Technology designed for collaboration across difference: the movement and design programme that treats social diversity as the raw material of progress and builds mechanisms that let groups cooperate without first having to agree.
Plurality makes the opposite wager to the one the platform era made. Not that difference is friction to be removed by a single algorithmic standard, but that difference is the raw material of progress, and that the job of technology is to let groups collaborate across it. Where a monoculture asks people to converge before they can act together, plural mechanisms let them act together first and keep their differences.
The canonical text is the book Plurality: The Future of Collaborative Technology and Democracy by E. Glen Weyl, Audrey Tang and the Plurality Community (2024) — itself written plurally, drafted in the open by hundreds of contributors and free to read online. Its repertoire is concrete: quadratic funding and voting, plural identity and association, data coalitions, deliberative tooling such as Polis, tested at national scale in Taiwan. That repertoire is exactly what the Governance Gap says we keep disseminating instead of installing.
In this system Plurality is the constitutional layer, not one of the loops: RadicalxChange and Plurality sit above the three loops as the Plural Constitution and decide where the surplus of a positive-sum system goes. I coordinate the movement's European arm and am lead author of the Plural Stack, which maps how plural technologies compose into infrastructure that resists centralised capture.