A defense for a balanced librarianship

Purpose Recent debates in library and information science have cast neutrality and social justice as irreconcilable–like oil and water. This paper challenges that view, advocating for balanced librarianship, where diverse values are negotiated through an ongoing democratic process. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on political philosophy, it warns that treating values as absolute, enforcing rigid definitions and overemphasizing incompatibility risk sliding toward authoritarian forms of librarianship. Findings This viewpoint highlights three principles of democratic librarianship. First, it should be acknowledged that librarianship as a concept is open to multiple interpretations. Second, democratic librarianship should be grounded in more than one core value. Third, democratic librarianship is an ongoing negotiation between library professionals, politicians and citizens, because democracy is an unfinished project. Originality/value By situating the neutrality–social justice debate within broader political theory, this paper reveals its parallels with the tension between liberalism (neutrality) and state perfectionism (social justice). It further grounds the case for balance in the work of Karl Popper, Chantal Mouffe, Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida offering a philosophical framework for resisting authoritarian tendencies while embracing diversity.