Democratic Deliberations, Equality of Influence, and Pragmatism

1998 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 253-272
Author(s):  
Judith Baker

Democracy is committed to procedures of decision-making which express the values of both political equality and truth. One current program, that of strong or deliberative democracy, explicitly defends institutions which reflect the dual commitments to truth and equality. Like many other political theorists, however, deliberative democrats do not address the issue of a minority group which always loses the vote. The presumption is that free and equal deliberation by agents who think in terms of the common good is sufficient for political equality. I will argue, however, that the proposed deliberative procedures do not preclude persistent failure for a minority, and that this problem should lead us to acknowledge that power relations can underpin decision-making arrangements even within the ideal framework of deliberative democracy. Political equality and effective political equality seem to come apart.In order to come closer to the idea of effective political equality, this paper will look at the notion of equality of influence. It may seem tautological, and so redundant, to argue that political egalitarians and particularly deliberative democrats need to recognize equality of influence.

2017 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 635-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Ebeling ◽  
Fabio Wolkenstein

At the heart of the ideal of deliberative democracy lies an emphasis on the political autonomy of citizens participating in procedures of public justification aimed at the promotion of the common good. The recent systemic turn in deliberative democracy has moved so far away from this ideal that it relegates the deliberations of citizens to a secondary matter, legitimising forms of rule that may even undermine the normative impulses central to the project of deliberative democracy. We critically discuss this theoretical development and show how deliberative agency can effectively be exercised in complex political systems. We argue, in particular, that political parties play a central role in facilitating the exercise of deliberative agency, fostering deliberation among citizens and linking their deliberations to decisions. Instead of giving up on the possibility that citizens participate in procedures of public justification, deliberative democrats should look to parties’ unique ability to enable deliberation.


2009 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Christiano

Democratic theorists stress the importance of free and equal discussion and debate in a well-functioning democratic process. In this process, citizens attempt to persuade each other to support legislation by appealing to considerations of justice, liberty or the common good and are open to changing their minds when hearing the arguments of others. They are concerned to ground policy and legislation on the most defensible considerations of morality and the best empirical evidence. To be sure, majority rule remains important in democratic decision making because of the persistence of disagreement. But many have argued that debates over legislation that appeal to moral considerations ought to be given a much larger place in our understanding of the ideals of democracy than theorists have given them in the past. This emphasis on the importance of moral debate and discussion in democracy is characteristic of what I call the wide view of deliberative democracy.


Author(s):  
A. A. Gromyko

Anatoly Andreevich Gromyko, a professor of the Moscow State University, a corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences reflects in his article on the destinies of mankind and the most complex problems facing the world community at the early 21 century under globalization and increased demand in global governance. In his analysis the author concedes that after numerous pieces of research on various aspects of these two phenomena, there are still more questions than answers. He believes that globalization might become a force serving not only private interests of big corporations but also the common good of humanity. Since interdependence is the main feature of our world we should not fall prey to the ideal images of global governance because there is no one size fit all global governance. The article elaborates the three most pressing world problems:– the need in a new way of thinking about globalization. According to the author the problems of globalization must be approached with knowledge of history and acknowledgement of social justice;– the need in morally acceptable balance among unifying potential of globalization, unchained global market and the state as the last resort of its nation;– the need to make United Nations a platform, where political and social democracy should lay ground for global governance so craved for by the mankind. The author pays special attention to the dichotomy between the force of law and the law of force as well as to the prospects for the new democratic global order accommodating the sustainable development of human civilization.


Author(s):  
Rachel Ablow

This chapter argues that one of the most famous invalids of the age—and one of the most important political theorists—used her many writings on illness to imagine a model of impersonality uniquely well suited to the responsibilities of legislation. The relation of the legislator to the community represents a recurring problem for utilitarianism: if self-interest is the only reliable motivation, it becomes difficult to account for the legislator's—and hence, the ideal citizen's—supposed commitment to the common good. In Harriet Martineau's account, only the enlightened sufferer is able to regard all persons as equally valuable, and hence, their own pain is of no greater or lesser consequence than that experienced by anyone else.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 374-408 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik O. Eriksen

Deliberation has not only epistemic and moral value, it also has transformative value. Even if deliberation faces the problem of indeterminacy, it is assumed to have explanatory power. This article spells out why this is so and suggests a way to establish the causing effect of deliberation. It outlines a reason-based (RB) model of political decision-making applicable also to international affairs. By specifying a theory of argumentation on collective decision-making, we get to the nuts and bolts of deliberative decision-making, which, when supported by institutional powers, ensures a justified and well-grounded decision. The model contains a set of rules of inference and offers ‘mechanismic’ accounts of social events. It allows for explanations, but not predictions. The RB model conceives of decision-making as consisting of three sequences: claims-making, justification, and learning, each containing a set of explanatory mechanisms: values referring to conceptions of the common good, mandatory norms concerning the right thing to do, and evidence to the fact that non-compliance is wrong. The explanatory potential of this scheme is exemplified with reference to agreement making in the European Union. Some actors changed opinion voluntarily with regard to empowering the European parliament.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-35
Author(s):  
Romano Deluque Júnior ◽  
Cristiane Maluf Rodrigues Correia

À luz de uma reflexão jusfilosófica, a pessoa humana ascende enquanto sujeito de maior relevância para a ciência do Direito, nesse mesmo sentido, se faz relevante citar que o Direito possuiria, em todas as suas instâncias, a seguinte preocupação: de caminhar paralelamente a um verdadeiro senso de justiça, que se volte à solidariedade e ao bem comum. O presente artigo possui como objetivo fazer emergir uma reflexão ética acerca da função social dos contratos, por sua vez aqui percebida tal como um instituto norteador das relações jurídicas contratuais relacionando-a  com a questão da dignidade da pessoa humana enquanto basilar princípio constitucional. A discussão proposta decorrer-se-á de modo a defender a premissa de que a manutenção e a defesa dessa dignidade ocorreriam  dentro de uma perspectiva contratualista, a partir da observância e do respeito pelos limites impostos pela própria função social dos contratos, na figura da probidade contratual, da boa-fé objetiva, e da defesa dos interesses difusos e institucionais. Propõe-se, ainda, discutir a respeito de uma ética contratual contemporânea, que a partir dos conceitos aqui em análise, possuiria o intento de superar o ciclo histórico de individualismo exacerbado, e substituí-lo pelo ideal da coexistencialidade. Nessa nova perspectiva ter-se-á em pauta o instituto da boa-fé objetiva, através da qual a relação negocial passaria a ser vislumbrada a partir de uma ética do comum proveito, que caminharia, não obstante, à harmonia jurídico-contratual em prol da coletividade e dos interesses difusos. Palavras-chave: Função Social do Contrato. Contratos. Direito Civil. AbstractOn the  light of a jus-philosophical reflection, the human being ascends as a subject of greater relevance to the science of Law, in the same sense, it is relevant to mention that Law would have, in all its instances, the following concern: to walk in parallel to a true sense of justice, to return, to solidarity and to the common good. The purpose of this article is to make an ethical reflection about the social function of contracts, in turn perceived here as an institute guiding contractual legal relationships  regarding the issue of the dignity of the human person as a basis for constitutional principle. The proposed discussion will be carried out in such a way as to defend the premise that the maintenance and defense of this dignity would take place, from a contractual perspective, from the observance and respect for the limits imposed by the social function of the contracts themselves, figure of contractual probity, objective good faith, and defense of diffuse and institutional interests. It is also proposed to discuss a contemporary contractual ethic that, based on the concepts analyzed here, would attempt to overcome the historical cycle of exacerbated individualism and replace it with the ideal of coexistentiality. In this new perspective, the institute of objective good faith, through which the negotiating relationship would be perceived from an ethic of common advantage, would nevertheless follow the legal-contractual harmony in collective and diffuse interests. Keywords: Social Function of Contract. Contracts. Civil Law.


2019 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 3-30
Author(s):  
Tommi Lehtonen ◽  

The prisoner's dilemma famously shows that individuals seeking their own benefit end up with a worse outcome than could be achieved through cooperation. This dilemma provides an effective but neglected method for the study of the Hindu principle of "desireless action" (niṣkāmakarma). In the context of the prisoner's dilemma, one or the other of the following decision-making strategies is feasible for prisoners who want to follow the principle of "desireless action": (1) to be indifferent and to leave the decision to chance (e.g. by arbitrarily drawing lots) or (2) to pursue the common good or the benefit of the other (by remaining silent) instead of seeking primarily to benefit oneself (by confessing). The second strategy is more appropriate assuming the following: the followers of the principle of "desireless action" can be goal-oriented and target-driven, as long as unselfish goals are considered, while remaining indifferent and non-attached in terms of personal benefit. This interpretation is tested and further discussed in this article in light of the values of the modem environmental and anti-consumerist degrowth movement. A non-profit orientation and the emphasis on duties are shared by the concepts of degrowth and niṣkāmakarma. Social- or reality-centredness rather than self-centredness is also common to both concepts. The degrowth movement focuses on economic contraction and deceleration, and thus its scope is narrower and more specific than that of niṣkāmakarma. Moreover, the degrowth movement rejects economic grovrth because of its ecologically and socially harmful effects, such as pollution and income inequality, but it is - at least in theory - indifferent to the harmless results of economic activities. On the contrary, the principle of niṣkāmakarma involves a critical stance toward both good and bad results of actions, insofar as they are pursued because of self-regarding desires.


2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 297-303
Author(s):  
Randi Bastian ◽  
◽  
Marcus Garner ◽  
John Barron ◽  
Emmanuel Akowuah ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document