RECOGNITION OR ETHICS?

Abstract

White settler peoples inherit a legacy of colonial domination and Enlightenment belief in the possibilities of western universalism. This legacy makes it difficult for us to co-exist with the cultural difference of our indigenous neighbors. In this paper I search for a political practice that might co-exist with rather than deny indigenous difference. I consider the case of Aotearoa New Zealand and explore Taylor's politics of recognition and Lévinasian ethics for the guidance each offers to the practice of non-dominating modes of interaction. I argue that recognition theory does not live up to its claims for reciprocity and equality in cross-cultural engagement. Further, no political prescription can provide adequate guidance to these engagements. Rather, the ethical interruption of politics as prescribed by Lévinas provides the necessary underpinning for a non-dominating engagement with cultural difference. How ethics might productively interrupt politics is illustrated with reference to analyses of a pedagogical experiment in a culturally diverse university classroom.