			Home About us Contact

Democratic Deliberation (democratic + deliberation)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Humanities and Social Sciences	63%

Selected Abstracts

On the Prospects for Democratic Deliberation: Values Analysis Applied to AustralianPolitics

POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 2 2000
John S. Dryzek
Democratic theorists increasingly stress that democratic legitimacy rests primarily on authentic deliberation. Critics of deliberative democracy believe that this hope is unrealistic,that deliberation either will prove intractable across political differences or will exacerbate instability. This paper deploys some tools of political psychology, notably Q methodology and values analysis, to investigate the conditions under which effective deliberation is likely to occur. These tools are applied to contemporary political debates in Australia, concerned with how the Australian polity should be constituted in light of a reform agenda underpinned by a discourse we term "Inclusive Republicanism." An investigation of the character of the basic value commitments associated with discursive positions in these debates shows that some differences will yield to deliberation, but others will not. When two discourses subscribe to different value bases, deliberation will induce reflection and facilitate positive-sum outcomes. When a discourse has a value base but finds its specific goals opposed by a competitor that otherwise has no value base of its own, deliberation will be ineffective. When one discourse subscribes to a value base that another questions, but without providing an alternative, deliberation can help to bridge idealism and cynicism. [source]

Effective Opportunity and Democratic Deliberation

POLITICS, Issue 2 2007
Michael Allen
This article develops a conception of effective opportunities of minority speakers that is tied to the possibilities of conceptual innovation in informally inclusive democratic deliberation. My argument proceeds through a critical engagement with Brian Barry and Bikhu Parekh on what it means to have an equal opportunity in a multicultural society. I claim that the exchange between Barry and Parekh reaches a conceptual deadlock over the possibility of producing a substantive revision in the concept of equality. I break this conceptual deadlock, however, by appeal to the potential of diverse speakers in informal deliberation to reinvent the meanings of their basic political terms of co-operation. [source]

Participation in Urban Contention and Deliberation

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF URBAN AND REGIONAL RESEARCH, Issue 3 2010
HILARY SILVER
Abstract Participation is a popular buzzword in contemporary urban studies. For some, it implies a deepening of democratic deliberation; for others, it represents grassroots resistance to powerful elites and neoliberalization. Rather than seeing participation as either consensus-building or conflicts of interest, as either a top-down or bottom-up process, the evidence suggests that it can be all of these. By adopting a more dynamic, pragmatic, and empirically informed perspective, seemingly opposite normative conceptions of democratic participation may be theorized as different ,moments' in the democratic process. Bottom-up mobilization may coincide with and complement top-down initiatives, each dominating different political phases of policymaking, implementation and monitoring. Case studies from Belfast, Berlin, Durban, Philadelphia and São Paulo illustrate the approach and provide insight into the urban as a social laboratory in which other scales of social life and multiple ways to perform democracy are constructed. Résumé La participation est un terme qui revient très souvent dans les études urbaines contemporaines. Pour certains, elle implique une réflexion démocratique approfondie, pour d'autres, une résistance des citoyens face à la puissance des élites et au néolibéralisme. Si la participation peut être vue comme un moyen de bâtir des consensus ou l'expression de conflits d'intérêts, ou comme un processus imposé par le haut ou bien par la base, les faits suggèrent qu'elle peut être tout cela. En adoptant une perspective pragmatique plus dynamique reposant sur des éléments empiriques, des concepts normatifs de la participation apparemment opposés sont susceptibles d'être formulés en tant que "moments" différents du processus démocratique. La mobilisation par la base peut venir en coïncidence et complément d'initiatives imposées par le haut, chaque forme dominant des phases politiques distinctes dans la prise de décision, la mise en ,uvre et le suivi. Des études de cas portant sur Belfast, Berlin, Durban, Philadelphie et São Paulo illustrent la démarche et font apparaître l'urbain comme un laboratoire où s'élaborent d'autres dimensions de la vie sociale et de multiples modalités d'exercice de la démocratie. [source]

Politically Motivated Reinforcement Seeking: Reframing the Selective Exposure Debate

JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION, Issue 4 2009
R. Kelly Garrett
This article seeks to reframe the selective exposure debate by demonstrating that people exhibit a preference for opinion-reinforcing political information without systematically avoiding opinion challenges. The results are based on data collected in a national random-digit-dial telephone survey (n = 1,510) conducted prior to the 2004 U.S. presidential election. Analyses show that Americans use the control afforded by online information sources to increase their exposure to opinions consistent with their own views without sacrificing contact with other opinions. This observation contradicts the common assumption that reinforcement seeking and challenge avoidance are intrinsically linked aspects of the selective exposure phenomenon. This distinction is important because the consequences of challenge avoidance are significantly more harmful to democratic deliberation than those of reinforcement seeking. Politically Motivated Reinforcement Seeking: Reframing the Debate Over Selective Exposure in the Political Domain This article seeks to reframe the selective exposure debate by demonstrating that people exhibit a preference for opinion-reinforcing political information without systematically avoiding opinion challenges. The results are based on data collected in a national randomdigit-dial telephone survey (n = 1,510) conducted prior to the 2004 U.S. presidential election. Analyses show that Americans use the control afforded by online information sources to increase their exposure to opinions consistent with their own views without sacrificing contactwith other opinions. This observation contradicts the common assumption that reinforcement seeking and challenge avoidance are intrinsically linked aspects of the selective exposure phenomenon. This distinction is important because the consequences of challenge avoidance are significantly more harmful to democratic deliberation than those of reinforcement seeking. Politisch motivierte Suche nach Verstärkung: Eine Umdeutung der Debatte zur selektiven Wahrnehmung in der Politik Dieser Artikel versucht, die Debatte zur selektiven Wahrnehmung umzudeuten, indem er aufzeigt, dass Menschen eine Präferenz für meinungsverstärkende politische Informationen zeigen, ohne systematisch zu vermeiden, dass ihre Meinung hinterfragt wird. Diese Ergebnisse basieren auf Daten einer nationalen zufallsgesteuerten Telefonumfrage (n=1.510) die vor den U.S. Präsidentschaftswahlen 2004 durchgeführt wurde. Die Analysen zeigen, dass Amerikaner die Möglichkeiten von Online-Informationsquellen nutzen, um die Exposition zu konsistenten Meinungen herzustellen, ohne dafür andere Meinungen aufzugeben. Diese Beobachtung widerspricht der allgemeinen Annahme, dass Verstärkersuche und Herausforderungsvermeidung intrinsisch verbundene Aspekte des selektiven Wahrnehmungsphänomens sind. Diese Unterscheidung ist wichtig, weil die Konsequenzen der Vermeidung von Herausforderung für die demokratische Teilhabe wesentlich problematischer sind als die des Suchens nach Verstärkung. La Búsqueda del Reforzamiento Motivado Políticamente: Re-encuadrando el Debate sobre la Exposición Selectiva en el Dominio Político R. Kelly Garrett Resumen Este artículo busca re-encuadrar el debate sobre la exposición selectiva demostrando que la gente exhibe una preferencia por la opinión que refuerza la información política sin evadir sistemáticamente los desafíos de la opinión. Los resultados están basados en los datos colectados en una entrevista aleatoria de discado telefónico a nivel nacional (n = 1,510) conducida antes de la elección presidencial del 2004 de los EE.UU. Los análisis demuestran que los Estadounidenses usaron el control proporcionado por recursos de información online para incrementar la exposición a las opiniones consistentes con sus propios puntos de vista sin sacrificar el contacto con otras opiniones. Esta observación contradice la asunción común que la búsqueda del reforzamiento y la evasión del desafío están intrínsecamente unidos con los aspectos de la exposición selectiva del fenómeno. Esta distinción es importante porque las consecuencias de la evasión del desafío son significativamente más perjudiciales en la deliberación democrática que aquellas de la búsqueda del reforzamiento. [source]

Freedom of Choice, Community and Deliberation

JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION, Issue 3 2003
Klas Roth
Present arrangements for the control and administration of schools in Sweden foster freedom of choice and the interests of different value communities more than ideals such as democratic deliberation. I argue that children and young people should be given the opportunity to deliberate in ,discourse ethics' terms during their compulsory schooling, and I suggest that their right to engage in such deliberation is contained in the national curriculum. A discourse ethics approach to democratic deliberation pays attention to whether, and to what extent, individuals are free and able to participate in joint democratic deliberation. [source]

Citizenship and The State

PHILOSOPHY COMPASS (ELECTRONIC), Issue 6 2009
M. Victoria Costa
This study surveys debates on citizenship, the state, and the bases of political stability. The survey begins by presenting the primary sense of ,citizenship' as a legal status and the question of the sorts of political communities people can belong to as citizens. (Multi)nation-states are suggested as the main site of citizenship in the contemporary world, without ignoring the existence of alternative possibilities. Turning to discussions of citizen identity, the study shows that some of the discussion is motivated by a perceived need for citizens to have a sense of political belonging, on the assumption that such a sense promotes political activity and has other personal and social benefits. But there are serious problems with the strategy of understanding the relevant sense of belonging in terms of identification with the nation-state. The study explores a more promising way to generate this sense of belonging. First, societies should function, to a sufficiently high degree, in accord with political principles of justice and democratic decision making. Second, there should be a general consensus on political principles among citizens, as well as high levels of engagement in democratic deliberation. [source]

Effective Opportunity and Democratic Deliberation

The Idea of Deliberative Democracy.

RATIO JURIS, Issue 4 2001
A Critical Appraisal
The deliberative conception of politics seems to be necessary for the legitimation of state power through democratic will-formation and decision-making. However, the author maintains that a complex theory of democracy cannot merely consist in procedural prerequisites for organizing the concomitant institutional settings. In particular, such a theory must comprise some substantive presuppositions, such as social and economic rights, in order to diminish existing material inequalities, especially those connected with social exploitation and domination. The author argues that a contemporary theory of democracy should reflect on the autonomization of mechanisms of egoistic action challenging not only the democratic political order, but also the very reproduction preconditions of societies all over the world. In this perspective, the model of associative democracy, which is suggested nowadays as a sort of substantive correlative to the institutional proceduralism, could not significantly rejuvenate the traditional representative democracy. Instead, democracy could only be given a fresh impulse if democratic deliberation penetrates the currently forbidden field of capitalist production and social exploitation, the locus where social inequality and effective unfreedom are endlessly reproduced. [source]

Philosophy of Education and the Gigantic Affront of Universalism

JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION, Issue 1 2009
PENNY ENSLIN
Universalism in philosophy, argue Penny Enslin and Mary Tjiattas, tends to be regarded as an affront to particular affiliations, an act of injustice by misrecognition. While agreeing with criticisms of some expressions of universalism, they take the view that anti-universalism has become an orthodoxy that deflects attention from pressing issues of global injustice in education. In different ways, recent reformulations of universalism accommodate particularity and claims for recognition. Defending a qualified universalism, they argue, through a discussion of the Education for All campaign, that the present focus on recognition should be widened to address redistribution and representation as elements of global justice in education. In her response to Enslin and Tjiattas, Sharon Todd expresses sympathy for their aspiration towards a ,qualified universalism', but she seeks to go beyond the dichotomy of universalism versus anti-universalism by way of a discussion of aspects of the work of Judith Butler. Butler's emphasis on cultural translation offers a way, it is claimed, to think about the universal that transcends the oppositional relation between culture and commitment to universals. In the light of this she advocates an approach that involves neither universalism nor anti-universalism but ,critique of universality'. Thus, the task of translation, on Butler's account, prevents universality from being a standard or home-base from which we can judge the world and turns it instead into an ongoing struggle for intelligibility. In their rejoinder, Enslin and Tjiattas reject any charge that their own account has fallen into a simple dichotomisation of universalism and anti-universalism, and reaffirm their commitment to a form of universalism in which (a) partial or contextual considerations count in ethical deliberations, and (b) values and principles are subject to reflexive renegotiation in democratic deliberations, which provides the means of their justification and the source of their legitimacy. This yields, they claim, a non-standard form of contractualism that is both culturally sensitive and open-ended. They suggest in conclusion that the debate between themselves and Todd raises questions about whether the analytical and continental traditions can concede one another's place in the philosophy of education. [source]

Causal Inference with Differential Measurement Error: Nonparametric Identification and Sensitivity Analysis

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, Issue 2 2010
Kosuke Imai
Political scientists have long been concerned about the validity of survey measurements. Although many have studied classical measurement error in linear regression models where the error is assumed to arise completely at random, in a number of situations the error may be correlated with the outcome. We analyze the impact of differential measurement error on causal estimation. The proposed nonparametric identification analysis avoids arbitrary modeling decisions and formally characterizes the roles of different assumptions. We show the serious consequences of differential misclassification and offer a new sensitivity analysis that allows researchers to evaluate the robustness of their conclusions. Our methods are motivated by a field experiment on democratic deliberations, in which one set of estimates potentially suffers from differential misclassification. We show that an analysis ignoring differential measurement error may considerably overestimate the causal effects. This finding contrasts with the case of classical measurement error, which always yields attenuation bias. [source]