|
Showing 1 - 7 of
7 matches in All Departments
"Debating Deliberative Democracy" explores the nature and value of
deliberation, the feasibility and desirability of consensus on
contentious issues, the implications of institutional complexity
and cultural diversity for democratic decision making, and the
significance of voting and majority rule in deliberative
arrangements.
Investigates the nature and value of deliberation, the feasibility
and desirability of consensus on contentious issues, the
implications of institutional complexity and cultural diversity for
democratic decision making, and the significance of voting and
majority rule in deliberative arrangements.
Includes focus on institutions and makes reference to empirical
work.
Engages a debate that cuts across political science, philosophy,
the law and other disciplines.
Democracy requires a connection to the 'will of the people'. What
does that mean in a world of 'fake news', relentless advocacy,
dialogue mostly among the like-minded, and massive spending to
manipulate public opinion? What kind of opinion can the public have
under such conditions? What would democracy be like if the people
were really thinking in depth about the policies they must live
with? If they really 'deliberated' with good information about
their political choices? This book argues that 'deliberative
democracy' is not utopian. It is a practical solution to many of
democracy's ills. It can supplement existing institutions with
practical reforms. It can apply at all levels of government and for
many different kinds of policy choices. This volume speaks to a
recurring dilemma: listen to the people and get the angry voices of
populism or rely on widely distrusted elites and get policies that
seem out of touch with the public's concerns. Instead, there are
methods for getting a representative and thoughtful public voice
that is really worth listening to. Democracy is under siege in most
countries, where democratic institutions have low approval and face
a resurgent threat from authoritarian regimes. Deliberative
democracy can provide an antidote and can reinvigorate our
democratic politics. Democracy When the People Are Thinking draws
on the author's research with many collaborators on 'Deliberative
Polling'-a process conducted in 27 countries on six continents. It
contributes both to political theory and to the empirical study of
public opinion and participation. It should interest anyone
concerned about the future of democracy and how it can be
revitalized.
Two leading political thinkers offer an audacious proposal to
energize the electoral process Bruce Ackerman and James Fishkin
argue that Americans can revitalize their democracy and break the
cycle of cynical media manipulation that is crippling public life.
They propose a new national holiday-Deliberation Day-for each
presidential election year. On this day people throughout the
country will meet in public spaces and engage in structured debates
about issues that divide the candidates in the upcoming
presidential election. Deliberation Day isa bold new proposal, but
it builds on a host of smaller experiments. Over the past decade,
Fishkin has initiated Deliberative Polling events in the United
States and elsewhere that bring random and representative samples
of voters together for discussion of key political issues. In these
events, participants greatly increase their understanding of the
issues and often change their minds on the best course of action.
Deliberation Day isnot merely a novel idea but a feasible reform.
Ackerman and Fishkin consider the economic, organizational, and
political questions raised by their proposal and explore its
relationship to the larger ideals of liberal democracy.
Ours is an era of stunted public discourse, where instant polls,
900 numbers, orchestrated petitions, and talk-show campaigning
appear to have overwhelmed participatory democracy. What has become
of the freely reasoned public debate and informed "consent of the
governed" that, as cherished principle, we hold will produce better
leaders and better public decisions? Where-or what-is the voice of
the people todoay? In this lively book James Fishkin evaluates
modern democratic practices and explains how the voice of the
people has struggled to make itself heard in the past. He tells a
fascinating story of changing concepts and parctices of democracy,
with examples that range from ancient Sparta to America's founders
to the first Gallup polls to Ross Perot. He then develops the
rationale for a new method-the "deliberative opinion poll"-that
uses modern media and survey research to legitimately rediscover
the people's voice. Fishkin's proposal for televised deliberative
opinion polls has already been realized twice by the British
television network Channel 4, and he discusses its implementation
in the book. In January 1996, his deliberative poll will be seen in
action in a "National Issues Convention" to be broadcast by PBS on
the eve of the American presidential primary season. During this
broadcast, a national random sample of citizens will interact with
presidential contenders in order to reflect and vote on the issues
and candidates. Fishkin discusses the pros and cons of this
important event, giving behind-the-scenes details about
preparations for it. Here then is a compelling story of citizen
deliberation from ancient Athens to the present, setting the
context for future deliberative polls and related efforts to
reinvigorate our public dialogue.
People around the world are agitating for democracy and individual
rights, but there is no consensus on a theory of liberal democracy
that might guide them. What are the first principles of a just
society? What political theory should shape public policy in such a
society? In this book, James S. Fishkin offers a new basis for
answering these questions by proposing the ideal of a
"self-reflective society"-a political culture in which citizens are
able to decide their own fate through unconstrained dialogue.
Fishkin offers a comprehensive critique of liberal political
theories that do not satisfy the requirements for a self-reflective
society. He then explains his own theory of liberalism, showing
that the freely self-examining society he advocates can provide the
key to issues of political legitimacy and social justice. Fishkin
proposes practical applications of his theory that would lead to
more participatory democracy. Among these are deliberative opinion
polls that would allow ordinary citizens to explore issues directly
with candidates before elections, and vouchers that would allow
them to organize representation for their interests. Fishkin
examines a broad range of topics from the fresh perspective of a
self-reflective society: utility and its limits, justice between
generations, conflicting ideals of democracy, equal opportunity,
the connections between theory and public policy, the notion of
moral progress, and the bases for political obligation. His book
makes a new contribution to central debates in moral, political,
and legal philosophy.
This book proposes a new kind of democracy for the modern era, one
that not only gives citizens more power but also allows them more
opportunities to exercise this power thoughtfully. James S. Fishkin
here suggests an innovative solution to the problem of inadequate
deliberation, in particular within our presidential nomination
system. His reform involves a well-publicized national caucus in
which a representative sample of American citizens would interact
directly with presidential contenders in order to reflect and vote
on the issues and candidates. In adapting democracy to the large
scale nation state, says Fishkin, Americans have previously had two
choices. They could participate directly through primaries and
referenda or they could depend on elite groups-such as party
conventions and legislatures-to represent them. The first choice
offers political equality but little chance for deliberation; the
second offers the participants an opportunity to deliberate but
provides less political equality for the electorate. The national
caucus that Fishkin proposes-an example of what he calls a
"deliberative opinion poll"-combines deliberation with political
equality and reveals what the public would think if it had better
conditions and information with which to explore and define the
issues with the candidates. Arguing persuasively for the usefulness
of deliberative opinion polls, Fishkin places them within the
history of democratic theory and practice, exploring models of
democracy ranging form ancient Athens and the debates of the
American founders to contemporary transitions toward democracy in
Eastern Europe.
Three common assumptions of both liberal theory and political
debate are the autonomy of the family, the principle of merit, and
equality of life chances. Fishkin argues that even under the best
conditions, commitment to any two of these principles precludes the
third. "A brief survey and brilliant critique of contemporary
liberal political theory.... A must for all political theory or
public policy collections." -Choice "The strong points of Fishkin's
book are many. He raises provocative issues, locates them within a
broader theoretical framework, and demonstrates an urgent need for
liberals to set certain priorities. His main message-that
liberalism has radical implications for ordinary life-needs to be
heard by many." --Virginia L. Warren, Michigan Law Review "A highly
original and powerfully argued book.... Fishkin is undoubtedly
right, and his warning needs to be taken seriously.... This is not
a book that catechizes us about what we should believe concerning
the practicalities of distributive justice. It is a book that
advises us about how we need to think about beliefs that are
already popular dogmas, in the interest of making sense." -James
Gaffney, America James S. Fishkin is associate professor of
political science at Yale University. He is also the author of The
Limits of Obligation and Beyond Subjective Morality.
|
|