Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Power in Deliberative Democracy

Part of the book series: Political Philosophy and Public Purpose ((POPHPUPU))

Abstract

Why must discussions about the relationship between deliberative democracy and power be revived? This introductory chapter provides an overview of the rationale for viewing deliberative democracy from the lens of power. It offers conceptual clarification on how the terms deliberative democracy and power are used in the subsequent chapters, and sets the book’s theoretical, empirical, and political agenda.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    We recognise the importance of conceptual clarity, especially when differentiating deliberation, democratic deliberation, and deliberative democracy, as Bächtiger and John Parkinson (forthcoming) argue. For this particular section, we are defining deliberative democracy.

  2. 2.

    There are other labels associated to the distinction between Type 1 and Type 2 deliberation. Bächtiger and Simon Beste use the language of ‘old’ and ‘new’ deliberation, where the old version presents a ‘unitary’ conception where deliberative ideas ‘are fixed and work in tandem’. The new version, on the other hand, focuses on goals of deliberation and adjusts the relative importance of virtues accordingly (Bächtiger and Beste 2017: 107). Meanwhile, Stephen Elstub, Selen Ercan, and Ricardo Mendonça speak of ‘generations’ of deliberative democracy, where the first generation focuses on normative theorising, the second on the diverse and pluralised characterisation of deliberation, the third on deliberative democracy’s institutional configurations, and the fourth deals with systems (Elstub et al. 2016).

  3. 3.

    We recognise, however, that creative and non-institutionalised forms of political participation can both enforce and challenge patterns of inequality . In their multilevel analysis of 25 countries, Sofie Marien et al. (2010) find that non-institutionalised forms of participation (e.g. signing petitions and boycotting products) counterbalance traditional sources of inequality in traditional forms of participation, such as gender and age (more women and younger people participate), but highlight other forms of inequality such as educational background.

  4. 4.

    The latter, for Forst, demonstrates the lack of power, for individuals cease to be subjects who can ‘do’ something with noumenal power (accept, negotiate, or reject it) and instead become objects—something is ‘done’ to them.

References

  • Allen, Amy. 1999. The Power of Feminist Theory. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, A., Rainer Forst, and Mark Haugaard. 2014. Power and Reason, Justice and Domination: A Conversation. Journal of Political Power 7 (1): 7–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bächtiger, André, and Simon Beste. 2017. Deliberative Citizens, (Non)Deliberative Politicians: A Rejoinder. Daedalus 146 (3): 106–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bächtiger, André, Simon Niemeyer, Michael Neblo, Marco Steenbergen, and Jürg Steiner. 2010. Disentangling Diversity in Deliberative Democracy: Competing Theories, Their Blind Spots and Complementarities. Journal of Political Philosophy 18 (1): 32–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bächtiger, André, and John Parkinson. Forthcoming. Mapping and Measuring Deliberation: Towards a New Deliberative Quality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baiocchi, Gianpaolo. 2005. Militants and Citizens: The Politics of Participatory Democracy in Porto Alegre. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bickford, Susan. 1996. The Dissonance of Democracy: Listening, Conflict, and Citizenship. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohman, James. 1998. Survey Article: The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy. The Journal of Political Philosophy 6 (4): 400–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, Simone. 2003. Deliberative Democratic Theory. Annual Review of Political Science 6: 307–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2009. Rhetoric and the Public Sphere: Has Deliberative Democracy Abandoned Mass Democracy? Political Theory 37 (3): 323–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, Henrik Serup, and Asa von Schoultz. 2018. Ideology and Deliberation: An Analysis of Public Support for Deliberative Practices in Finland. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 2018: 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, Stacy. 2012. Making Disability Public in Deliberative Democracy. Contemporary Political Theory 11 (2): 211–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conover, Pamela Johnston, and Donald Searing. 2005. Studying ‘Everyday Political Talk’ in the Deliberative System. Acta Politica 40 (3): 269–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, Robert. 1981. Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 10 (2): 126–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curato, Nicole, John Dryzek, Selen Ercan, Carolyn Hendriks, and Simon Niemeyer. 2017. Twelve Key Findings in Deliberative Democracy Research. Daedalus 146 (3): 28–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, John S. 2000. Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, John. 2010. Rhetoric in Democracy: A Systemic Appreciation. Political Theory 38 (3): 319–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017. The Forum, the System, and the Polity: Three Varieties of Democratic Theory. Political Theory 45 (5): 610–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elstub, Stephen, Selen Ercan, and Ricardo Fabrino Mendonça. 2016. The Fourth Generation of Deliberative Democracy. Critical Policy Studies 10 (2): 139–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercan, Selen, Carolyn Hendriks, and John S. Dryzek. 2018. Public Deliberation in an Era of Communicative Plenty. Policy & Politics 2018: 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esterling, Kevin, Archon Fung, and Taeku Lee. 2010. The Difference Deliberation Makes: Evaluating the ‘Our Budget, Our Economy’ Public Deliberation. America Speaks. MacArthur: The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. https://thomasjhayes.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/americaspeaks1.pdf. Accessed 19 Apr 2018.

  • Forst, Rainer. 2015. Noumenal Power. The Journal of Political Philosophy 23 (2): 111–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fung, Archon. 2003. Survey Article: Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences. The Journal of Political Philosophy 11 (3): 338–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005. Deliberation Before the Revolution: Toward an Ethics of Deliberative Democracy in an Unjust World. Political Theory 33 (3): 397–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, Robert E. 2000. Democratic Deliberation Within. Philosophy & Public Affairs 29 (1): 81–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, Robert E., and Simon J. Niemeyer. 2003. When Does Deliberation Begin? Internal Reflection Versus Public Discussion in Deliberative Democracy. Political Studies 51 (4): 627–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzini, Stefano. 2005. The Concept of Power: A Constructive Analysis. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 33 (3): 495–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, Jürgen. 1984. The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. 1. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006. Political Communication in Media Society: Does Democracy Still Enjoy an Epistemic Dimension? The Impact of Normative Theory on Empirical Research. Communication Theory 16 (4): 411–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haugaard, Mark. 1997. The Consensual Basis of Conflictual Power: A Critical Response to ‘Using Power, Fighting Power’ by Jane Mansbridge. Constellations 3 (3): 401–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Havel, Václav. 1978. The Power of the Powerless. http://www.vaclavhavel.cz/showtrans.php?cat=eseje&val=2_aj_eseje.html&typ=HTML. Accessed 9 Aug 2018.

  • Hay, Colin. 1997. Divided by a Common Language: Political Theory and the Concept of Power. Politics 17 (1): 45–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayward, Clarissa Rile. 2000. De-Facing Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hayward, Clarissa, and Steven Lukes. 2008. Nobody to Shoot? Power, Structure, and Agency: A Dialogue. Journal of Power 1 (1): 5–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendriks, Carolyn. 2009. Deliberative Governance in the Context of Power. Policy and Society 28: 173–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendriks, Carolyn, and Lyn Carson. 2008. Can the Market Help the Forum? Negotiating the Commercialization of Deliberative Democracy. Policy Sciences 41 (4): 293–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, Lawrence, Fay Lomax Cook, and Michael Delli Carpini. 2009. Talking Together: Public Deliberation and Political Participation in America. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jungkunz, Vincent. 2012. The Promise of Democratic Silences. New Political Science 34 (2): 127–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Caroline. 2015. Do-It-Yourself Democracy: The Rise of the Public Engagement Industry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, David M. 1989. The Body Politic: The Embodiment of Praxis in Foucault and Habermas. Praxis International 9 (1/2): 112–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lukes, Stephen. 2005. Power: A Radical View. 2nd ed. New York: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, Benjamin A. 2017. From Code to Discourse: Social Media and Linkage Mechanisms in Deliberative Systems. Journal of Public Deliberation 13 (1): 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, Jane, and Katherine Flaster. 2007. The Cultural Politics of Everyday Discourse: The Case of ‘Male Chauvinist. Critical Sociology 33 (4): 627–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, Jane, James Bohman, Simone Chambers, Thomas Christiano, Archon Fung, John Parkinson, Dennis Thompson, and Mark Warren. 2012. A Systematic Approach to Deliberative Democracy. In Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale, ed. John Parkinson and Jane Mansbridge, 1–26. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marien, Sofie, Mark Hooghe, and Ellen Quintelier. 2010. Inequalities in Non-institutionalised Forms of Political Participation: A Multi-level Analysis of 25 Countries. Political Studies 58 (1): 187–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendonça, Ricardo Fabrino, and Selen Ercan. 2015. Deliberation and Protest: Strange Bedfellows? Revealing the Deliberative Potential of 2013 Protests in Turkey and Brazil. Policy Studies 36 (3): 267–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mouffe, Chantal. 2000. The Democratic Paradox. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Näsström, Sofia. 2011. The Challenge of the All-affected Principle. Political Studies 59 (1): 116–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neblo, Michael, Kevin Esterling, Ryan Kennedy, David Lazer, and Anand Sokhey. 2010. Who Wants to Deliberate—And Why? American Political Science Review 104 (3): 566–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemeyer, Simon. 2011. The Emancipatory Effect of Deliberation: Empirical Lessons from Mini-publics. Politics & Society 39 (1): 103–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemeyer, Simon, and John S. Dryzek. 2007. The Ends of Deliberation: Meta-consensus and Inter-Subjective Rationality as Ideal Outcomes. Swiss Political Science Review 13 (4): 497–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owen, David, and Graham Smith. 2015. Survey Article: Deliberation, Democracy, and the Systemic Turn. The Journal of Political Philosophy 23 (2): 213–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennington, Mark. 2010. Democracy and the Deliberative Conceit. Critical Review 22 (2–3): 159–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rollo, Toby. 2017. Everyday Deeds: Enactive Protest, Exit, and Silence in Deliberative Systems. Political Theory 45 (5): 587–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rostbøll, Christian. 2008. Deliberative Freedom: Deliberative Democracy as Critical Theory. New York: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, Lynn M. 1997. Against deliberation. Political Theory 25 (3): 347–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scorza, Jason. 2004. Liberal Citizenship and Civic Friendship. Political Theory 32 (1): 85–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, Jürg, André Bächtiger, Markus Spörndli, and Marco Steenbergen. 2005. Deliberative Politics in Action: Analyzing Parliamentary Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Talisse, Robert. 2017. New Trouble for Deliberative Democracy. The Ethics Forum 12 (1): 107–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamura, Tetsuki. 2014. Rethinking Grassroots Participation in Nested Deliberative Systems. Japanese Political Science Review 2: 63–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren, Mark E. 2007. Institutionalizing Deliberative Democracy. In Deliberation, Participation and Democracy: Can the People Govern? ed. Shawn Rosenberg, 272–288. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wolkenstein, Fabio. 2016. A Deliberative Model of Intra-party Democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy 24 (3): 297–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, Iris Marion. 1996. Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy. In Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political, ed. Seyla Benhabib, 120–135. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2001. Activist Challenges to Deliberative Democracy. Political Theory 29 (5): 670–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2002. Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia

    Nicole Curato

  2. School of Politics, Philosophy, International Relations and Environment, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, UK

    Marit Hammond

  3. Department of Social Sciences – Philosophy Program, College of Southern Nevada, North Las Vegas, NV, USA

    John B. Min

Authors
  1. Nicole Curato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marit Hammond
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John B. Min
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Curato, N., Hammond, M., Min, J.B. (2019). Introduction. In: Power in Deliberative Democracy. Political Philosophy and Public Purpose. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95534-6_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation