville, Collingwood, History and Extending the Moral Community” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 2, 3 (2000). Bradley, I. The Optimists: Themes and Personalities in Victorian Liberalism (London: Faber and Faber, 1980). Bullock, Katherine. “Challenging Media Representations of the Veil: Contemporary Muslim Women’s Re-Veiling Movement” The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 17, 3 (2001). Burrow, J.W. Whigs and Liberals: Continuity and Change in English Political Thought (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988). Carlisle, Janice. John Stuart Mill and the Writing of Character (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1991). ———. “Mr. John Stuart Mill, M.P., and the Character of the Working Classes” in Eldon Eisenach (ed.) Mill and the Moral Character of Liberalism (College Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1999). Cayer, Carmen G. “Hijab, Narrative and the Production of Gender Among Second Generation, Indo-Pakistani, Muslim Women in Greater Toronto” (MA thesis, Social Anthropology, York University, 1996) cited in Katherine Bullock “Challenging Media Representations of the Veil: Contemporary Muslim Women’s Re-Veiling Movement” The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 17, 3 (2001). Cesari, Jocelyne. “Islam in France: The Shaping of a Religious Minority” in Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad (ed.) Muslims in the West: From Sojourners to Citizens (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002). Clarke, L. “Hijab According to the Hadith” in Alvil Hoodfar and McDonough (eds.) The Muslim Veil in North America. Clarke, Peter. Liberals and Social Democrats (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978). Clifford, James. “Identity in Mashpee” The Predicament of Culture (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988). Clyne, Irene Donohoue. “Muslim Women: Some Western Fictions” in Haifaa Jawad and Tansin Benn (eds.) Muslim Women in the United Kingdom and Beyond: Experiences and Images (Leiden: Brill, 2003). Cohen, Cathy J. “Straight Gay Politics: The Limits of an Ethnic Model of Inclusion” in Ian Shapiro and Will Kymlicka (eds.) Ethnicity and Group Rights (NOMOS XXXIX) (New York: New York University Press, 1997). Cohen, Joshua. “Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy” in Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit (eds.) The Good Polity: Normative Analysis of the State (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1989). ———. “Moral Pluralism and Political Consensus” in David Copp, Jean Hampton, and John E. Roemer (eds.) The Idea of Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993). ———. Matthew Howard, and Martha C. Nussbaum (eds.). Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999). Cole, G.D.H. “Conflicting Social Obligations” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, xv (1914–1915). ———. Labour in the Commonwealth (London: Swarthmore Press, 1918). bibliography / 183

———. Guild Socialism Restated (London: Leonard Parsons, 1920). ———. Social Theory (New York: Stokes, 1920). Collini, Stefan. Liberalism and Sociology: L.T. Hobhouse and Political Argument in England 1880–1924 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979). ———. “The Idea of ‘Character’ in Victorian Political Thought” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th series, 35 (1983). ———. (ed.) On Liberty and Other Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989). Cornell, Stephen. The Return of the Native: American Indian Political Resurgence (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988). Couture, Claude. Paddling with the Current: Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Etienne Parent, Liberalism and Nationalism in Canada trans. Vivien Bosley (Edmonton: University of Alberta Press, 1998). Crenshaw, Kimberle. “Whose Story Is It Anyway? Feminist and Antiracist Appropriations of Anita Hill” in Toni Morrison (ed.) Race-ing Justice, Engendering Power (New York: Pantheon, 1992). ———. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics and Violence Against Women of Color” in Martha Albertson Fineman and Rixanne Mykitiuk (eds.) The Public Nature of Private Violence (New York: Routledge, 1994). Dahl, Robert. Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961). ———. Democracy and Its Critics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989). Dean, Jodi. Solidarity of Strangers: Feminism after Identity Politics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996). D’Emilio, John. Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities: The Making of a Homosexual Minority in the United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983). Donner, W. The Liberal Self. John Stuart Mill’s Moral and Political Philosophy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1991). Dryzek, John S. Deliberative Democracy and Beyond (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000). DuBois, W.E.B. Dusk of Dawn: An Essay Toward an Autobiography Of a Race Concept (Milwood: Kraus-Thomson, 1975). Duncan, Graeme. Marx and Mill: Two Views of Social Conflict and Social Harmony (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973). Dworkin, Gerald. The Theory and Practice of Autonomy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988). Dworkin, Ronald. “Liberalism” in Stuart Hampshire (ed.) Public and Private Morality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978). Eickelman, Dale E., and James Piscatori. Muslim Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996). Eisenstein, Zillah. The Female Body and the Law (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988). Elshtain, Jean Bethke. “Politics and Forgiveness” in Nigel Biggar (ed.) Burying the Past: Making Peace and Doing Justice after Civil Conflict (Washington DC: Georgetown University Press, 2001). Finn, Peter. Citizen Review of Police: Approaches and Implementation (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, 2001). Flathman, Richard E. The Philosophy and Politics of Freedom (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987). 184 / bibliography

Fraser, Nancy. Unruly Practices (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989). ———. Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the “Postsocialist” Condition (New York: Routledge, 1997). ———. “From Redistribution to Recognition? Dilemmas of Justice in a ‘Post- Socialist’ Age” in Cynthia Willett (ed.) Theorizing Multiculturalism: A Guide to the Current Debate (Oxford: Blackwell, 1998). Freeden, Michael. The New Liberalism: An Ideology of Social Reform (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978). ———. Liberalism Divided (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986). Friedman, Marilyn. “Feminism and Modern Friendship: Dislocating the Community” in Shlomo Avineri and Avner De-Shalit (eds.) Communitarianism and Individualism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992). Frow, John. “A Politics of Stolen Time” Meanjin 57, 2 (1998): 362–3. Galston, William. Liberal Pluralism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002). Gaspard, Francoise, and Farhad Khosrokhavar. Le Foulard et la Republique (Paris: La Decouverte, 1995). Gaus, Gerald. The Modern Liberal Theory of Man (London: Croom Helm, 1983). Gerstle, Gary. “Pluralism and the War on Terror” Dissent (Spring 2003). Gilligan, Carol. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1982). Ginsburg, Fay. Contested Lives: The Abortion Debate in an American Community (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989). Glazer, Nathan. “The Emergence of an American Ethnic Pattern” in Ronald Takaki (ed.) From Different Shores: Perspsectives on Race and Ethnicity in America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994). Gooding-Williams, Robert. “Race, Multiculturalism and Democracy” Constellations 5, 1 (1998): 18–41. Gray, John. Mill on Liberty. A Defence (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983). Green, Philip. “Review Essay on Robert Dahl’s Democracy and its Critics” Social Theory and Practice 16, 2 (Summer 1990): 227–8. Green, T.H. Prolegomena to Ethics (Oxford: Kraus, 1969). ———. “Lectures on Liberal Legislation and Freedom of Contract” in Paul Harris and John Morrow (eds.) Lectures on the Principles of Political Obligation and Other Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986). ———. “Lectures on the Principles of Political Obligation” in Paul Harris and John Morrow (eds.) Lectures on the Principles of Political Obligation and Other Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986). Greenawalt, Kent. “Freedom of Association and Religious Association” in Freedom of Association (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998). Gunier, Lani. The Tyranny of the Majority: Fundamental Fairness in Representative Democracy (New York: Free Press, 1994). ———. “The Representation of Minority Interests” in Paul E. Peterson (ed.) Classifying By Race (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995). Gunnell, John G. The Descent of Political Theory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993). Gutmann, Amy. “Communitarian Critics of Liberalism” Philosophy and Public Affairs 14, 3 (Summer 1985) 308–22. bibliography / 185

———. “Responding to Racial Injustice” in K. Anthony Appiah and Amy Gutmann, Color Conscious: The Political Morality of Race (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996). ———. Identity in Democracy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003). Gutmann, Amy, and Dennis Thompson. Democracy and Disagreement (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1996). Habermas, Jurgen. Between Facts and Norms (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996). Hacker, Andrew. Two Nations: Black and White, Separate, Hostile and Unequal (New York: Scribner’s, 1992). Hacking, Ian. “Making Up People” in Thomas C. Heller, Morton Sosna, and David E. Wellbery (eds.) Reconstructing Individualism: Autonomy, Individuality and the Self in Western Thought (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1986). Haddad, Yvonne Yazbeck. “Muslims in U.S. Politics: Recognized and Integrated, or Seduced and Abandoned?” SAIS Review XXI, 2 (Summer–Fall 2001). ——— (ed.). Muslims in the West: From Sojourners to Citizens (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002). Haddad, Yvonne, and Smith, Jane I. (eds.). Muslim Minorities in the West: Visible and Invisible (Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press, 2002). Hamburger, Joseph. John Stuart Mill on Liberty and Control (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999). Harding, Sandra. Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Thinking from Women’s Lives (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1991). Harvie, Christopher. The Lights of Liberalism: University Liberals and the Challenge of Democracy 1860–86 (London: Allen Lane, 1976). Hayek, F.A. The Road to Serfdom (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1944). Hegel, G.W.F. The Philosophy of History, trans. J. Sibree (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1991). Hepple, Bob, and Tufyal Choudhury. “Tackling Religious Discrimination: Practical Implications for Policy Makers and Legislators” Home Office Research Study 221 (Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, February 2001). Herbert, David. “Islam, Identity and Globalization: Reflections in the Wake of 11 September 2001” in Simon Coleman and Peter Collins (eds.) Religion, Identity and Change: Perspectives on Global Transformations (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004). Hirschman, Albert O. The Passions and the Interests (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977). Hirschmann, Nancy. The Subject of Liberty: Towards a Feminist Theory of Freedom (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003). Hirst, Paul. Associative Democracy: New Forms of Economic and Social Governance (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1994). ——— (ed.). The Pluralist Theory of the State (London: Routledge, 1989). Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan, ed. Michael Oakeshott (New York: Macmillan, 1962). Hobhouse, L.T. The Metaphysical Theory of the State (London: Allen and Unwin, 1918). ———. Social Development (London: Allen and Unwin, 1924). ———. “Sociology” in Sociology and Philosophy: A Centenary Collection of Essays and Articles intr. Morris Ginsberg (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966). 186 / bibliography

Hobhouse, L.T. “Liberalism” in James Meadowcroft (ed.) Liberalism and Other Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994). Hobsbawm, Eric, and Terence Ranger (eds.). The Invention of Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983). Hoodfar, Homa. “More than Clothing: Veiling as an Adaptive Strategy” in Alvi, Hoodfar and McDanough (eds.) The Muslim Veil in North America. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Enquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families (Sydney: Commonwealth of Australia, 1997). Hume, David. Treatise of Human Nature (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1991). Huntington, Samuel. “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs 72, 3 (Summer 1993). Hurst, Paul Q. (ed.). The Pluralist Theory of the State (London: Routledge, 1989). Jawad, Haifaa, and Tansin Benn (eds.). Muslim Women in the United Kingdom and Beyond (Leiden: Brill, 2003). Jennings, James. “The Politics of Black Empowerment in Urban America: Reflections on Race, Class and Community” in Joseph S. King and Prudence S. Posner (eds.) Dilemmas of Activism: Class, Community and the Politics of Local Mobilization (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990). Jennings, Jeremy. “Citizenship, Republicanism and Multculturalism in Contemporary France” British Journal of Political Science, 30 (2000). Johnston, David. The Idea of a Liberal Theory: A Critique and Reconstruction (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994). Jones, Gareth Stedman. “Working Class Culture and Working-Class Politics in London, 1870–1990: Notes on the Remaking of a Working Class” in Languages of Class (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983). Jones, Peter. “Respecting Beliefs and Rebuking Rushdie” in John Horton (ed.) Liberalism, Multiculturalism and Toleration (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993). Kahlenberg, Richard D. The Remedy: Class, Race and Affirmative Action (New York: Basic Books, 1997). Karim H. Karim. “Crescent Dawn in the Great White North: Muslim Participation in the Canadian Public Sphere” in Haddad (ed.) Muslims in the West. Kateb, George. “Notes on Pluralism” Social Research 61, 3 (Fall 1994): 511–37. Kent, Christopher. Brains and Numbers: Elitism, Comtism and Democracy in Mid- Victorian England (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1978). Kukathas, Chandran. “Are There Any Cultural Rights?” Political Theory 20, 1 (February 1992): 105–39. ———. “Cultural Rights Again” Political Theory 20, 4 (November 1992): 674–80. Kymlicka, Will. Liberalism, Community and Culture (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989). ———. Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990). ———. Multicultural Citizenship. A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995). ———. “Misunderstanding Nationalism” Dissent (Winter 1995). ———. “Ethnic Associations and Democratic Citizenship” in Amy Gutmann (ed.) Freedom of Association (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998). bibliography / 187

Laclau, Ernesto, and Chantal Mouffe. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Toward a Radical Democratic Politics (London: Verso, 1985). Larmore, Charles. Patterns of Moral Complexity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987). ———. “Pluralism and Reasonable Disagreement” in Ellen Frankel Paul, Fred D. Miller, Jr., and Jeffrey Paul (eds.) Cultural Pluralism and Moral Knowledge (Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1994). ———. The Morals of Modernity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996). Laski, Harold J. Studies in the Problem of Sovereignty (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1917). ———. Authority in the Modern State (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1919). ———. The Foundations of Sovereignty and Other Essays (London: Allen and Unwin, 1921). ———. A Grammar of Politics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1925). ———. The State in Theory and Practice (New York: Viking Press, 1935). Leonard, Karen. “South Asian Leadership of American Muslims” in Haddad (ed.) Muslims in the West. Lerner, Gerda. The Majority Finds Its Past: Placing Women in History (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979). Letwin, Shirley Robin. The Pursuit of Certainty (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965). Levi, Primo. Survival in Auschwitz (New York: Collier Books, 1993). Liddle, David. “Djerrkura Wants Black Seats in Parliament” Land Rights Queensland (March 1998). Locke, John. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Peter Nidditch (ed.) (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975). ———. A Letter Concerning Toleration, James H. Tully (ed.) (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1983). Lomasky, Loren. Persons, Rights and the Moral Community (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987). Lukes, Steven. Individualism (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1973). ———. “Making Sense of Moral Conflict” in Nancy L. Rosenblum (ed.) Liberalism and the Moral Life (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989). MacIntyre, Alasdair. After Virtue (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1984). Macpherson, C.B. The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism. Hobbes to Locke (London: Oxford University Press, 1962). ———. Democratic Theory: Essays in Retrieval (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1973). ———. The Life and Times of Liberal Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977). Magid, Henry Mayer. English Political Pluralism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1941). Malik, Iftikhar H. Islam and Modernity: Muslims in Europe and the United States (London: Pluto Press, 2004). Manne, Robert. “In Denial, the Stolen Generations and the Right” Australian Quarterly Essay 1 (2001): 75. Margalit, Avishai, and Joseph Raz. “National Self-Determination” Journal of Philosophy 87, 9 (September 1990): 447–9. 188 / bibliography

McCloud, Aminah Beverly. African American Islam (New York: Routledge, 1995). Mehta, Uday. Liberalism and Empire: A Study in Nineteenth-Century British Liberal Thought (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999). Mill, John Stuart. “Autobiography” in Jack Stillinger (ed.) Autobiography and Other Writings (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1969). ———. The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill 33 volumes, ed. J.M. Robson (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974–1991). ———. “On Liberty” in Stefan Collini (ed.) On Liberty and Other Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989). Miller, David. On Nationality (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995). Modood, Tariq. “Muslims, Incitement to Hatred and the Law” in John Horton (ed.) Liberalism, Multiculturalism and Toleration (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993). ———. “Muslims and the Politics of Difference” in Sarah Spencer (ed.) The Politics of Migration: Managing Opportunity, Conflict and Change (Oxford: Blackwell for Political Quarterly Publishing, 2003). Moon, J. Donald. Constructing Community: Moral Pluralism and Tragic Conflicts (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993). Moore, Kathleen. “The Politics of Transfiguration: Constitutive Aspects of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998” in Haddad and Smith (eds.) Muslim Minorities in the West. Morrison, Toni. Playing in the Dark: Whiteness and the Literary Imagination (New York: Vintage, 1993). Morrow, John. “Community, Class and Bosanquet’s ‘New State’ ” History of Political Thought 21, 3 (Autumn 2000): 495. Morson, Gary Saul, and Caryl Emerson. Mikhail Bakhtin: Creation of a Prosaics (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1990). Mouffe, Chantal (ed.). Dimensions of Radical Democracy: Pluralism, Citizenship, Community (London: Verso, 1992). ———. The Return of the Political (London: Verso, 1993). Newey, Glen. After Politics: The Rejection of Politics in Contemporary Liberal Philosophy (New York: Palgrave, 2001). Nielsen, Jorgen S. Muslims in Western Europe (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1992). Nimer, Mohamed. “Muslims in American Public Life” in Haddad (ed.) Muslims in the West. Okin, Susan. “Review Political Liberalism” American Political Science Review 87, 4 (December 1993): 1010–12. ———. “Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women?” in Joshua Cohen, Matthew Howard, and Martha C. Nussbaum (eds.) Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999). Parekh, Bhikhu. Rethinking Multiculturalism (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000). Pateman, Carole. Participation and Democratic Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976). Pennock, J.R., and J.W. Chapman (eds.). Participation in Politics (NOMOS XVI) (New York, 1975). Phelan, Shane. “All the Comforts of Home: The Genealogy of Community” in Nancy J. Hirschmann and Christine Di Stefano (eds.) Revisioning the bibliography / 189

Political: Feminist Reconstructions of Traditional Concepts in Western Political Theory (Boulder: Westview, 1996). Phillips, Anne. Democracy and Difference (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1993). ———. “Dealing with Difference: A Politics of Ideas or a Politics of Presence?” Constellations 1, 1 (1994): 74–91. ———. “Feminism and the Politics of Difference, Or, Where Have All the Women Gone?” in Susan James and Stephanie Palmer (eds.) Visible Women: Essays on Feminist Legal Theory and Political Philosophy (Oxford: Hart, 2002). Piore, Michael J. Beyond Individualism (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1995). Plato. “The Apology” in Great Dialogues of Plato trans. W.H.D. Rouse (New York: Mentor, 1956). Plummer, Kenneth (ed.). The Making of the Modern Homosexual (London: Hutchinson, 1981). Pogge, Thomas W. “Group Rights and Ethnicity” in Ian Shapiro and Will Kymlicka (eds.) Ethnicity and Group Rights (NOMOS XXXIX) (New York: New York University Press, 1997). Pugh, Martin. “Liberals and Women’s Suffrage, 1867–1914” in Eugenio Biagini (ed.) Citizenship and Community (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996). ———. State and Society: A Social and Political History of Britain, 1870–1997 (2nd edition, New York: Oxford University Press, 1999). Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1971). ———. “Overlapping Consensus” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 7 (February 1987): 1–25. ———. “Justice as Fairness: Political—Not Metaphysical” Philosophy and Public Affairs 14 (1988): 223–51. ———. Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993). Raz, Joseph. The Morality of Freedom (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986). Rice, Mitchell F., and Martin Carcasson. “The Promise and Failure of President Clinton’s Race Initiative of 1997–1998: A Rhetorical Perspective” Rhetoric and Public Affairs 2, 2 (1999): 243–74. Roald, Anne Sofie. Women in Islam: The Western Experience (London: Routledge, 2001). Rodriguez, Richard. Hunger of Memory (New York: Bantam, 1982). Rorty, Amelie Oksenberg. “The Hidden Politics of Cultural Identification” Political Theory 22, 1 (February 1994): 153–65. Rosen, Fred. Bentham, Byron and Greece (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992). Rosenblum, Nancy L. Another Liberalism: Romanticism and the Reconstruction of Liberal Thought (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987). ———. “Pluralism and Self- Defense” in Nancy L. Rosenblum (ed.) Liberalism and the Moral Life (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989). ———. Membership and Morals: The Personal Uses of Pluralism in America (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998). Rosenthal, Donald B. “Regime Change and Gay and Lesbian Politics in Four New York Cities” in Elaine B. Sharp (ed.) Culture Wars and Local Politics (Lawrence, KA: University of Kansas Press, 1999). 190 / bibliography

Ruddick, Sara. Maternal Thinking: Towards a Politics of Peace (Boston: Beacon, 1989). Ryan, Alan. John Stuart Mill (New York: Pantheon, 1970). ———. “Mill’s Political Thought” in John M. Robson and Michael Laine (eds.) A Cultivated Mind: Essays on J.S. Mill Presented to John M. Robson (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1991). Saeed, Agha. “The American Muslim Paradox” in Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad and Jane I. Smith Muslim Minorities in the West: Visible and Invisible (Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press, 2002). Sandel, Michael. Liberalism and the Limits of Justice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982). ———. Democracy’s Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996). Sanders, Lynn M. “Against Deliberation” Political Theory 25, 3 (June 1997): 347–76. Sayyid, Bobby. A Fundamental Fear: Eurocentrism and the Emergence of Islamism (London: Zed, 1997). Schlesinger Jr., Arthur M. The Disuniting of America (New York: Norton, 1992). Schmidt, Garbi. “The Complexity of Belonging: Sunni Muslim Immigrants in Chicago” in Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad and Jane I. Smith, Muslim Minorities in the West: Visible and Invisible. ———. Islam in Urban America: Sunni Muslims in Chicago (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2004). Shapiro, Ian. “Enough of Deliberation: Politics is about Interests and Power” in Stephen Macedo (ed.) Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999). Simpson, Audra. “Paths Toward a Mohawk Nation; Narratives of Citizenship and Nationhood in Kahnawake” in Duncan Ivison, Paul Patton, and Will Sanders (eds.) Political Theory and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). Spurles, Patricia Kelly. “Coding Dress: Gender and the Articulation of Identity in a Canadian Muslim School” in Alvi, Hoodfar and McDonough, The Muslim Veil in North America. Stansell, Christine. “White Feminists and Black Realities: The Politics of Authenticity” in Toni Morrison (ed.) Race-ing Justice, Engendering Power (New York: Pantheon, 1992). Streich, Gregory. “Constructing Multiracial Democracy: To Deliberate or Not to Deliberate” Constellations 9, 1 (March 2002): 127–53. Tamir, Yael. Liberal Nationalism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993). ———. “The Enigma of Nationalism” World Politics 47, 3 (April 1995): 418–40. Taylor, Charles. “Cross-Purposes: The Liberal-Communitarian Debate” in Nancy Rosenblum (ed.) Liberalism and the Moral Life (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989). ———. “The Politics of Recognition” in Amy Gutmann (ed.) Multiculturalism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994). Terrill, Richard I. “Civilian Oversight of the Police Complaints Process in the United States: Concerns, Developments and More Concerns” in Andrew J. Goldsmith (ed.) bibliography / 191

Complaints against the Police: The Trend to External Review (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991). Thompson, E.P. “The Patricians and the Plebs” in Customs in Common: Studies in Traditional Popular Culture (New York: The New Press, 1993). Trudeau, Pierre. “The New Betrayal of the Intellectuals” in Federalism and French Canadian Society (Montreal: HMH, 1967). Truman, David. The Governmental Process (New York: Knopf, 1951). Tully, James. Strange Multiplicity: Constitutionalism in an Age of Diversity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995). Turner, J.C., M.A. Hogg, P.J. Oakes, S.D. Reicher, and M.S. Wetherell. Rediscovering the Social Group. A Self-Categorization Theory (Oxford: Blackwell, 1987). Varouxakis, Georgios. “National Character in John Stuart Mill’s Thought” History of European Ideas 24, 6 (1998): 375–91. ———. Mill on Nationality (London: Routledge, 2002). Vertovec, Steven. “Islamophobia and Muslim Recognition in Britain,” in Haddad (ed.) Muslims in the West. Vincent, Andrew, and Raymond Plant. Philosophy, Politics and Citizenship: The Life and Thought of the British Idealists (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1984). Walker, Brian. “Modernity and Cultural Vulnerability: Should Ethnicity be Privileged?” in Ronald Beiner (ed.) Theorizing Nationalism (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999). Walzer, Michael. “The Communitarian Critique of Liberalism” Political Theory 18, 1 (February 1990): 6–23. ———. “Comment” in Amy Gutmann (ed.) Multiculturalism and the Politics of Recognition (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992). Watson, Helen. “Women and the Veil: Personal Responses to Global Process” in Akbar S. Ahmed and Hastings Donnan (eds.) Islam, Globalization and Postmodernity (London: Routledge, 1994). Werbner, Pnina. “Public Spaces, Political Voices: Gender, Feminism and Aspects of British Muslim Participation in the Public Sphere” in W. Shadid and P. van Koningsveld (eds.) Political Participation and Identities of Muslims in Non-Muslim States (Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1996). White, Stephen K. Political Theory and Postmodernism (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991). Williams, Armstrong. “Presumed Victims” in Raymond Winbush (ed.) Should America Pay? (New York: Harper Collins, 2003). Williams, Melissa. Voice, Trust, and Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998). Williams, Raymond. Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. Revised edition. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983). Winnicott, D.W. “Mirror-Role of Mother and Family in Child Development” in Playing and Reality (London: Tavistock, 1971). Wolf, Susan. “Comment” in Amy Gutmann (ed.) Multiculturalism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994). Yack, Bernard. “Reconciling Liberalism and Nationalism” Political Theory 23, 1 (February 1995): 166–82. Young, Iris Marion. Justice and the Politics of Difference (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990). 192 / bibliography

Young, Iris Marion. “Together in Difference: Transforming the Logic of Group Political Conflict” in Will Kymlicka (ed.) The Rights of Minority Cultures (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995). ———. “Justice, Inclusion and Deliberative Democracy” in Stephen Macedo (ed.) Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999). ———. Inclusion and Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000). Zylstra, Bernard. From Pluralism to Collectivism (Assen: van Gorcum, 1968).

Media and Internet Sources Alam, Fareena. “British Press Unite in Hysteria over Jilbab” Times Educational Supplement (June 25, 2004). “Banning of Headscarves is an Attack on Fundamental Freedoms Says FCO Minister” Islamic Foundation Press Release (February 6, 2004) at http://www.mcb.org.uk/OBrien0204.pdf. Brenner, Marie. “Daughters of France, Daughters of Allah” Vanity Fair (April 2004). Bullock, Katherine. “The Hijab Experience of Canadian Muslim Women” Islamic Horizons (March/April 1998). Centre for Research and Information on Canada Survey (July 2004) reported at http://www.cric.ca/pdfje/new_canada_redux/new_canadajedux_summary. “Chirac calls Muslim Veils ‘aggressive’ in schools” Reuters (December 6, 2003). “Chirac’s Hijab Remark Antagonizes French Muslims” Islam Online (December 7, 2003). “Clinton Opposes Slavery Apology” US News and World Report (April 6, 1998). Conniff Taber, Kimberly. “Isolation Awaits French Girls in Headscarves” Women’s e-News March 5, 2004 at http://www.womense-news.org/article.cfmldynlaidll 738/context/archive. Dodd, Vikram. “Muslims Face More Suspicion” The Guardian (Tuesday, November 5, 2002). Elle France (Monday, December 8, 2003). Gray, John. “Can We Agree to Disagree?” The New York Times Book Review (Sunday, May 16, 1993). ———. “Autonomy is not the Only Good” The Times Literary Supplement (June 13, 1997). Hamdani, Daood Hassan. “Canada’s Muslims: An Unnoticed Part of Our History” Address on the occasion of Eid-al-Adha to the Canadian Parliament, Ottawa, May 2, 1996 at http://muslim-canada.orglcdnmuslm.htm. Horn, Dan. “Civility Turned to Anarchy: How it Happened” Cincinnati Enquirer (April 16, 2001). http://muslim-canada.orglcdnmuslm.htm. “Islam is Peace Says President” White House press release (September 17, 2001) at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917–11.html. Kelso, Paul, and Jeevan Vasagar. “Muslims Reject Image of Separate Society” The Guardian (Monday, June 17, 2002). Kramer, Jane. “Taking the Veil: How Frances’s Public Schools Became the Battleground in a Culture War” The New Yorker (November 22, 2004). Lemon, Michele. “Understanding does not Always Lead to Tolerance” Facts and Arguments, Globe and Mail (Tuesday, January 31, 1995). bibliography / 193

“Luton School Lifts Headscarf Ban” The Guardian (March 4, 2004). “Ms. Moseley Braun’s Majestic Moment” New York Times (July 24, 1993), 18. “Muslim Girl in Oklahoma Public School O’Kd to Wear Headscarf” Dallas Morning News (November 12, 2004). Mustafa, Naheed. “My Body is My Own Business” The Globe and Mail (Tuesday, June 29, 1993), A26. New Zealand Electoral Commission. New Zealand’s Electoral System: The Maori Electoral Option at http://www.elections.org.nz/esystlmroll.html. Noguera, Pedro A. “Transforming Urban Schools by Increasing Community Control” In Motion Magazine (May 20, 1999). “Race Panel Leadership Takes Shape” Cincinnati Enquirer (May 18, 2001). Schofield, Hugh. “Jewish Dad Backs Headscarf Daughters” BBC News (Wednesday, 1 October, 2003) at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/39.stm. “School Alters Dress Code after Muslim Student Complains” Associated Press (January 21, 2005). Sciolino, Elaine. “French Panel Recommends Banning Headscarves in Schools” The New York Times (December 11, 2003). “Suit Continues over Headscarf Incident in LA School” Associated Press (February 1, 2005). “Thomas’ Death Seen as Catalyst for Change” staff report, Cincinnati Post (April 16, 2001). Thompson, Richelle. “First We Talk: Community Meetings Produce Results” Cincinnati Enquirer (April 7, 2002). Toynbee, Polly. “Behind the Burka” The Guardian (September 28, 2001). United State Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (Department of State) International Religious Freedom Report 2004—Canada at: http://www. state.gov/gldrllrls/irf/2004/35529.htm. Viner, Katharine. “Feminism as Imperialism” The Guardian (Saturday, September 21, 2002). Walter, Natasha. “When the Veil Means Freedom” The Guardian (Tuesday, January 20, 2004). “War on Terrorism or Muslims” The Muslim News Online (Friday, September 28, 2001). Wax, Emily. “The Fabric of their Faith” Washington Post (May 19, 2002). Zeh, John. “Council OKs Police Review Board but...” Rainbow Cincinnati (January 26, 1999). Index

Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders, Bentham, Jeremy, 39, 42, 158–159 n.36 102–104, 106 Berlin, Isaiah, 22, 55 abortion, 32 bisexuals, 16, 82 affirmative action, 1, 56, 146, 162 n.116 Black Power movement, 14 African Americans, 14, 17, 83, 88, Bosanquet, Bernard, 51–54, 161 n.108 109–110, 118 Bradley, Ian, 49 Afrocentricism, 14 Braun, Carol Moseley, 170 n.22 Ahmed, Leila, 123 Bullock, Katherine, 122, 123 Alvi, Sajida Sultana, 130, 131 Burrow, J. W., 42 Amara, Fadela, 126 American Muslim Council, 120 Carlisle, Janice, 44 Anderson, Benedict, 150 n.15 Canadian Multiculturalism Act, 121–122 “angry white man,” 1 Cayer, Carmen, 131 apology, 101–111, 170 n.23 Cesari, Jocelyne, 125 Appiah, K. Anthony, 13, 16–17 character, 5, 37–57 Ashcraft, Richard, 43, 48 national character, 5, 40–57; see also Ashcroft, John, 129 national identity associations, see voluntary associations Chartist movement, 42 associationalism (associative democracy), Charity Organization Society, 53–54 6, 61, 71–74 Chirac, Jacques, 125 ascription, 12–19, 21, 51, 83, 105, 142, Cincinnati Community Action Now 145 (Cincinnati CAN), 109–111 Asquith, Herbert, 53 civilian review boards, 107–110 Attlee, Clement, 68 civil rights movement, 12–13 autonomy, 21, 55, 155–156 n. 99 civil society, 6, 71–75 autonomous agency, 12, 28–33, 78, class, 7, 16, 36–57, 67, 82, 87, 146, 147 83, 155 n.88, Clinton, Bill, 102 group autonomy, 12, 140–143, 156 Cohen, Joshua, 31 n.110 Cole, G. D. H., 6, 37, 62, 65–69, 72 of national minorities, 19, 78–94 Collini, Stephen, 37, 52, 53 political autonomy, 11 communitarian theory, 21–22, 30, 72, weak autonomy, 5, 30, 78 78, 83, 91, 136 communities of fate and communities of Barry, Brian, 3 choice, 21, 73–74, 141–143, 151 Benhabib, Seyla, 100–101, 104 n.2, 165 n.71, 165 n.72 Benn, Stanley, 155 n.88 Constant, Benjamin, 5 196 / index

Cornell, Stephen, 14 Haddad, Yvonne Yazbeck, 119 Couture, Claude, 167 n.32 Harlem Renaissance, 14 Crenshaw, Kimberle, 171 n.44 Harvie, Christopher, 54 culture, 12, 15, 69–71, 79, 87–88, Hayek, Friedrich, 68 91–92; see also multiculturalism Hegel, G. W. F., 49, 50, 62 Hill, Anita, 83 Dahl, Robert, 6, 7, 69–71, 95, 105, 136, Hirschman, Albert, 60 137, 141 Hirschmann, Nancy, 123, 177 n.97 decentralization, 7, 37, 71–75 Hirst, Paul Q., 6, 61, 71–75, 81, 93, deliberation (deliberative democracy), 8, 141, 144 94, 95–111 Hobbes, Thomas, 60 democratic theory, 7 Hobhouse, L. T., 37, 42, 51–53, 62 Dewey, John, 42 Hobson, J. A., 53 Donner, Wendy, 46 Hoodfar, Homa, 130, 131 Dubois, W. B., 14, 84 Hume, David, 60 Dworkin, Gerald, 29, 31 Huntington, Samuel, 121 educational curricula, 11 Idealism, 5, 9, 49, 61–63 empirical political theory, 6 identity politics, 10–33 ethnicity, 1, 9 and autonomy, 140–147 ethology, see Mill, John Stuart and deliberative politics, 97–104 and group representation, 105–111, Fabian socialists, 61 172 n.1 feminism, 11, 14, 83, 84, 88, 127–134 and justice, 143–147 Flathman, Richard, 28 indigenous minority groups, 12, 94; see Fraser, Nancy, 150 n.12 also subnational groups; Quebecois; French League of Muslim Women, 127 Aborigines; Maori Friedman, Marilyn, 165 n.72 Islamophobia, 116–118 Frow, John, 102 Islamic Society of Great Britain, 117

Gaus, Gerald, 48 Japanese Americans, 102, 170 n.23 Gaspard, Francoise, 127 Johnston, David, 29, 155–156 n.99 gays, 13, 83, 88, 108–109 Jones, Gareth Stedman, 82 Galston, William, 28 gender, 7, 11, 12, 16 Kateb, George, 140 Glazer, Nathan, 120 Kent, Christopher, 54 Green, Philip, 136 Khomeini, Ayatollah, 32 Green, T. H., 36, 42, 49–53, 92, 106 Khosrokhavar, Farhad, 127 Gray, John, 1–2, 21, 22, 135, 149 n.4 Kramer, Jane, 126 Guild Socialism, 68 Kramnick, Isaac, 153 n.41 Gunnell, John, 69 Kymlicka, Will, 7, 15, 35, 42, 77–94, 137, Gutmann, Amy, 12, 99–100, 149 n.4, 144, 149–150 n.10, 167 n.32 152 n.30 Kukathas, Chandran, 2, 81, 87, 93

Habermas, Jurgen, 99 Labour Party, 56 Hacker, Andrew, 17 Laclau, Ernesto, 2 index / 197 laïcité, 124, 126 “Vindication of the French Revolution Larmore, Charles, 4, 19, 22, 27–28, 152 of February 1848,” 41 n.33 Miller, David, 9, 150 n.23 Laski, Harold, 6, 37, 62–65, 67, 68, 72, Modood, Tariq, 32, 116 142, 163 n.14 Moon, Donald, 4, 19, 22, 25–27, Leonard, Karen, 119 136, 137 lesbians, 11, 13, 15, 88, 108–109 Moore, Kathleen, 120 Letwin, Shirley, 36 Morrison, Toni, 17 liberalism Morrow, John, 161 n.108 collectivist, 67 Mouffe, Chantal, 2 and consumerism, 162–163 n.8 multiculturalism, 9, 35, 71, 77–94 contemporary relevance of, 1–10 Muslim Student Association (MSA), 119 cultural, 7, 77–94 Muslims, 7–8, 32, 113–114 deontological, 30 as religious and ethnic minorities, and identity, 26–33, 96–111, 114–122 143–147 women, 122–131 political, 19–33, 96 Locke, John, 21 Nation of Islam, 118 Lomasky, Loren, 30 national identity, 5–9, 12, 67, 78–95, Lukes, Steven, 49, 60, 135 137–138; see also national character, and subnational groups Macpherson, C. B., 42, 135 nationalism, 5, 27, 79 Malik, Iftikar H., 117 Native Americans, 14, 86, 106 Maori, 106, 170 n.23 Newey, Glen, 149 n.5 Marxism, 19 New Left, 96 McDonough, Sheila, 130, 131 New Liberals, 51, 54, 61 Mehta, Uday, 41 Ni Putes Ni Soumises (Neither Whores Milani, Farzaneh, 129 Nor Submissives), 126 Mill, James, 42 Mill, John Stuart, 3, 5, 9, 29, 33–57, 79, O’Brien, Mike, 127–128 92, 132, 136 Okin, Susan Moller, 23, 86–87 “Chapters on Socialism,” 45 Owen, Robert, 47 “The Claims of Labour,” 42, 44 “Considerations on Representative Parekh, Bhikhu, 36 Government,” 46, 47–48, and Phelan, Shane, 17 ethology, 5, 39 Philips, Anne, 147 and identity pluralism, 35–57, 60, Piore, Michael J., 149 n.1 106, 150 n.10, 162 n.116 Plant, Raymond, 50 On Liberty, 35, 46, 156 n.1, 162 n.7 Plato, 102 and national identity, 9, 35, 40–57, pluralism 158 n.32 cultural, 31, 35, 77–94, 119–133 “Principles of Political Economy,” 43 early, 61–69 On the Subjection of Women, 38, 43, empirical, 6 157 n.5 identity, 5–6, 7, 11, 35–57, 60, 105–106 A System of Logic, 39–40 interest, 6, 35, 37, 59–75, 95, and de Toqueville, 44 105–106 198 / index pluralism—continued sexuality, 1, 7, 11 liberal, 6, 7 Spurles, Patricia Kelly, 130 moral, 6, 19–35, 45, 59, 152–153 Stasi Commission, 126, 127 n.33 Stonewall riot, 14 and national membership, 5–7, 35 subnational groups, subcultural groups, 7, and statism, 69 12, 21, 37, 48, 70–95, 105–110 social science, 4, 6, 19, 69, 71 sociological, 5 Tamir, Yael, 7, 77, 80, 87–90, 93, in the United States, 69, 71 137, 144 Pogge, Thomas, 80–81 Taylor, Charles, 7, 17–18, 77, 85, 90–91, postnationalist liberal pluralism, 9 138 testimony, 101–104 Q-News, 118, 128 Thomas, Clarence, 83 Quebecois, 82, 84–85, 93, 167 n.32 Thomas, Timothy, 109–110 Thompson, Denis, 99–100 race, 1, 11 Tocqueville, Alexis de, 5 and religion, 114–122 Toynbee, Polly, 128 Rawls, John, 1, 4, 5, 19, 22–25, 29, 89, Trudeau, Pierre, 167 n.32 138 Raz, Joseph, 22, 55, 138 Utilitarianism, 36, 39, 42, 61 recognition, 7, 8, 11, 12, 17, 36, 90–91, 94, 96–104, 113–133, 138, Varouxakis, Georgios, 40 142–143, 147 veiling (hijab), 8–9, 118, 122–133, redistribution, 3, 10 174–175 n.44 (defined), 175 n.51 religion, 7, 16 Victorian liberals, 9, 37–38, 49–57 and ethnicity, 114–122 Vincent, Andrew, 50 Romanticism, 9, 29, 49, 88 voluntarism, 5, 21, 26, 62, 81, 87 Romantic individualism, 5, 38, 136, voluntary associations, 7, 12–19, 51, 54, 155–156 n.99 62–75, 141–143, 165 n.71, 178 Rorty, Amelie, 85 n.12 Rosenblum, Nancy, 29, 139–140, 141–143, 153–154 n.41 Walker, Brian, 82 Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 62 Walzer, Michael, 84 Runnymede Trust, 116 Webb, Beatrice, 54 Rushdie, Salmon, 32, 116 Werbner, Pnina, 118 Williams, Melissa, 105–106 Saeed, Agha, 120 Wollstonecraft, Mary, 14 Samuel, Herbert, 53 Wolf, Susan, 15 Sandel, Michael, 26, 30 women’s movement, 11, 12–13 Sanders, Lynn M., 101 Women’s Social and Political Union, 53 Schmidt, Garbi, 119, 130 self-respect, 138–140 Young, Iris Marion, 2, 14, 56, 95, 100, September, 11, 8, 117, 125 102, 144