Deliberative democracy defended: A response to Posner's political realism

Res Publica

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 185-199

  Talisse, Robert B ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 26044459630     PISSN: 13564765     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11158-005-1388-4     Document Type: Review

References (98)

1. R. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2003).
2. R. Posner, 'Dewey and Democracy: A Critique', Transactional Viewpoints I/3 (2002)
3. 'Smooth Sailing', Legal Affairs January/February (2004), 41-2.
4. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, op. cit., 130. For key statements of deliberative democracy
5. see the essays in eds J. Bohman and W. Rehg, Deliberative Democracy (Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1997);
6. ed J. Elster, Deliberative Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998);
7. and eds J. Fishkin and P. Laslett, Debating Deliberative Democracy (Oxford: Blackwell, 2003).
8. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, op. cit., 166.
9. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid., 130.
10. To get a flavour of the range of views in currency, compare G. Smith, Deliberative Democracy and the Environment (London: Routledge, 2003);
11. R. Goodin, Reflective Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003);
12. E. Leib Deliberative Democracy in America (College Park, Penn.: Penn State University Press, 2004);
13. M. James, Deliberative Democracy and the Plural Polity (Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas Press, 2004);
14. and R. Talisse, Democracy After Liberalism (New York: Routledge, 2005).
15. See also J. Bohman, 'The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy', The Journal of Political Philosophy 6/4 (1998), 400-25
16. and S. Freeman, 'Deliberative Democracy: A Sympathetic Comment', Philosophy & Public Affairs 29/4(2000), 371-418.
17. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, op. cit., 106. Those who are familiar with Dewey's work will find that the version of deliberative democracy I propose is much in line with Dewey's views. It is not my aim in the present essay, however, to establish this connection. The terminological issue is not crucial; the objective is to show that there is at least one version of deliberative democracy that can withstand Posner's objections.
18. I shall not engage Posner's legal theory, which is concisely summarized in R. Posner, 'Legal Pragmatism', Metaphilosophy 35/1 & 2 (2004), 147-59.
19. J. Rawls, Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996), 214.
20. Compare J. Habermas, Between Facts and Norms (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1996), 298;
21. I. Young, Inclusion and Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 46;
22. J. Bohman, 'Realizing Deliberative Democracy as a Mode of Inquiry', Journal of Speculative Philosophy 18/1(2004) 23-43, p. 39.
23. J. Dewey, Freedom and Culture: The Later Works of John Dewey, Vol. 13, ed. Jo Ann Boydston, (Carbondale, Ill.: Southern Illinois University Press, 1991).
24. J. Bohman, Public Deliberation (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996), 53.
25. The distinction that follows between proceduralist and epistemic views of deliberation is common. Cf. Freeman Public Deliberation op. cit., 378-79;
26. Dryzek Deliberative Democracy and Beyond (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), 174;
27. and C. List and R. Goodin, 'Epistemic Democracy: Generalizing the Condorcet Jury Theorem', Journal of Political Philosophy 9 (2001), 277-78.
28. J. Cohen, 'Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy', in eds Bohman and Rehg, Journal of Political Philosophy op. cit. 367-92.
29. Cf. the discussion in D. Estlund, 'Beyond Fairness and Deliberation' Journal of Political Philosophy, ibid. 173-204, pp. 176-81.
30. S. Benhabib, 'Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy', in S. Benhabib, Democracy and Difference (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), p. 87;
31. J. Dryzek, Democracy and Difference op. cit., 174.
32. Young, Democracy and Difference op. cit., 30.
33. D. Estlund, 'Making Truth Safe for Democracy', in eds D. Copp, J. Roemer and J. Hampton, The Idea of Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993);
34. C. Nino, The Constitution of Deliberative Democracy (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1996);
35. C. Misak, 'Making Disagreement Matter', Journal of Speculative Philosophy 18/1 (2004), 9-22.
36. J. Bohman, 'Democracy as Inquiry, Inquiry as Democratic', American Journal of Political Science 43/2 (1999), 590-607
37. and 'Realizing Deliberative Democracy', American Journal of Political Science op. cit.
38. H. Putnam and R. Putnam, 'Epistemology as Hypothesis', Transactions of the C. S. Peirce Society 26/4 (1990), 407-33;
39. T. Burke, Dewey's New Logic (Chicago, Il: University of Chicago Press, 1994).
40. F. Cunningham, Theories of Democracy (New York: Routledge 2001), 145;
41. Bohman, 'Realizing Deliberative Democracy', Theories of Democracy op. cit., 24.
42. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, op. cit., 107.
43. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid. 167.
44. C. Sunstein, Designing Democracy: What Constitutions Do (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 239.
45. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, op. cit., 2003, 164.
46. See L. Bartels, 'Uninformed Votes: Information Effects in Presidential Elections', American Journal of Political Science 40/1 (1996), 194-230;
47. B. Page, Who Deliberates? Mass Media in Modern Democracy. (Chicago, Il: University of Chicago Press, 1996);
48. I. Somin, 'Voter Ignorance and the Democratic Ideal', Critical Review 12/4 (1998), 413-58;
49. eds S. Elkin and K.E. Soltan, Citizen Competence and Democratic Institutions (College Park, Penn: Penn State Univrsity Press, 1999);
50. M. Weinshall, 'Means, Ends, and Public Ignorance in Habermas's Theory of Democracy', Critical Review 15/1-2 (2003), 23-58;
51. E.M. Selinger, 'Expertise and Public Ignorance', Critical Review 15/3-4 (2003), 375-86.
52. J. Fishkin, Democracy and Deliberation (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1991)
53. and The Voice of the People (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1997).
54. J. Gastil, By Popular Demand (Berkeley University of California Press, 2000).
55. B. Ackerman and J. Fishkin, Deliberation Day (New Haven, Yale University Press, 2004), 52-9.
56. See also the findings discussed in R. Goodin and S. Niemeyer, 'When Does Deliberation Begin?', Political Studies 51/4 (2003), 627-49.
57. Ackerman and Fishkin, Political Studies op cit., 59;
58. N. McAfee, 'Three Models of Democratic Deliberation', Journal of Speculative Philosophy 18/1 (2004), 44-59, pp. 51-5;
59. J. Mansbridge, 'On the Idea that Participation Makes Better Citizens', in eds Elkin and Soltan, Journal of Speculative Philosophy op. cit., 291-325.
60. R.C. Luskin and Fishkin, 'Deliberation and "Better Citizens"', unpublished, on file with the authors.
61. Posner, 'Smooth Sailing', Deliberation and "Better Citizens" op. cit. 2004; 41. Ackerman and Fishkin propose to pay a modest stipend - $150.00 - to each citizen who elects to participate in Deliberation Day
62. (Posner, Deliberation and "Better Citizens", ibid., 17).
63. E.J. Dionne, Why Americans Hate Politics (New York: Touchstone Books, 1992);
64. J.J. Judis, The Paradox of American Democracy (New York: Routledge, 2001);
65. eds S.J. Pharr and R. Putman, Disaffected Democracies (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2000);
66. T.E. Patterson, The Vanishing Voter (New York: Knopf, 2002).
67. Although I am speaking here particularly from within the context of the United States, the point is not restricted to that context.
68. This is to say nothing about the sophistication of the deliberations that one can find on sports radio programming, where call-ins regularly display an impressive command of statistics, facts and other data.
69. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, op. cit. 153.
70. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid., 41.
71. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid., 137.
72. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid., 139.
73. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid., 135.
74. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid., 174.
75. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid., 174.
76. Note Posner's puzzlement over how Sunstein can be a deliberative democrat in light of his work on group polarization (Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, ibid., n. 39).
77. C. Sunstein, Why Societies Need Dissent (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003), 112.
78. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, op. cit.
79. C. Sunstein, Republic.com (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001).
80. C. Sunstein, 'The Law of Group Polarization', eds in Fishkin and Laslett, Republic.com, 2001 op. cit., 80-101, p. 84.
81. Sunstein, Why Societies Need Dissent, op. cit., 110.
82. Sunstein, Why Societies Need Dissent, Ibid. 110.
83. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, op. cit., 159.
84. Posner, 'Smooth Sailing', Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy op. cit., 42.
85. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid., 41.
86. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, op. cit., 183.
87. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid., 165.
88. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid., 145.
89. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid., 145, ch. 1.
90. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, ibid., 50.
91. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid., 50.
92. Posner, Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Ibid., 184.
93. Consider the technical sophistication of contemporary realists such as A. Przeworski, 'Minimalist Conception of Democracy: A Defense', in eds I. Shapiro and C. Nacker-Cordon, Democracy's Value (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 23-55
94. and R. Hardin, 'Street Level Epistemology and Democratic Participation', in eds Fishkin and Laslett, Democracy's Value op. cit., 163-81.
95. I cannot here rehearse the main objections to democratic realism, but see G. Mackie, Democracy Defended (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003) for an extended critical treatment. My argument here is that, whatever its virtues and vices, democratic realism is a roust social theory and so is not an easy fit with Posner's pragmatism.
96. See W. Lippmann, Public Opinion (New York: The Free Press, 1922);
97. N. Chomsky and E. Herman, Manufacturing Consent (New York: Pantheon Books, 2002).
98. The author would like to thank Brooke Ackerly, Lenn Goodman, Angelo Juffras and two anonymous Res Publica referees for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. Work on this essay was completed with the generous support of the Center for Ethics and Public Affairs of the Murphy Institute for Political Economy at Tulane University.