Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- 1 Cultivating Autonomy: The Normative Core of Democracy
- 2 Deliberative Democracy and Autonomous Decision-Making
- 3 Institutionalising Deliberative Democracy through Secondary Associations
- 4 A Dualist Model of Deliberative and Associational Democracy
- 5 Democratising Secondary Associations
- 6 Avoiding the Mischief of Factionalism
- Conclusion
- Bibliography
- Index
Conclusion
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 September 2012
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- 1 Cultivating Autonomy: The Normative Core of Democracy
- 2 Deliberative Democracy and Autonomous Decision-Making
- 3 Institutionalising Deliberative Democracy through Secondary Associations
- 4 A Dualist Model of Deliberative and Associational Democracy
- 5 Democratising Secondary Associations
- 6 Avoiding the Mischief of Factionalism
- Conclusion
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
The book has presented a normative argument for deliberative and associational democracy based upon the justification that such a democracy can cultivate the autonomy of all citizens relatively equally. To get to this conclusion, it was argued that autonomy is the normative core of democracy, that deliberative democracy is the decision-making model most likely to cultivate the autonomy of citizens, and that secondary associations enable deliberative democracy to overcome features of social complexity and be meaningfully institutionalised. If associations are to be mechanisms for deliberative democracy, then a dualist strategy must be employed in order to ensure that deliberation and decision-making are linked. This involves networks of communication within the informal public sphere, which can both transform preferences and set the agenda. The other requirement of the dualist model is access to the legislative arenas, which must be devolved, both territorially and functionally, consistent with the principle of subsidiarity. One possibility is mediating forums, organised by quangos, which bring together representatives from secondary associations to make decisions based upon the norms of deliberative democracy. Such a model differs considerably from neopluralism, as all relevant associations are included and must justify their preferences publicly, which encourages them to consider the interests and opinions of other associations, and in turn reduces the mischief of faction connected to secondary associations. The combination of both deliberative and associational democracy therefore brings out mutual strengths and helps overcome many weaknesses of each model that would be present if they were not combined.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Towards a Deliberative and Associational Democracy , pp. 233 - 236Publisher: Edinburgh University PressPrint publication year: 2008