Article seeks to answer the question in what context it is possible or inevitable legal pluralism. In our view the concept itself, is no less problematic, since the end of the day although fractional and multipolar, legal pluralism continues to be a universalist project or a meta-narrative. Contrary to what postmodernity attempts, this project involves a return to the era of globalization of discourse (or perhaps never surpassed), and any project of this nature involves an imposition or hegemony of any project or speech. In turn contradicts the basic principles of pluralism and the right alternative, which pursue that knowledge arises out of the community and not the outside community, so tax.