To me, pluralism includes several dimensions.
First, a pluralistic society is not merely one with multiple interests. It is multidimensional, involving diversity in the domains of creed, sensual disposition, gender practice, household organization, ethnic identification, first language, and fundamental existential orientations. The activation of multidimensional pluralism helps to open up public arenas and to ventilate the internal life of numerous organizations.
[...]

Second, a pluralistic society is marked by recurrent tension between already existing diversity and new movements that press upon this or that established assumption about God, freedom, identity, legitimacy, rights, and the nation.
This torsion between the politics of pluralism and that of pluralization is constitutive.
[...]

Third, attention to the first two dimensions pressed me to come to terms with the need for a positive ‘ethos of engagement’ between diverse, interdependent constituencies. This is particularly pertinent to a world in which the secular separation between private and public is exaggerated and secular proceduralism is insufficient to itself.

In der aktuellen Ausgabe der Zeitschrift Contemporary Political Theory findet sich ein momentan (bis Ende Juli) frei zugängliches und sehr lesenswertes Interview mit dem Politikwissenschaftler William E. Connolly: Agonism, Pluralism, and Contemporary Capitalism: An Interview with William E. Connolly