Abstract
This paper looks into the politics of difference’s criticism of deliberative democracy in the work of Iris M. Young. According to Young, theories of deliberative democracy are not as inclusive as they pretend to be. She proposes a theory of communicative democracy based on “greeting,” “storytelling” and “rhetoric.” To begin with, this paper examines three conditions of deliberative democracy (the inclusiveness-condition, the rationality-condition, and the legitimacy-condition) and argues that Young’s criticism of the deliberative democracy is based on wrong assumptions. Secondly, the paper investigates Young’s proposed theory of communicative democracy. Although “greeting,” “storytelling” and “rhetoric” play a role in the process of political communication, it is not the role proposed by Young. Accordingly, as a mechanism to increase inclusiveness, her theory is politically unproductive.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
Even Rawls’ demanding conception of “public reason” allows the use of a majority-rule. In his own words: “A vote can be held on a fundamental question as on any other; and if the question is debated by appeal to political values and citizens vote their sincere opinion, the ideal is sustained” (Rawls 1993: 240–1).
Bibliography
Bengoa, J. 1999. Historia de un Conflicto. El estado y los Mapuches en el Siglo XX. Santiago: Planeta Ariel.
Benhabib, S. (ed.). 1996a. Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Benhabib, S. 1996b. Towards a deliberative model of democratic legitimacy. In Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political, ed. S. Benhabib, 67–94. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Bohman, J. 1997. Public deliberation: Pluralism, complexity and democracy. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Bohman, J., and W. Rehg (eds.). 1997. Deliberative democracy: Essays on reason and politics. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Chambers, S. 1996. Reasonable democracy. Ithica: Cornell University Press.
Cohen, G.A. 1989. On the currency of egalitarian justice. Ethics 99(4): 906–944.
Cohen, G.A. 1993. The quality of what? On welfare, goods, and capabilities. In The quality of life, ed. M. Nussbaum and A. Sen, 9–29. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Dworkin, R. 1981. Equality of resources. Philosophy and Public Affairs 10(4): 283–345.
Elster, J. 1983. Sour grapes. Studies in the subversion of rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Elster, J. 1992. Local justice. How institutions allocate scarce goods and necessary burdens. New York: Russell Sage.
Elster, J. (ed.). 1998. Deliberative democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fishkin, J. 1991. Democracy and deliberation. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Galston, W. 1995. Two concepts of liberalism. Ethics 105(3): 516–534.
Galston, W. 2002. Liberal pluralism. The implications of value pluralism for political theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gutmann, A., and D. Thompson. 2000 (1996). Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Macedo, S. (ed.). 1999. Deliberative politics. Essays on democracy and disagreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Marsden, N. 1987. Gender dynamics and jury deliberations. Yale Law Journal 96: 593–612.
Miller, D. 2000. Citizenship and national identity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Nussbaum, M. 2000. Women and the human development. The capabilities approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Okin, S. 1999. Is multiculturalism bad for women? In Is multiculturalism bad for women? Susan Moller Okin with respondents, ed. J. Cohen, M. Howard, and M. Nussbaum, 7–26. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Phillips, A. 1995. The politic of presence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Phillips, A. 1996. Dealing with difference: A politics of ideas, or a politics of presence? In Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political, ed. S. Benhabib, 139–152. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rawls, J. 1971. A theory of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J. 1993. Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Rawls, J. 1997. The idea of public reason revisited. University of Chicago Law Review 64(3): 765–807.
Sanders, L. 1997. Against deliberation. Political Theory 25(3): 347–376.
Scanlon, T.M. 1998. What we owe to each other. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Shapiro, I. 1999. Democratic justice. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Walzer, M. 1999. Deliberation, and what else? In Deliberative politics. Essays on democracy and disagreement, ed. S. Macedo, 58–69. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Young, I.M. 1990. Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Young, I.M. 1996. Communication and the other: Beyond deliberative democracy. In Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political, ed. S. Benhabib, 120–136. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Young, I.M. 1999. Justice, inclusion and deliberative democracy. In Deliberative politics. Essays on democracy and disagreement, ed. S. Macedo, 151–158. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Loewe, D. (2013). Deliberative Democracy and the Politics of Difference. In: Merle, JC. (eds) Spheres of Global Justice. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5998-5_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5998-5_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5997-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5998-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)