Toleration (Chapters One and Two) – Michael Walzer

1.  Walzer wishes to restrict his discussion of toleration. What does he wish to exclude? What is his main focus on?

2.  There are five attitudes towards tolerance – resignation, indifference, stoical acceptance, curiosity, and enthusiasm. Describe each. How do they arrange themselves on the continuum of tolerance?

3.  Chapter two is an analysis of five different political arrangements, all of which can be said to be tolerant. Make sure you are aware of the differences between the five.

4.  How are multinational empires tolerant? What are some historical examples? What motivates their toleration? Are they tolerant of groups or individuals or both? What advantages does this style present? What drawbacks does it have?

5.  Repeat the above question for the other regimes: international society, consociations, nation-states, and immigrant societies.

6. Why is international society like a multinational empire? Why is it less stable?

7.  Why is a consociation like a multinational empire? Why is it also less stable? What advantage does it have over a multinational empire?

8.  One might read Taylor’s account of Quebec-style liberalism as a case of what Walzer calls a nation-state. (For example compare Walzer’s comments about language with Taylor’s.) Explain. Walzer claims that nation-states can respect minority rights; Taylor also offers a defence of this idea. Are their claims compatible? Are they convincing?

9.  According to Walzer, the US is not a nation-state but rather an immigrant society. Why does he say this? What evidence is there to suggest that, in fact, the US is a nation-state? (Think of Yack here.) Taking the counterevidence into account, is Walzer’s position convincing?

10.  Why is the immigrant society the most open to toleration? Is this an attractive ideal?