Deliberative Democracy (Cambridge Studies in the Theory of Democracy) [Hardcover]

Jon Elster (Editor)

Book Description

Series: Cambridge Studies in the Theory of Democracy | Publication Date: March 28, 1998

It is sometimes assumed that voting is the central mechanism for political decision making. The contributors to this volume focus on an alternative mechanism, which is decision by discussion or deliberation. This volume is characterized by a realistic approach to the issue of deliberative democracy. Rather than assuming that deliberative democracy is always ideal, the authors critically probe its limits and weaknesses as well as its strengths.

Editorial Reviews

Review

"Deliberative Democracy is a timely book by an excellent group of scholars that examines an issue of major political importance: the merits of decision making by deliberation. Everyone interested in democratic theory and practice should read this far-ranging, thoughtful, and provocative collection." Amy Gutmann, Princeton University

"This thoughtful and engaging volume makes several significant contributions to our understanding of democratic deliberation. Deliberative Democracy's major insights involve the questions and challenges that it raises for our basic conceptions of deliberation and democratic decision-making. These essays place a number of important issues on the research agenda in this field." Jack Knight, Washington University in St. Louis

Book Description

It is sometimes assumed that voting is the central mechanism for political decision-making. The contributors to this volume focus on an alternative mechanism, that is decision by discussion or deliberation. This volume is characterized by a realistic approach to the issue of deliberative democracy. Rather than assuming that deliberative democracy is always ideal, the authors critically probe its limits and weaknesses as well as its strengths.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 296 pages
• Publisher: Cambridge University Press (March 28, 1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0521592968
• ISBN-13: 978-0521592963
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6 x 0.8 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.3 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #4,658,037 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

22 of 24 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Pericles Redux, September 24, 2000

By 

Simon Thackrah (Perth, Western Australia) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Deliberative Democracy (Cambridge Studies in the Theory of Democracy) (Paperback)

If you were designing a political system from scratch, what decision-making procedures would you enshrine to guarantee fair and efficient outcomes? According to Jon Elster, all possible procedures are permutations of three ideal types: arguing, bargaining and voting.

Voting involves the aggregation of individual preferences. The typical example is the referendum by secret ballot. To be democratic, the principle of majority rule must apply. A fine procedure, we might say. But surely it is misplaced optimism to believe that some sort of invisible hand will guide the mass of probably uninformed voters towards mastery of a complex issue.

Bargaining, on the other hand, involves interaction between participants. The isolation and anonymity of the participants is removed, and decisions are arrived at after those that command the weightiest resources ( eg. money, control of the army, authority over demonstrators ) make an agreement in exchange for various concessions.

Arguing similarly involves participant interaction, but appeals are made to impartial reason rather than partisan interest. The deliberations of the jury room are the model for this procedure. If 'voting' has its roots in Rousseau's theory of democracy and 'bargaining' belongs with the liberal democratic tradition of Dahl and Schumpeter, 'arguing' is firmly rooted in the republican tradition. Elster cites Pericles' eulogy of Athens: instead of a stumbling block, discussion is "an indispensable preliminary to any wise action". The idea turns up throughout history: Burke's speech to the electors of Bristol implies a deliberative model of sorts.

Its most recent incarnation was partly a result of Habermas' influential theory of communicative action. Habermas' claim that speech 'does' things ( from Austin's speech-act theory ), and is primarily oriented towards understanding and consensus, was ideally suited to revamping the theory of deliberative democracy. Despite being an heir of Kant and Marx, Habermas does not really get away from the republican mindset inherent in the model. In this sense, the elitist implications of deliberative democracy worry me . . .

Elster's volume fleshes out some of these worries in a reasonably comprehensive way. Susan Stokes' essay 'Pathologies of Deliberation' is well worth reading, as is James Johnson's 'Arguing for Deliberation: Some Skeptical Considerations'. Elster makes the important distinction between deliberation in the making of a constitution and the level of deliberation in the final constitutional document.

Of the remaining essays, Cass Sunstein's 'Health-Health Trade-Offs' is the stand-out, managing to locate the debate in solid empirical examples. Sunstein's conclusion that must find a balance between 'voting' and 'arguing' struck a chord and reminded me of its applicability to the current hot political topic of GM food: how can we balance voter's 'gut feelings' against GM food with a vigorous scientific and public policy debate which is increasingly pointing to its advantages?

Deliberative democracy is not simply abstract theorising. It is very much located in the politics of modern societies. I strongly recommend this book.