Pluralism has long been an ideal commonly invoked to celebrate American civil society, charity, and philanthropy in particular. It’s been defined most often in terms of seeing a diversity of causes and perspectives as an inherent good. The “let a thousand flowers bloom” approach has governed how many people have thought about the norms and institutions that define both large- and smaller-scale giving in this country. But the past decade has witnessed several prominent challenges to the status of pluralism in charitable and philanthropic giving, outlined in recent Urban Institute research on the topic and as a central issue of discussion on the Commons, the Chronicle of Philanthropy’s new digital home for exchanging ideas and solutions about how philanthropy and nonprofits can best heal divides. Some have pointed out how pluralism can dull or discourage critiques of problematic causes, and others have said it is important and urgent to support some causes over others.

The Urban Institute’s Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy and the Chronicle of Philanthropy brought together leading figures in charitable giving and philanthropy to deepen this debate and to ask what role pluralism does and should play in the charitable and philanthropic sectors.

Together, we explored the history of the concept in relation to giving norms, probed what we really mean when we invoke the term, examined pluralism’s relation to equity, and examined how it might be misused or misunderstood. We also asked whether pluralism might be in tension or compatible with more prescriptive approaches that call for giving to particular causes or institutions over others.