Suchergebnisse

Examines the innovative potential of the Internet for democracy as applied to deliberative transnationalism, asserting, however, that this public sphere requires innovative institutions. Keeping in mind deliberative democracy, a conceptual clarification of the conditions for a public sphere is provided. It is contended that for the public sphere to exist in large & highly differentiated modern societies, technological mediation of public communication is needed; this necessitates finding indirect & mediated alternatives to the public sphere as face-to-face public forum. Dialogue, when it can expand & transform the conditions of communicative interaction, is taken as a key feature of any public sphere. How computer-mediated communication extends the forum is then addressed in terms of how the Internet, with its many-to-many communicative potential, can fulfill the requirements of publicity. The Internet opens a space for a "distributive," ie, a transnational public of publics, rather than unified public sphere with new forms of interaction; the public sphere becomes decentered, where the Internet becomes a public sphere only through agents who engage in reflexive & democratic activity, ie, dialogue, with the defining characteristic that all participants can propose & incur mutual obligations. This reflexive agency would foster the creation of software capable of turning networks into publics using the distributive processes of communication to transcend space & time limitations inherent in national public spheres & state forms. However, some remarks are offered on whether the Internet has the capacity to escape the manner in which state sovereignty organizes space & time, highlighting the thought of Will Kymlicka. The European Union is taken as a case study to explore the democratic deficit of transnational & international institutions, focusing on proposals indicative of how a polycentric form of publicity night allow a more directly deliberative form of governance. Considered in closing is whether the kind of public sphere generated in transnational politics might spur new institutional forms of democracy that confront the problems of time and space concomitant with global democracy, eg, collective identity. 26 References. J. Zendejas

Examines the innovative potential of the Internet for democracy as applied to deliberative transnationalism, asserting, however, that this public sphere requires innovative institutions. Keeping in mind deliberative democracy, a conceptual clarification of the conditions for a public sphere is provided. It is contended that for the public sphere to exist in large & highly differentiated modern societies, technological mediation of public communication is needed; this necessitates finding indirect & mediated alternatives to the public sphere as face-to-face public forum. Dialogue, when it can expand & transform the conditions of communicative interaction, is taken as a key feature of any public sphere. How computer-mediated communication extends the forum is then addressed in terms of how the Internet, with its many-to-many communicative potential, can fulfill the requirements of publicity. The Internet opens a space for a "distributive," ie, a transnational public of publics, rather than unified public sphere with new forms of interaction; the public sphere becomes decentered, where the Internet becomes a public sphere only through agents who engage in reflexive & democratic activity, ie, dialogue, with the defining characteristic that all participants can propose & incur mutual obligations. This reflexive agency would foster the creation of software capable of turning networks into publics using the distributive processes of communication to transcend space & time limitations inherent in national public spheres & state forms. However, some remarks are offered on whether the Internet has the capacity to escape the manner in which state sovereignty organizes space & time, highlighting the thought of Will Kymlicka. The European Union is taken as a case study to explore the democratic deficit of transnational & international institutions, focusing on proposals indicative of how a polycentric form of publicity night allow a more directly deliberative form of governance. Considered in closing is whether the kind of public sphere generated in transnational politics might spur new institutional forms of democracy that confront the problems of time and space concomitant with global democracy, eg, collective identity. 26 References. J. Zendejas