Abstract
The current conceptualization of deliberation may represent Western Enlightenment ideals in that it values rationality, publicity, equality, argumentation and reasoning. This essay explores the potential of deliberative democracy in non-Western contexts, such as the Confucian East Asian societies where it is often considered that the public sphere is less developed and people are reluctant to engage in public argumentation. Herein, several cultural traits of the collectivist East Asian societies relating to deliberation are identified, including the lower value of public talk, the strong influence of social position in talk and the unique traits of their cognitive reasoning processes. Considering these traits, the promises and perils of deliberation in the East Asian context are discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
For a good review of the ‘empirical dimension’ of deliberative democracy, see the two special issues of Acta Politica, Vol. 40 (2005).
One may argue that East Asians are not at all reluctant to engage in public argumentation. For example, recent mass candle light protests in South Korea, the martyrs of the Tiananmen Massacre in China, the often-violent behavior of Taiwanese and South Korean legislators suggest that they are active in publicly voicing their views. Such phenomena, however, also suggest that public deliberation seldom happens in these societies. That is, rather than engaging in the calm, rational deliberation suggested by many Western theorists, East Asians, who may lack Western-style deliberation traditions and who have had authoritarian regimes, prefer such modes of expression as protest and often violent behaviors. Again, with political and cultural factors confounded, this present a challenge to the analysis.
There may be important cultural differences between these countries. However, designating them as a ‘Confucian’ culture is widely accepted. See, for example, Hofstede, 2001.
Also see Kazuhiro Soda’s 2007 film, ‘Campaign’, which offers a microcosm of the hierarchical nature of Japanese society in an amusing manner.
The term ‘individuality’ is somewhat different from individualism in that it denotes a modern philosophical thought related with Enlightenment philosophers.
References
Asch, S. (1951) Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgment. In: H. Guetzkow (ed.) Groups, Leadership, and Men. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie, pp. 177–190.
Bell, D. (1999) Democratic deliberation. In: S. Macedo (ed.) Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 70–87.
Benhabib, S. (2002) The Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Blanchard, A. and Horan, T. (1998) Virtual community and social capital. Social Science Computer Review 16 (3): 293–307.
Bond, R. and Smith, P. (1996) Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of studies using Asch's line judgment task. Psychological Bulletin 119 (1): 111–137.
Chen, G.M. and Chung, J. (1994) The impact of Confucianism on organizational communication. Communication Quarterly 42 (2): 93–105.
Cohen, J. (1989) Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. In: A. Hamlin and P. Pettit (eds.) The Good Polity. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, pp. 17–34.
Cole, M. (1996) Cultural Psychology: Once and Future Discipline. Cambridge, MA: Belknap-Harvard.
Conover, P., Searing, D. and Crew, I. (2002) The deliberative potential of political discussion. British Journal of Political Science 32 (1): 21–62.
Cooke, M. (2000) Five arguments for deliberative democracy. Political Studies 48 (5): 947–969.
Delanty, G. (1997) Habermas and occidental rationalism: The politics of identity, social learning, and the cultural limits of moral universalism. Sociological Theory 15 (1): 30–59.
Dryzek, J. (2000) Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Elliot, S., Scott, M., Jensen, A. and McDonough, M. (1982) Perceptions of reticence: A cross-cultural investigation. In: M. Burgoon (ed.) Communication Yearbook 5. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 591–602.
Fishkin, J. and Luskin, R. (1999) Bringing deliberation to the democratic dialogue. In: M. McCombs and A. Reynolds (eds.) The Poll with a Human Face: The National Issues Convention Experiment in Political Communication. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 3–38.
Fraser, N. (1992) Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In: C. Calhoun (ed.) Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, pp. 109–142.
Gambetta, D. (1998) Claro!: An essay on discursive machismo. In: J. Elster (ed.) Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 19–43.
Gastil, J. and Dillard, J.P. (1999) Increasing political sophistication through public deliberation. Political Communication 16 (1): 3–23.
Giles, H., Coupland, N. and Wiemann, J. (1992) Talk is cheap … but my word is my bond: Beliefs about talk. In: K. Bolton and H. Kwok (eds.) Sociolinguistics Today: International Perspectives. New York: Routledge, pp. 218–243.
Goffman, E. (1967) Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. New York: Pantheon.
Gudykunst, W. and Lee, C.M. (2002) Cross-cultural communication theories. In: W. Gudykunst and B. Mody (eds.) Handbook of International and Intercultural Communication, 2nd edn. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 25–50.
Gunaratne, S. (2006) Public sphere and communicative rationality: Interrogating Habermas's Eurocentrism. Journalism and Mass Communication Monographs 8 (2): 93–156.
Gutmann, A. and Thompson, D. (1996) Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.
Gutmann, A. and Thompson, D. (2004) Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Habermas, J. (1975) Legitimation Crisis. Boston, MA: Beacon.
Habermas, J. (1984) Theory of Communicative Action Vol. 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Boston, MA: Beacon.
Habermas, J. (1987) Theory of Communicative Action Vol. 2: Life World and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Boston, MA: Beacon.
Habermas, J. (1996) Between Facts and Norms. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Habermas, J. (1998) On the Pragmatics of Communication. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Hall, E.T. (1976) Beyond Culture. Garden City, NY: Anchor.
Harris, K. and Nibler, R. (1998) Decision making by Chinese and US students. Journal of Psychology 138 (1): 102–114.
He, B. (2006) Western theories of deliberative democracy and the Chinese practice of complex deliberative governance. In: E. Leib and B. He (eds.) The Search for Deliberative Democracy in China. New York: Palgrave-Macmillan, pp. 133–148.
Hofstede, G. (1991) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: HarperCollins.
Hofstede, G. (2001) Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations, 2nd edn. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hofstede, G. and Bond, M. (1988) The Confucius connection: From cultural roots to economic growth. Organizational Dynamics 16 (1): 5–21.
Huang, H. (2005) A cross-cultural test of the spiral of silence. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 17 (3): 324–345.
Ikeda, K. and Richey, S. (2005) Japanese network capital: The impact of social networks on Japanese political participation. Political Behavior 23 (1): 23–51.
Jacobson, T. (2008) Harmonious society, civil society, and the media: A communicative action perspective. China Media Research 4 (4): 31–38.
Kim, J. and Kim, E.J. (2008) Theorizing dialogic deliberation: Everyday political talk as communicative action and dialogue. Communication Theory 18 (1): 51–70.
Kim, M.S., Tasaki, K., Kim, I.D. and Lee, H.R. (2007) The influence of social status on communication predispositions. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication 17 (2): 303–329.
Leib, E.J. and He, B. (eds.) (2006) The Search for Deliberative Democracy in China. New York: Palgrave-Macmillian.
Mansbridge, J. (1999) Everyday talk in the deliberative system. In: S. Macedo (ed.) Deliberative Politics. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 211–239.
Marin, I. (2006) (ed.) Collective Decision Making around the World: Essays on Historical Deliberative Practices. Dayton, OH: Kettering Foundation.
Mathews, D. (2006) Afterword. In: I. Marin (ed.) Collective Decision Making around the World: Essays on Historical Deliberative Practices. Dayton, OH: Kettering Foundation, pp. 189–193.
Mendelberg, T. (2002) The deliberative citizen: Theory and evidence. In: M.X. Delli Carpini, L. Huddy and R. Shapiro (eds.) Research in Micropolitics: Political Decision Making, Deliberation and Participation. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 151–193.
Mendelberg, T. and Oleske, J. (2000) Race and public deliberation. Political Communication 17 (2): 169–191.
Min, S.J. (2007) Online vs. face-to-face deliberation: Effects on civic engagement. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (4): 1369–1387.
Mouffe, C. (1999) Deliberative democracy or agnostic pluralism? Social Research 66 (3): 745–758.
Mutz, D. (2006) Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative versus Participatory Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Oetzel, J. and Ting-Toomey, S. (2003) Face concerns in interpersonal conflict: A cross-cultural empirical test of face negotiation theory. Communication Research 30 (6): 599–624.
Oyserman, D., Coon, H. and Kemmelmeier, M. (2002) Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluations of theoretical assumptions and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 123 (1): 3–72.
Park, S.G. (2000) The significance of civility in deliberative democracy. Korean Journal of Journalism and Communication Studies 45 (1): 162–194.
Peng, K. and Nisbett, R. (1999) Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist 54 (9): 741–754.
Price, V., Cappella, J. and Nir, L. (2002) Does disagreement contribute to more deliberative Opinion? Political Communication 19 (1): 95–112.
Prunty, A., Klopf, D. and Ishii, S. (1990) Argumentativeness: Japanese and American tendencies to approach and avoid conflict. Communication Research Reports 7 (1): 75–79.
Richey, S. (2009) Hierarchy in political discussion. Political Communication 26 (2): 137–152.
Rosenberg, S. (2006) Human nature, communication, and culture: Rethinking democratic deliberation in China and the west. In: E. Leib and B. He (eds) The Search for Deliberative Democracy in China. New York: Palgrave-Macmillan, pp. 77–112.
Ryfe, D. (2005) Does deliberative democracy work? Annual Review of Political Science 8: 49–71.
Sanders, L. (1997) Against deliberation. Political Theory 25 (3): 347–376.
Sen, A. (2003) Democracy and its global roots. The New Republic 6 (October): 28–35.
Singhal, A. and Nagao, M. (1993) Assertiveness as communication competence: A comparison of American and Japanese students. Asian Journal of Communication 3 (1): 1–18.
Tarde, G. (1969[Original work published in 1898]) Opinion and conversation. In: T.N. Clark (ed.) Gabriel Tarde on Communication and Social Influence. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 297–318.
Ting-Toomey, S. (1988) Intercultural conflict styles: A face-negotiation theory. In: Y.Y. Kim and W. Gudykunst (eds.) Theories in Intercultural Communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 213–235.
Ting-Toomey, S., Oetzel, J. and Yee-Jung, K. (2001) Self-construal types and conflict management styles. Communication Reports 14 (2): 87–104.
Young, I.M. (1996) Communication and the other: Beyond deliberative democracy. In: S. Benhabib (ed.) Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, pp. 120–136.
Yum, J.O. (1988) The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communication patterns in East Asia. Communication Monographs 55 (4): 374–388.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Min, SJ. Deliberation, East meets West: Exploring the cultural dimension of citizen deliberation. Acta Polit 44, 439–458 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1057/ap.2009.10
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/ap.2009.10