Valuing Diversity without Illusions: Critical Rationalism as an Underexploited Resource in Political Theory

Democratic societies are confronted with a formidable challenge: On the one hand, it has almost become a truism to argue that we live in ‘polarised times’. At the same time, ‘viewpoint diversity’, which is one of the cornerstones of democracy, has come under criticism from both the political Left and Right. The question of diversity – its meaning, relevance, and potential limits – has, therefore, become one of the most pressing issues of our time. However, political theorists who continue to think in terms of a fundamental divide between analytical and critical theory have limited resources to confront this theoretical and practical challenge. It is, thus, hardly surprising that some of the most interesting contributions have come from scholars who are straddling the boundaries between the two approaches (for a very recent example, see Truth and Loyalty - Matt Sleat, 2023 (sagepub.com)). This paper seeks to contribute to the development of more innovative approaches to central social and political question by defending a particular version of diversity through the methodological lens of ‘critical rationalism’. To be more precise, the purpose of this paper is twofold: First, it seeks to defend a particular version of viewpoint diversity, which departs from the assumption that diversity is a social and political value (rather than a mere fact, as liberals like John Rawls have claimed). This defence of ‘viewpoint diversity’, in other words, follows the insights of agonistic democratic thinkers such as Chantal Mouffe, Bonnie Honig, or James Tully. The second purpose of the paper is to probe the potential of ‘critical rationalism’ in this context. This methodological concept, popularised by Karl Popper (and his followers), has remained an undereploited resource for contemporary political theorists (at least beyond a relatively narrow circle of ‘Popper scholars’). My aim is to demonstrate that ‘critical rationalism’ has considerable potential to narrow the gap between analytic and continental political theory, because it is guided by a genuine valuation of diversity while, simultaneously, remaining cognisant of the tragic dimensions of political life (much more so than radical democrats normally do). If I have time (depending on the length of presentations), I want to demonstrate the viability of this approach by referring to a recent case study: Slavoj Zizek’s opening speech at the Frankfurter Buchmesse, which stirred so much controversy in Germany and beyond. In sum, I will argue that critical rationalism has the potential to value diversity without illusions – it thus, combines the radically democratic ethos of agonism with the more sober normative thrust of political realism. And it, ultimately, shows that diversity is not a baton to attack one’s political enemies, but a boomerang that makes demands on oneself.