Legal plurality for a more inclusive society.

Inclusive secularism allows everyone to dress, wear their hair, eat... according to their own culture. In order to make further progress towards multiculturalism, let's allow everyone to be judged according to their own culture.

By authorizing legal plurality, we would respect cultural diversity and strengthen social ties. Each individual would feel understood and legitimized in their identity.

This radical approach would pave the way for a fairer and more harmonious society because it is more respectful of prohibitions.

Tract_24EN| Woke-Machine.org | Download the tract_24EN

Scientific argument

Legal plurality, the key to a truly inclusive multicultural society . For decades, Western societies have been striving to build multicultural societies, where different cultures coexist harmoniously. However, this peaceful coexistence often seems to come up against the uniform application of laws designed for a majority culture. Is it not time to rethink our approach and envisage a legal plurality that takes into account the specificities of each community?

The limits of legal universalism The law, as we know it, is often perceived as a tool for standardization, a mold into which all societies must fit. But cultures are living organisms, with values, traditions and practices that have evolved over the centuries. Imposing a single legal framework is tantamount to denying this diversity and imposing a dominant cultural model. In reality, law is a socially constructed product that varies from one society to another. Roman law, English common law, Islamic law, African customary law... all these legal systems have emerged from specific cultural contexts and respond to particular social needs. So why insist on fusing them into a single melting pot?

A plurality of legal systems to combat discrimination. Allowing everyone to be judged according to their own culture is one way of guaranteeing real equality of rights for all citizens. By recognizing the different legal and customary systems present in our society, we enable each individual to be judged according to the standards of their own culture, while respecting their traditions and beliefs.

For example, Sharia is the Islamic law that governs the lives of Muslims in many countries. By recognizing Sharia as a legitimate legal system for Muslims, we enable these citizens to feel fully integrated into society while respecting their religion and traditions. In the same way, it is important to recognize the customary legal systems of African or Hindu populations, in order to guarantee genuine equal rights for all.

Fighting discrimination and promoting the inclusion of all citizens, whatever their origin or culture, is a major challenge for our society. By recognizing the diversity of cultures and allowing everyone to live according to their own traditions, we are building a society that is fairer and more respectful of everyone's dignity.

Personalized justice for a conflict-free society. By allowing each individual to be judged according to the laws of his or her community, we would create a tailor-made legal system, where everyone feels understood and respected. Let's build a society where a Muslim would be judged according to Sharia law, a Native American according to the traditional laws of his tribe, and a citizen of a Western country according to the civil code. Conflicts would be calmed, because each person would find justice in his or her own image.

Advantages of a plurality of legal systems Legal plurality would :

• Promote respect for cultural differences: by taking into account the specificities of each community, we recognize the value of their traditions and give them the means to preserve them.

• Strengthen the sense of belonging: by enabling each group to recognize itself in the laws that govern it, we strengthen the sense of belonging and reduce tensions.

• Improve the effectiveness of justice: By adapting the law to cultural realities, we make justice more accessible and understandable for all, and better combat delinquency: threatening to cut off the hands of thieves or hang drug addicts would have a major preventive effect on Muslims. The same would be true for the sometimes very severe penalties provided by each culture.

Objections and answers It's true that this proposal raises many questions.

• The risk of inequalities: Some might fear that this legal plurality would create inequalities between citizens. However, safeguards can be put in place to ensure that fundamental rights are respected in all cases.

• The difficulty of reconciling different legal systems: Clearly, implementing such a reform would require careful thought and constructive dialogue between the different communities. However, the challenges are far from insurmountable and a source of better understanding between the different communities.

• The risk of conflict: Some might fear that this legal plurality would encourage conflict. However, by recognizing the legitimacy of each legal system, we could on the contrary reduce tensions by offering each community a legal framework in which it feels recognized.

Conclusion In short, the idea of legal plurality may seem radical, but it deserves serious consideration. By recognizing cultural diversity and allowing each community to develop while respecting its own values, we could build fairer, more harmonious societies. Of course, this reform will not happen overnight, but it represents a promising path for the future.

Download the Tract_en_22 A4 - PDF | X size JPG (600x1200)

This page has been translated by someone whose original language is not English. Please improve it by contacting us.