"Long live the red terror!" This and other political slogans were used by China's communist rulers as leverage for conflict and conflict management during 1949. China's Cultural Revolution movement understandably fueled anger, fear, and terror among Chinese citizens. Currently, contrary to the positive facade that China, under the control of the Communist Chinese Party (CCP), tries to project regarding human rights, a dark reality reveals a brutal authoritarian state with no concern for religious freedom. What guiding philosophy could best help procure, provide, and protect religious freedom for all in a post-communist, Christianized, democratic China? Bob Fu argues that while various Christianity-oriented theories may appear promising, they fail to provide an adequate pluralistic foundation for protecting the religious freedoms of people of all faiths and none. The predominant theory of political liberalism in the West likewise fails to prove sufficiently inclusive for all faiths and worldviews. As an alternative, the author defends Baorong Duoyuan (inclusive pluralism), his own contextualized theory modeled after principled pluralism. This model, he believes, has the potential to help ensure that religious freedom for all becomes a reality.

""Long live the red terror!"" This and other political slogans were used by China's communist rulers as leverage for conflict and conflict management during 1949. China's Cultural Revolution movement understandably fueled anger, fear, and terror among Chinese citizens. Currently, contrary to the positive facade that China, under the control of the Communist Chinese Party (CCP), tries to project regarding human rights, a dark reality reveals a brutal authoritarian state with no concern for religious freedom. What guiding philosophy could best help procure, provide, and protect religious freedom for all in a post-communist, Christianized, democratic China? Bob Fu argues that while various Christianity-oriented theories may appear promising, they fail to provide an adequate pluralistic foundation for protecting the religious freedoms of people of all faiths and none. The predominant theory of political liberalism in the West likewise fails to prove sufficiently inclusive for all faiths and worldviews. As an alternative, the author defends Baorong Duoyuan (inclusive pluralism), his own contextualized theory modeled after principled pluralism. This model, he believes, has the potential to help ensure that religious freedom for all becomes a reality.

This book addresses the social, functional and symbolic dimensions of urban space in today's world. The twelve essays are grouped in three parts, ranging from a conceptual framework to case descriptions rich with illustrations. They provide a valuable service in exploring the nature and significance of social space and particular aspects of its contemporary distribution and contestation. The book addresses a topic that is intrinsically interdisciplinary. Questions of space are examined from a rich variety of disciplinary perspectives in a welcome range from urban planning to political philosophy, shedding a good deal of light in the process. The issues in focus include the dichotomies of public and private space, discussion of rights and duties with regard to the use of space, or conflicts over its allocation. Well reasoned and presented discussion is offered from the perspective of basic values and rights. The policy issue of institutional recognition of the specifics of (minority community) identity is raised in opposition to abstract distributive accounts of justice.

In contemporary political philosophy, there is much debate over how to maintain a public order in pluralistic democracies in which citizens hold radically different religious views. The Political Problem of Religious Pluralism deals with this theoretically and practically difficult issue by examining three of the most influential figures of religious pluralism theory: John Rawls, Jacques Maritain, and Alasdair MacIntyre. Drawing on a diverse number of sources, Kozinski addresses the flaws in each philosopher's views and shows that the only philosophically defensible end of any overlapping consensus political order must be the eradication of the ideological pluralism that makes it necessary. In other words, a pluralistic society should have as its primary political aim to create the political conditions for the communal discovery and political establishment of that unifying tradition within which political justice can most effectively be obtained. Kozinski's analysis, though exhaustive and rigorous, still remains accessible and engaging, even for a reader unversed in the works of Rawls, Maritain, and MacIntyre. Interdisciplinary and multi-thematic in nature, it will appeal to anyone interested in the intersection of religion, politics, and culture.

In this book, Robert Talisse critically examines the moral and political implications of pluralism, the view that our best moral thinking is indeterminate and that moral conflict is an inescapable feature of the human condition. Through a careful engagement with the work of William James, Isaiah Berlin, John Rawls, and their contemporary followers, Talisse distinguishes two broad types of moral pluralism: metaphysical and epistemic. After arguing that metaphysical pluralism does not offer a compelling account of value and thus cannot ground a viable conception of liberal politics, Talisse proposes and defends a distinctive variety of epistemic pluralism. According to this view, certain value conflicts are at present undecidable rather than intrinsic. Consequently, epistemic pluralism countenances the possibility that further argumentation, enhanced reflection, or the acquisition of more information could yield rational resolutions to the kinds of value conflicts that metaphysical pluralists deem irresolvable as such. Talisse’s epistemic pluralism hence prescribes a politics in which deep value conflicts are to be addressed by ongoing argumentation and free engagement among citizens; the epistemic pluralist thus sees liberal democracy is the proper political response to ongoing moral disagreement.

How competing visions of world order in the 1940s gave rise to the modern concept of globalism During and after the Second World War, public intellectuals in Britain and the United States grappled with concerns about the future of democracy, the prospects of liberty, and the decline of the imperial system. Without using the term "globalization," they identified a shift toward technological, economic, cultural, and political interconnectedness and developed a "globalist" ideology to reflect this new postwar reality. The Emergence of Globalism examines the competing visions of world order that shaped these debates and led to the development of globalism as a modern political concept. Shedding critical light on this neglected chapter in the history of political thought, Or Rosenboim describes how a transnational network of globalist thinkers emerged from the traumas of war and expatriation in the 1940s and how their ideas drew widely from political philosophy, geopolitics, economics, imperial thought, constitutional law, theology, and philosophy of science. She presents compelling portraits of Raymond Aron, Owen Lattimore, Lionel Robbins, Barbara Wootton, Friedrich Hayek, Lionel Curtis, Richard McKeon, Michael Polanyi, Lewis Mumford, Jacques Maritain, Reinhold Niebuhr, H. G. Wells, and others. Rosenboim shows how the globalist debate they embarked on sought to balance the tensions between a growing recognition of pluralism on the one hand and an appreciation of the unity of humankind on the other. An engaging look at the ideas that have shaped today's world, The Emergence of Globalism is a major work of intellectual history that is certain to fundamentally transform our understanding of the globalist ideal and its origins.

This book develops an account of 'inclusive multicultural governance' which is contrasted with assimilationist and separatist/differentialist approaches to the political management of and accommodation of multicultural diversity in liberal democracies.

This pioneering handbook proposes an approach to pluralism that is relational, principled, and non-relativistic, going beyond banal calls for mere "tolerance." The growing religious diversity within societies around the world presents both challenges and opportunities. A degree of competition between deeply held religious/worldview perspectives is natural and inevitable, yet at the same time the world urgently needs engagement and partnership across lines of difference. None of the world’s most pressing problems can be solved by any single actor, and as such it is not a question of if but when you partner with an individual or institution that does not think, act, or believe as you do. The authors argue that religious literacy—defined as a dynamic combination of competencies and skills, continuously refined through real-world cross-cultural engagement—is vital to building societies and states of neighborly solidarity and civic fairness. Through examination, reflection, and case studies across multiple faith traditions and professional fields, this handbook equips scholars and students, as well as policymakers and practitioners, to assess, analyze, and act collaboratively in a world of deep diversity. The Open Access version of this book, available at www.taylorfrancis.com, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 license.

In democratization theory, Singapore continues to be a remarkable country for its extremely low level of contentious politics despite rapid economic development. In contrast, many different groups in Hong Kong have taken their demands to the streets since the 1970s. Even though there is an obvious difference in the willingness of the population to actively challenge the regime, the political developments of the two city-states show a similar pattern of political mobilization and government reaction. This book examines the changing pattern of contentious politics in the democratization process of these Asian city-states. It explores the causal connections between popular contention and democratization, using a multi-disciplinary approach with theoretical insights from the political sciences, sociology and psychology. The political process model is applied to provide further understanding of the patterns of interaction between contenders, opposition groups or social movements and the ruling elite. The book argues that differences in the strategies applied by the ruling elite explain why members of the opposition were empowered or obstructed in challenging the government.