The ties that bind: Reconciling value pluralism and national identity | Peter Kurti

Read the paper here: https://www.cis.org.au/publication/the-ties-that-bind-reconciling-value-pluralism-and-national-identity-in-australia/  Executive summary

Australia’s multicultural democracy is under increasing pressure, not only from economic uncertainty but from the moral and cultural disagreements that have intensified in recent years. Deep cultural and moral diversity presents both remarkable opportunities and profound challenges for our national identity.

This report explores whether value pluralism — the recognition that people will continue to hold fundamentally different moral, religious, and cultural beliefs — is compatible with a cohesive national identity in a liberal democracy. It argues that Australia’s future cohesion depends not on suppressing disagreement, but on managing it fairly through civic institutions, democratic procedures and mutual restraint. This entails rethinking national identity in light of enduring moral diversity so cultural differences do not threaten social harmony.

Drawing on the political theory of value pluralism developed by Isaiah Berlin, John Gray and others, the report argues that civic nationalism — not ethnic or cultural nationalism – offers the best foundation for Australian identity. This model does not require moral consensus, but depends on shared political commitments: to the rule of law, democratic accountability, and the peaceful resolution of disagreement. It is a model that offers a robust framework for managing disagreement in a pluralist society.

The report draws a careful distinction between non-negotiable limits (such as prohibitions on female genital mutilation, child marriage, and ritual violence) and morally contested ‘grey zones’ where rights and values may conflict. These include religious exemptions to anti-discrimination laws, parental refusal of child vaccinations, and ritual slaughter.

It argues that these contested areas require structured negotiation, not moral coercion, and that pluralism must be bounded by core liberal principles, including human dignity and equal protection under the law. Addressing these challenges demands more than rule-setting; it requires a civic culture capable of managing moral disagreement with fairness and refrainment. To strengthen national cohesion in a context of deep moral diversity, the report proposes five exploratory policy directions:

1. Reform civic education to equip citizens for principled disagreement and deliberation.
2. Revise the citizenship test to reflect shared civic institutions rather than narrow cultural values.
3. Encourage voluntary intercultural dialogue, especially in communities under pressure.
4. Design conflict-resolution mechanisms that defuse moral clashes before they escalate.
5. Commission longitudinal research on public attitudes and pluralism’s institutional performance.

Rather than calling for renewed consensus around fixed national values, the report calls for a civic culture capable of managing deep diversity. It argues that Australia’s identity must be grounded not in sameness, but in the institutions and norms that allow citizens to live together amid enduring difference. Only by managing difference fairly can Australia protect its democracy, strengthen social trust and build a national identity embracing a new understanding of ‘patriotism’ fit for the challenges of the 21st century.

In "Rooftop Solar: Paradise Lost," Zoe Hilton, Michael Wu, and Aidan Morrison examine the unintended consequences of Australia's rooftop solar boom. They argue that while rooftop solar has been promoted as a m