Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis paper examines the potential role of deliberative democracy in constitutional processes of higher law-making, either for the founding of constitutions or for constitutional change. It defines deliberative democracy as the combination of political equality and deliberation and situates this form of democracy in contrast to a range of alternatives. It then considers two contrasting processes—elite deliberation and plebiscitary mass democracy (embodied in referenda) as approaches to higher law-making that employ deliberation without political equality or political equality without deliberation. It finally turns to some institutional designs that might achieve both fundamental values at the same time, or in the process of realizing a sequence of choices.

This article is aimed at expanding the democratic tool kit of mechanisms for public consultation. It is aimed at showing that it is indeed possible to combine inclusiveness & thoughtfulness -- rather than force us to choose between them. The author's institutional innovations for combining the two democratic aspirations are deliberative polls & Deliberation day. The article shows that these mechanisms of public consultation manage to avoid contentions that mass participation undermines collective thoughtfulness. Adapted from the source document.

Converse's seminal 1964 article explored three crucial limitations of public opinion as it is revealed in conventional polls: information levels, belief systems, & nonattitudes. These limitations are significant from the standpoint of democratic theory, but it is possible to design forms of public consultation & of social-science research that will reveal what public opinion might be like if these limitations were somehow overcome. Deliberative Polling is an effort to explore the contours of such a counterfactual public opinion-one that is more informed & engaged than is the mass public. Doing so requires going beyond "polling alone.". Adapted from the source document.