Das Modell der „Deliberativen Demokratie”, wie es Jürgen Habermas entwickelt hat, erhebt den Anspruch, das Modell der liberalen und republikanischen Demokratie in sich vereinen zu können, ohne die Nachteile dieser Demokratietypen an sich zu haben. Diese Synthetisierung der Demokratietypen wird als defizient aufgewiesen. Sie scheitert zum einen daran, dass Habermas vor allem von der republikanischen Demokratie ein Zerrbild zeichnet, in das wesentliche Elemente dieses Demokratietypus erst gar nicht eingehen. Zum anderen ist sie zum Scheitern verurteilt, weil Habermas (...) übertriebene Idealisierungen an die deliberative Demokratie heranträgt. Solche entstehen vor allem durch eine Übersteigerung der Erwartungen an demokratische Diskurse und durch eine Unterschätzung des – auch in deliberativen Demokratien – bestehenden Handlungsbedarfs. (shrink)

Im vierten Band der Ausgewählten Schriften von Claus Offe sind demokratietheoretische Aufsätze aus fünf Dekaden zusammengestellt, die sich mit dem Spannungsverhältnis zwischen den organisierten Konfliktgruppen kapitalistischer Gesellschaften und den Institutionen der liberalen Demokratie befassen. Dabei geht es um die strategischen Akteure und ihre Interessen und Identitäten, die auf der "Eingabeseite" demokratischer Politik deren Tagesordnung wie ihre Verhandlungs- und Entscheidungsergebnisse bestimmen. Ebenso geht es um das politische Beteiligungsverhalten von Bürgern und die Symptome einer prekären Legitimität, die sich trotz des vermeintlichen (...) Universalismus von Gleichheit politischer Rechte und Mehrheitsprinzip unverkennbar abzeichnen. In einem abschließenden Teil des Bandes erörtert der Verfasser verzerrende Formen der Bildung und Messung des "Volkswillens" sowie Möglichkeiten, ihn durch deliberative Verfahren und Institutionen zu rationalisieren. (shrink)

Im Aufsatz geht es um wesentliche Merkmale und Modell der demokratischen Erziehung bei Dewey. Die Ausgangsfrage lautet: ob und was Deweys Bildungskonzept für die zeitgenössische deliberative Demokratie zu bedeuten hat. Kann sein ethisches Ideal der Menschheit als philosophisches Fundament zur Rechtfertigung der demokratischen Praxis angewendet werden? Hat Dewey die philosophischen Grundlagen des Liberalismus untergraben und abgeschafft, wie es Richard Rorty behauptet? Oder bringt seine Erneuerung der Philosophie zugleich die Wiederbelebung des Liberalismus und eröffnet neue Wege für Demokratie? (...) Die neueste Rezeptionswelle der deweyschen Philosophie mit einer sich stetig vertiefenden Intensität zeigt wohl, dass aus ihrem Gedankengut durch die fruchtbaren Zusammenstöße mit den Ideen und Tendenzen des gegenwärtigen Zeitalters etwas zutage tritt, was zugleich den Rahmen der Gegenwart überschreitet und auf die Zukunft hinweist. In der aktuellen Renaissance des Pragmatismus ist besonders merkwürdig, wie Deweys höchst ausdifferenzierte Kritik am modernen „Individualismus“ und Befürwortung der Stärkung der sittlichen und partizipativ-demokratischen Bindungen in den lokalen Gemeinschaften ein Echo in den kommunitaristischen Argumentationsdiskursen gefunden hat. Die Schlussthese besagt, dass Dewey mit der Hervorhebung des substanziellen Zusammenhangs der Kommunikation , der Gemeinschaft und des Gemeinsamen die Grundlagen des Liberalismus und der Demokratie keineswegs untergraben, sondern sie bereichert, gefestigt und auf eine höhere Ebene gehoben hat. (shrink)

Champions of systemic approaches to deliberative democratic theory consider that deliberative systems serve sundry functions. Whether guaranteeing political freedom should be one of those functions has not been explored in the scholarly literature. This article thus examines which conceptions of freedom underpin systemic approaches to deliberative democracy. I explore and circumscribe the analysis to two prominent options: freedom as absence of interference and freedom as non-domination. The answer to which of these alternatives best serves as a function (...) of the deliberative system hinges on the previous question of whether holistic evaluations of systemic deliberative performance are to be endorsed. The article then argues that holistic evaluations are only compatible with freedom as non-interference. By contrast, freedom as non-domination is incompatible with holism. I then provide reasons for endorsing freedom as non-domination and, by implication, to reject holistic systemic evaluations. (shrink)

Demokratie? Haben wir gar nicht, sagen die einen. Funktioniert nicht, sagen andere. Wird untergehen, sagen dritte. Muss völlig umgekrempelt werden, sagen vierte. Wer hat recht? Das kann nur sagen, wer weiß, was Demokratie ist. Na klar, Wahlen, Bundestag und so weiter. Aber was ist Demokratie im Kern? Und vor allem: Worin liegt der Wert der Demokratie? Was muss sich ändern? Der Philosoph Roland Kipke gibt Antworten auf diese Fragen. Er räumt mit einer Fülle falscher Erwartungen auf, (...) bringt die Demokratie auf den Punkt und entwickelt Ideen für die Zukunft – schwungvoll und verständlich. Eine glasklare Darstellung und ein leidenschaftliches Plädoyer für die Demokratie. (shrink)

The focus on reflexive democracy offers a meaningful perspective to reintegrate the fragmented knowledge regarding politics again. This shows that democracy is a complex historico-political concept. Against this background, "representative democracy", "direct democracy", and "deliberative democracy", on the one hand, are no longer disconnected from each other. On the other hand, it becomes possible to articulate with greater precision what "internal opening", "transnational extension", and "civil complexity" of democracy nowadays mean. (edited).

Resumimos la información aportada por estudios científicos recientes sobre las opiniones, visiones y actitudes de los cazadores españoles sobre la caza y su gestión. En concreto, discutimos las distintas funciones que atribuyen los cazadores a la actividad cinegética, así como los juicios morales asociados a diversas motivaciones para cazar. Seguidamente, exploramos las valoraciones expresadas por cazadores y gestores respecto a ciertas herramientas de gestión cinegética, y discutimos sobre cómo éstas influyen en la toma de decisiones. Por último, exploramos las posibles (...) tendencias futuras de esta actividad, a partir de lo expresado por los propios cazadores. (shrink)

This paper compares and contrasts the epistemologies of Rawls and Dworkin, both usually presented as either Kantian or pragmatist. It considers in particular the main pragmatist theses underlying their work, namely anti-metaphysics, anti-skepticism, fallibilism and objectivity as conditioned by practice, as well as their account of truth. It then examines an approach which takes Rawls’ epistemology as “anti-foundationalist” and argues that, to the extent that this qualification is connected to deliberative democracy, it should not be accepted without reservation as (...) an adequate account of the views of either philosopher. (shrink)

Aus dem Inhalt: Einleitung: Thema, Methode und Prozedere: Thema: Demokratisches Recht - Methode: Ethisch-juristische Legitimation - Prozedere: Interdisziplinare Feldarbeit - I. JUristische Methodik: Strukturierende Rechtslehre: Lassen sich Gesetze applizieren? - Lasst sich Recht juristisch legitimieren? - Ist Ethik ausgeschlossen? - Zusammenfassung - II. MOralphilosophie: Diskursethik: Was heiSSt Moral? - Wie lasst sich Moral begrunden? - Lasst sich Moral applizieren? - Zusammenfassung - III. JUrisprudenz und Ethik: Zwischenuberlegungen zu einer interdisziplinaren Theorie demokratischen Rechts: Wie konnte eine ethisch-juristische Theorie aussehen? - Wie (...) sollte Interdisziplinaritat praktiziert werden? - Programm einer ethisch-juristischen Legitimationstheorie - IV. POlitische Philosophie: Deliberative Demokratie: Demokratie-Konzepte - Kleine Soziologie moderner Demokratien - Deliberative Demokratie - Moralischer Diskurs im Kontext - Zusammenfassung - V. VErfassungstheorie: Demokratischer Rechtsstaat: Verfassungstheoretische Grundlagen - Kleine Soziologie der Public Governance - Demokratischer Rechtsstaat - Demokratischer Rechtsstaat im Kontext - Zusammenfassung - VI. URteilstheorie: Demokratische Judikation: Urteilstheoretische Grundlagen - Kleine Soziologie der Public Judication - Demokratische Judikation - Juristische Methodik im Kontext - Zusammenfassung - VII. URteilsphilosophie: Deliberative Judikation: Judikationskonzepte - Kleine Soziologie der Judikation - Deliberative Judikation - Demokratisches Recht im Kontext - Zusammenfassung - Exkurs: Interdisziplinare Rechtslegitimation und integrative Wirtschaftsethik - Schluss: Resumee und Ausblick - Literatur- und Sachverzeichnis. (shrink)

In recent literature, material theories of criminalization, such as the Rechtsgutslehre, are often criticized as undemocratic. The article shows that this critique is based on a simplistic majority model of democracy. Using human dignity-oriented (deliberative) counter-models, in particular Ronald Dworkin’s integrity concept of democracy, the paper explains how the Rechtsgutslehre can be defended and further developed in a liberal democracy.

William E. Connolly’s writings have pushed the leading edge of political theory, first in North America and then in Europe as well, for more than two decades now. This book draws on his numerous influential books and articles to provide a coherent and comprehensive overview of his significant contribution to the field of political theory. The book focuses in particular on three key areas of his thinking: Democracy: his work in democratic theory - through his critical challenges to the traditions (...) of Rawlsian theories of justice and Habermasian theories of deliberative democracy - has spurred the creation of a fertile and powerful new literature Pluralism - Connolly's work utterly transformed the terrain of the field by helping to resignify pluralism: from a conservative theory of order based on the status quo into a radical theory of democratic contestation based on a progressive political vision The Terms of Political Theory - Connolly has changed the language in which Anglo-American political theory is spoken, and entirely shuffled the pack with which political theorists work. (shrink)

William E. Connolly’s writings have pushed the leading edge of political theory, first in North America and then in Europe as well, for more than two decades now. This book draws on his numerous influential books and articles to provide a coherent and comprehensive overview of his significant contribution to the field of political theory. The book focuses in particular on three key areas of his thinking: Democracy: his work in democratic theory – through his critical challenges to the traditions (...) of Rawlsian theories of justice and Habermasian theories of deliberative democracy – has spurred the creation of a fertile and powerful new literature Pluralism: Connolly's work utterly transformed the terrain of the field by helping to resignify pluralism: from a conservative theory of order based on the status quo into a radical theory of democratic contestation based on a progressive political vision The Terms of Political Theory: Connolly has changed the language in which Anglo-American political theory is spoken, and entirely shuffled the pack with which political theorists work. (shrink)

William E. Connolly’s writings have pushed the leading edge of political theory, first in North America and then in Europe as well, for more than two decades now. This book draws on his numerous influential books and articles to provide a coherent and comprehensive overview of his significant contribution to the field of political theory. The book focuses in particular on three key areas of his thinking: Democracy: his work in democratic theory - through his critical challenges to the traditions (...) of Rawlsian theories of justice and Habermasian theories of deliberative democracy - has spurred the creation of a fertile and powerful new literature Pluralism - Connolly's work utterly transformed the terrain of the field by helping to resignify pluralism: from a conservative theory of order based on the status quo into a radical theory of democratic contestation based on a progressive political vision The Terms of Political Theory - Connolly has changed the language in which Anglo-American political theory is spoken, and entirely shuffled the pack with which political theorists work. (shrink)

A common objection to deliberative democracy is that available evidence on public ignorance makes it unlikely that social deliberation among the public is a process likely to yield accurate outputs. The present paper considers—and ultimately rejects—two responses to this objection. The first response is that the correct conclusion to draw from the evidence is simply that we must work harder to ensure that the deliberative process improves the deliberators’ epistemic situation. The main problem for this response is that (...) there are non-deliberative alternatives—most prominently information markets—available that do a better job from an epistemic point of view than does social deliberation. So why keep bothering with deliberation? The second response attempts to answer this question by arguing that only socially deliberative practices can confer legitimacy on the resulting policies. In response to this, it is argued that information markets actually carry more promise than does social deliberation when it comes to offering the kinds of justifications that are relevant to legitimacy. (shrink)

The most widely debated conception of democracy in recent years is deliberative democracy--the idea that citizens or their representatives owe each other mutually acceptable reasons for the laws they enact. Two prominent voices in the ongoing discussion are Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson. In Why Deliberative Democracy?, they move the debate forward beyond their influential book, Democracy and Disagreement.What exactly is deliberative democracy? Why is it more defensible than its rivals? By offering clear answers to these timely (...) questions, Gutmann and Thompson illuminate the theory and practice of justifying public policies in contemporary democracies. They not only develop their theory of deliberative democracy in new directions but also apply it to new practical problems. They discuss bioethics, health care, truth commissions, educational policy, and decisions to declare war. In "What Deliberative Democracy Means," which opens this collection of essays, they provide the most accessible exposition of deliberative democracy to date. They show how deliberative democracy should play an important role even in the debates about military intervention abroad.Why Deliberative Democracy? contributes to our understanding of how democratic citizens and their representatives can make justifiable decisions for their society in the face of the fundamental disagreements that are inevitable in diverse societies. Gutmann and Thompson provide a balanced and fair-minded approach that will benefit anyone intent on giving reason and reciprocity a more prominent place in politics than power and special interests. (shrink)

How should liberal democratic states respond to cultural practices and arrangements that run afoul of liberal norms and laws? This article argues for a reframing of the challenges posed by traditional or nonliberal cultural minorities. The author suggests that viewed from up close, such dilemmas are revealed to be primarily intracultural rather than intercultural conflicts, and reflect the political and practical interests of factions of communities much more than deep moral differences. Using the example of the reform of customary marriage (...) laws in post-apartheid South Africa, this article makes the case for a more pragmatic, politically focused approach to resolving conflicts of culture that it is argued is both more democratic and effective than alternatives recently advanced by liberals and deliberative democracy theorists. (shrink)

One of the main reasons that liberal democratic societies are not ill-prepared to confront the present challenge presented by disaffection with democratic institutions, is that the type of political theory currently in vogue is dominated by an individualistic, universalistic, and rationalistic framework. This erases the dimension of the political and impedes envisaging in an adequate manner the nature of a pluralistic democratic public sphere. This paper examines the most recent paradigm of liberal democracy: 'deliberative democracy', in order to bring (...) to the fore its shortcomings. Then, the authos puts forward some element for the elaboration of an alternative model that she proposes to call 'agonistic pluralism'. (shrink)

Are there are normative reasons to have – or refrain from having – certain emotions? The dominant view is that there are. I disagree. In this paper, I argue for Strong Eliminativism – the view that there are no reasons for emotions. My argument for this claim has two premises. The first premise is that there is a deliberative constraint on reasons: a reason for an agent to have an attitude must be able to feature in that agent’s deliberation (...) to that attitude. My argument for this premise is that in order to have reasons for an attitude, we need to be able to exhibit some relevant form of control over this attitude, and this relevant form of control is deliberative control. The second premise is that no one can deliberate to any emotion. My argument for this premise turns on the claim that there is no deliberative question that is settled by forming (or giving up) an emotion. I contend that this is so due to the well-known phenomenon of recalcitrant emotions: for any deliberative question that can be settled, there is no guarantee that the relevant emotional state will follow (or be revised). Strong Eliminativism follows from these two premises. (shrink)

The banner of deliberative democracy is attracting increasing numbers of supporters, in both the world's older and newer democracies. This effort to renew democratic politics is widely seen as a reaction to the dominance of liberal constitutionalism. But many questions surround this new project. What does deliberative democracy stand for? What difference would deliberative practices make in the real world of political conflict and public policy design? What is the relationship between deliberative politics and liberal constitutional (...) arrangements? The 1996 publication of Amy Gutmann and Dennis F. Thompsons Democracy and Disagreement was a signal contribution to the ongoing debate over the role of moral deliberation in democratic politics. In Deliberative Politics an all-star cast of political, legal, and moral commentators seek to criticize, extend, or provide alternatives to Gutmann and Thompson's hopeful model of democratic deliberation. The essays discuss the value and limits of moral deliberation in politics, and take up practical policy issues such as abortion, affirmative action, and health care reform. Among the impressive roster of contributors are Norman Daniels, Stanley Fish, William A. Galston, Jane Mansbridge, Cass R. Sunstein, Michael Walzer, and Iris Marion Young, and the editor of the volume, Stephen Macedo. The book concludes with a thoughtful response from Gutmann and Thompson to their esteemed critics. This fine collection is essential reading for anyone who takes seriously the call for a more deliberative politics. (shrink)

Deliberative democracy entails a commitment to deciding political questions on their merits. To that end, people engage in an exchange of reasons in a shared endeavour to arrive at the right answer or the best judgement they can make in the circumstances. Of course, in practice a shared judgement may be impossible to reach. Yet while compromise may seem a natural way of dealing with the disagreement that deliberation leaves unresolved – for example, some deliberative theorists argue that (...) a willingness to compromise manifests respect for the considered views of others, even as we continue to disagree with them – the relationship between deliberation and compromise is not as straightforward as one might think. To explain why, this paper contrasts conflicts of judgement with conflicts of preference, interest and value to show why greater attention needs to be paid to the character of the decision to be made. (shrink)

Is it possible to advance democracy by empowering ordinary citizens to make key decisions about the design of political institutions and policies? In 2004, the government of British Columbia embarked on a bold democratic experiment: it created an assembly of 160 near-randomly selected citizens to assess and redesign the province's electoral system. The British Columbia Citizens' Assembly represents the first time a citizen body has had the power to reform fundamental political institutions. It was an innovative gamble that has been (...) replicated elsewhere in Canada and in the Netherlands, and is gaining increasing attention in Europe as a democratic alternative for constitution-making and constitutional reform. In the USA, advocates view citizens' assemblies as a means for reforming referendum processes. This book investigates the citizens' assembly in British Columbia to test and refine key propositions of democratic theory and practice. (shrink)

Contending discourses underlie many of the worlds most intractable conflicts, producing misery and violence. This is especially true in the post-9/11 world. However, contending discourses can also open the way to greater dialogue in global civil society and across states and international organizations. This possibility holds even for the most murderous sorts of conflicts in deeply divided societies. In this timely and original book, John Dryzek examines major contemporary conflicts in terms of clashing discourses. Topics covered include the alleged clash (...) of civilizations; societies divided by ethnicity, nationality, or religion; economic globalization versus resistance; plus an in-depth discussion of the 'war on terror'. Dryzek concludes by highlighting the limitations of current neoconservative and cosmopolitan approaches, arguing that only deliberative global politics offers unprecedented new possibilities for democratic engagement in the international system. This book will be of interest to students and scholars of international relations, politics, philosophy, and sociology. (shrink)

Deliberative Democracy theory is an ever-expanding field in political theory. In the present article, I aim to present the significance of Gandhian thought for the theory of deliberative democracy. Gandhi never used the term deliberation or articulated a theory of deliberative democracy specifically while expressing his notion of ideal democracy. For him, discussion, exchange of thoughts, reasoning, etc. was instinctive for democracy and not something that required to be defended within the boundaries of scholarship. I trace the (...) central elements of democracy in Gandhian thought and examine them through the lens of deliberative democracy theory. I also examine the implication of Gandhi’s formulations in India. In doing so, I would develop a richer understanding of democracy by bringing clarity to the contribution of Gandhi to the cause of deliberative democracy. (shrink)

In spite of the global diffusion of democracy and a general commitment to democratic values, there is a widespread alienation from the political process in advanced democracies. Deliberative democracy has received much attention in recent years as a possible solution to this malaise. Its promise of a more engaged and collective form of politics has drawn the interest of policy makers and political philosophers – generating new avenues of thought in contemporary democratic theory as well as heated debates about (...) its utility in practice. -/- This book provides an ideal starting point in understanding the core concepts of deliberative democracy. It is the first text to offer a systematic introduction to the theories and debates in the field and to combine this with a detailed critique of both the theory and the practice of deliberative democracy. It examines the core values of deliberative democrats and evaluates the implementation of deliberative practices at the local, national and global level – considering, along the way, how far it is possible to introduce meaningful deliberative reform in existing democracies. Giving readers a state-of-the-art account of the field, this book addresses fundamental questions about deliberative democracy and also charts the future directions for contemporary democratic thought. (shrink)

The Ideal of Deliberative Democracy The Discursive Dilemma The Relevance of the Dilemma for Deliberative Democracy The Resolution in Republican Theory This Resolution and Other Arguments for the Ideal Notes.

Many of us care about the existence of ethical facts because they appear crucial to making sense of our practical lives. On one tempting line of thought, this idea can also play a central role in justifying our belief in those facts. David Enoch has developed this thought into a formidable new proposal in moral epistemology: that the deliberative indispensability of ethical facts gives us epistemic justification for believing in such facts. This chapter argues that Enoch’s proposal fails because (...) it conflicts with a central fact about epistemic justification: that the norms of epistemic justification have the content that they do in part because of some positive connection between those norms and the truth of the beliefs that these norms govern. Alternatives to Enoch’s attempt to defend the idea that deliberative indispensability confers epistemic justification fail for parallel reasons. The chapter concludes that deliberative indispensability does not provide epistemic justification. (shrink)

Vi står overfor en planetær miljø- og klimakrise, med alvorlige, gjennomgripende, langvarige og irreversible konsekvenser for både menneske og natur. Det skyldes særlig at politiske, rettslige og økonomiske systemer som har vokst frem i løpet av de siste 250 år – slik som det liberale demokratiet og den globale kapitalismen – behandler naturen antroposentrisk, materialistisk og instrumentelt. For bedre å håndtere dagens miljø- og klimakrise, bør disse utdaterte systemene reformeres ut fra tanken om et økologisk demokrati, herunder en grønn konstitusjonalisme (...) og naturens moralske trumf. Norges første klimasøksmål illustrerer viktigheten av en slik systemisk grønning. Rettsaken fant sted i 2017 og kom opp igjen for rettsapparatet i 2019, hvor staten hevdes å bryte miljøparagrafen i sin egen grunnlov. Søksmålets grønning innebærer en positiv rettsliggjøring, hvis natursynet i Grunnlovens miljøparagraf forstås økosentrisk fremfor antroposentrisk. Da styrker klimasøksmålet økologiske medborgeres konstitusjonelle rettssikkerhet og demokratiske deltagelseslikhet. Viktigst er imidlertid at planetens eksistensielle tålegrense og naturens moralske trumf anerkjennes. Nøkkelord: Miljøkrise, klimasøksmål, økologisk demokrati, økologisk medborgerskap, grønn konstitusjonalisme, naturens moralske trumf, positiv rettsliggjøring English Summary: Ecological democracy and the inherent value of nature: Climate litigation in the age of the environmental crisis We are facing a planetary environmental and climate crisis, with severe, pervasive, long-lasting, and irreversible impacts for both humans and nature. This is due to political, legal, and economic systems having emerged during the last 250 years – especially liberal democracy and global capitalism – treat nature anthropocentrically, materialistically, and instrumentally. To better handle today’s environmental and climate crisis, these outdated systems should be reformed in light of the idea of ecological democracy, hereunder green constitutionalism and nature’s moral trump. Norway’s first climate lawsuit illustrates the importance of such a systemic greening. This trial took place in 2017 and reappeared for the court in 2019, in which the state is accused for having broken the environmental paragraph in its own constitution. This lawsuit’s greening implies a positive juridification, if the perception of nature in the Constitution’s environmental paragraph is ecocentric rather than anthropocentric. Then, the climate lawsuit strengthens ecological co-citizens’ constitutionally rule of law and democratic participation equality. Most importantly, it recognizes the planet’s existential limits and nature’s moral trump. Keywords: Environmental crisis, climate lawsuit, ecological democracy, ecological citizenship, green constitutionalism, nature’s moral trump, positive legalization. (shrink)

The contributions in this anthology address tensions that arise between reason and politics in a democracy inspired by the ideal of achieving reasoned agreement among free and equal citizens.

Taken as a model for how groups should make collective judgments and decisions, the ideal of deliberative democracy is inherently ambiguous. Consider the idealised case where it is agreed on all sides that a certain conclusion should be endorsed if and only if certain premises are admitted. Does deliberative democracy recommend that members of the group debate the premises and then individually vote, in the light of that debate, on whether or not to support the conclusion? Or does (...) it recommend that members individually vote on the premises, and then let their commitment to the conclusion be settled by whether or not the group endorses the required premises? Deliberative-democratic theory has not addressed this issue, and this is a problem. The discursive dilemma of my title--a generalisation of the doctrinal paradox from analytical jurisprudence--shows that the procedures distinguished can come apart. Thus deliberative democrats must make up their minds on where they stand in relation to the issue; they cannot sit on the fence. This paper is an attempt to address the issue and look at the grounds on which it may be resolved. (shrink)

Philosophy's “linguistic turn” was destined to find its way into derivative disciplines such as political theory. In the last two decades, this turn has led to an absurd reductionism extrapolating the essence of existing democracies from their mode of communication. Flattening political theory, followers of this fashion rarely relinquish their fixation with the communicative component of modern democracies to the level of a multifaceted analysis. The central notion here is “deliberative democracy.” But is this a distinct model of democracy? (...) For Seyla Benhabib, it means “elucidating the already implicit principles and logic of existing democratic practices” (p. 84) There are…. (shrink)

Debating Deliberative Democracy explores the nature and value of deliberation, the feasibility and desirability of consensus on contentious issues, the implications of institutional complexity and cultural diversity for democratic decision making, and the significance of voting and majority rule in deliberative arrangements. Investigates the nature and value of deliberation, the feasibility and desirability of consensus on contentious issues, the implications of institutional complexity and cultural diversity for democratic decision making, and the significance of voting and majority rule in (...) deliberative arrangements. Includes focus on institutions and makes reference to empirical work. Engages a debate that cuts across political science, philosophy, the law and other disciplines. (shrink)

Classroom discussion practices that can lead to reasoned participation by all students are presented and described by the authors. Their research emphasizes the careful orchestration of talk and tasks in academic learning. Parallels are drawn to the philosophical work on deliberative discourse and the fundamental goal of equipping all students to participate in academically productive talk. These practices, termed Accountable TalkSM, emphasize the forms and norms of discourse that support and promote equity and access to rigorous academic learning. They (...) have been shown to result in academic achievement for diverse populations of students. The authors outline Accountable Talk as encompassing three broad dimensions: one, accountability to the learning community, in which participants listen to and build their contributions in response to those of others; two, accountability to accepted standards of reasoning, talk that emphasizes logical connections and the drawing of reasonable conclusions; and, three, accountability to knowledge, talk that is based explicitly on facts, written texts, or other public information. With more than fifteen years research into Accountable Talk applications across a wide range of classrooms and grade levels, the authors detail the challenges and limitations of contexts in which discourse norms are not shared by all members of the classroom community. (shrink)

Deliberative democrats seek to link political choices more closely to the deliberations of common citizens, rather than consigning them to speak only in the desiccated language of checks on a ballot. Sober thinkers from Plato to today, however, have argued that if we want to make good decisions we cannot entrust them to the deliberations of common citizens. Critics argue that deliberative democracy is wildly unworkable in practice. Deliberative Democracy between Theory and Practice cuts across this debate (...) by clarifying the structure of a deliberative democratic system, and goes on to re-evaluate the main empirical challenges to deliberative democracy in light of this new frame. It simultaneously reclaims the wider theory of deliberative democracy and meets the empirical critics squarely on terms that advance, rather than evade, the debate. Doing so has important implications for institutional design, the normative theory of democracy, and priorities for future research and practice. (shrink)

Dieses Buch versucht die Leerstelle bei der wissenschaftlichen Auseinandersetzung mit den Defekten der Demokratie zu füllen. Zwar blüht die Demokratieforschung, doch die systemimmanenten Defekte der Demokratie genießen eine vergleichsweise geringe (wenngleich wachsende) wissenschaftliche Aufmerksamkeit. Zu diesen Problemen zählen etwa ihr „short-termism“ und die „Unbeständigkeit der Zahl“, die Neigung zur „Tyrannei der Mehrheit“ und Kompetenzmängel beim Demos wie beim Führungspersonal. Die Autoren dieses Bandes – renommierte Experten auf dem Gebiet der Demokratieforschung – greifen je einen Defekt heraus, beleuchten ihn (...) eingehend und diskutieren institutionenreformerische Lösungsvorschläge. (shrink)

Ausgehend von einigen Überlegungen zur Lehrerausbildung und zum normativen Vorrang des Liberalismus vor der Demokratie plädiert der Beitrag zunächst für eine rechtssystematische und institutionenkundliche Orientierung des Politikunterrichts und konstatiert dann eine wachsende Spannung zwischen den Aufgaben der Demokratieerziehung und der politischen Urteilsbildung in einer zunehmend komplexen und amorphen politischen Realität.

This chapter contains sections titled: Participatory Democracy Social Capital and Participatory Democracy Ideal Theory Deliberative Democracy Audience Democracy Corporate Democracy Normative Claims for Democracy Concluding Remarks Notes References.

Increasing interest in applying the theory and practice of deliberative democracy to new and varied political contexts leads us to ask whether or not deliberation is a universal political practice. While deliberation does manifest a universal competence, its character varies substantially across time and space, a variation partially explicable in cultural terms. We deploy an intersubjective conception of culture in order to explore these differences. Culture meets deliberation where publicly accessible meanings, symbols, and norms shape the way political actors (...) engage one another in discourse. Fuller understanding of political deliberation requires comparative and historical studies of particular contexts. We look at one case from Egypt in some depth and provide shorter illustrations from Botswana, Europe, India, Japan, Madagascar, the United States, Yemen, and elsewhere. Cross-cultural learning can enrich the theory of deliberative democracy, and give democratic theory a more universal reach. (shrink)

'Deliberative politics' refers to the role of conversation and arguments in politics. Until recently discussion of deliberative politics took place almost exclusively among political philosophers, but many questions raised in this philosophical discussion cry out for empirical investigation. This book provides the first extended empirical study of deliberative politics, addressing, in particular, questions of the preconditions and consequences of high level deliberation. Using parliamentary debates in Germany, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States as an empirical (...) base, the authors measure the level of deliberation by constructing a 'Discourse Quality Index'. As deliberative politics moves to the forefront of political theory, this book makes an important contribution to deliberative democracy. (shrink)

Taken as a model for how groups should make collective judgments and decisions, the ideal of deliberative democracy is inherently ambiguous. Consider the idealised case where it is agreed on all sides that a certain conclusion should be endorsed if and only if certain premises are admitted. Does deliberative democracy recommend that members of the group debate the premises and then individually vote, in the light of that debate, on whether or not to support the conclusion? Or does (...) it recommend that members individually vote on the premises, and then let their commitment to the conclusion be settled by whether or not the group endorses the required premises? Is deliberative democracy to enforce the discipline of reason at the individual level, as in the first possibility, or at the collective level, as in the second? (shrink)

Public deliberation, highly valued by many African societies, becomes the cornerstone of a new system of African political philosophy in this brilliant, highly original study. In Deliberative Agency, philosopher Uchenna Okeja offers a way to construct a new political center by building it around the ubiquitous African practice of public deliberation, a widely accepted means to resolve legal matters, reconcile feuding groups, and reestablish harmony. In cities, hometown associations and voluntary organizations carry out the task of fostering deliberation among (...) African groups for different reasons. In some instances, the deliberation aims to settle disputes. In others, the aim is to decide the best action to take to address unfortunate incidents such as death. Through a measured, comparative analysis, Deliberative Agency argues that the best way to reimagine and harness the idea of public deliberation, based on current experiences in Africa, is to see it as performance of agency. Building a new political center around the practice places agency at the core of a new political life in Africa. (shrink)