Deliberative Democracy

We’re all in this together

Definition and Explanation 

Deliberative democracy refers to the idea that legitimate, effective political decisions and governmental policy should emerge from the public deliberation of people. Simply put, the people decide what they want and then send that out to the government. As such, it is a version of democracy that is far more engaged, where the people’s role is not solely relegated to voting but is extended to involvement in the policy-making process and interpersonal dialogue with fellow citizens. Thus, deliberative democracy encourages citizens to discuss and reach consensus on the common good.

Decision-making that is based on common agreement has been found around the world in different forms for all of history. However, Athenian democracy is often viewed as the earliest Western example, where the majority of the decision-making process was deliberative and direct among those who could vote. In more recent scholarship, the influence of John Rawls is tangible. In his seminal work, A Theory of Justice (1971), Rawls advocates for reason to be the foundation of a just political society. Reason, according to Rawls, upstages self-interest in ensuring fairness and equality for everyone is society, which all contribute to the overall democratic well-being of citizens.

Key Modern Scholars and Ideas 

Benjamin R. Barber: Barber offers an early precursor to the theory of deliberative democracy. He emphasizes the importance of local, face-to-face deliberation in shaping public policy in his 1984 book, Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age. Deliberative democracy, according to Barber, involves citizens coming together to discuss and debate issues, fostering a sense of community and shared responsibility. He also criticizes what he calls "thin democracy”, where citizens become mere passive consumers of politics rather than active participants, and political decisions are made by faraway elites.

James Bohman: Bohman emphasizes the importance of inclusive and reasoned discourse in the decision-making process. He is known for his concept of "discursive democracy", in which he argues that deliberation should be the primary mode of decision-making in a democracy. This involves rational discussion among citizens with diverse perspectives, aiming at reaching mutually acceptable agreements. He has also explored the institutional aspects of deliberative democracy. He considers how deliberative practices can be incorporated into existing political institutions to enhance democratic decision-making.

Robert E. Goodin: Goodin contributes to the deliberative democracy literature by emphasizing the practical dimensions of democratic theory and exploring the complexities of political decision-making. His work engages with issues related to reflective deliberation, reason-giving, compromise, and the institutional design of democratic processes. Additionally, Goodin has engaged with the idea of deliberative representation, which involves elected representatives acting as channels for the deliberative views of their constituents.

Amy Gutmann: Gutmann acknowledges the existence of diverse and deeply held moral and political beliefs within democratic societies. She recognizes that citizens often have different comprehensive doctrines, and ethical pluralism is a reality that needs to be addressed in democratic decision-making. She advocates for deliberative democracy as a way to address and manage disagreements fairly and inclusively. She argues that through reasoned and inclusive deliberation, citizens can find common ground and reach decisions that are acceptable to all, or at least justifiable to all.

Iris Marion Young: Young is critical of traditional models of deliberative democracy that may exclude or marginalize certain groups or perspectives. She argues for the importance of including the voices of marginalized and disadvantaged groups in deliberative processes to ensure a more inclusive and just democratic system. She talks about how certain social, economic, and institutional structures can systematically silence and disadvantage certain groups. Deliberative democracy, in her view, should address and rectify these structural injustices to achieve genuine inclusivity.