No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Deliberative Democracy
Bringing the System Back In
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2026
Abstract
The current crisis of democracy today is a crisis in the steering capacities of political systems as conventional representative institutions are seen as increasingly unresponsive. This has engendered a crisis of legitimacy as governing processes that affect daily life are seen as increasingly out of reach for citizens who find themselves with little or no influence over government administration, and increasingly globalized flows of markets and communication that belie the control of sovereign borders. The return to deliberative democracy as a response to the crisis has turned toward systems thinking within deliberation. Although this literature has primarily retained its normative language, approaching the crisis of democracy in terms of its empirical steering capacities is necessary to connect deliberation with its democratic aspirations. In addition to the language of steering capacities, these elements include an empirically-grounded account of the operation of power and authority as well the role of rhetoric as central rather than operating in the shadow of deliberation.
Information
- Type
- Which Crisis of Democracy?
- Information
- Democratic Theory , Volume 1 , Issue 2: The Crisis of Democracy: Which Crisis? Which Democracy? , December 2014 , pp. 85 - 94
- Copyright
- Copyright © Democratic Theory 2014
References
Armingeon, Klaus, and Kai, Guthmann. 2014. “Democracy in Crisis? The Declining Support for National Democracy in European Countries, 2007–2011.” European Journal of Political Research 53 (3): 423–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla. 1996. “Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy.” Pp. 67–94 in Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political, ed. Benhabib, Seyla. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biesecker, Barbara A. 2000. Addressing Postmodernity: Kenneth Burke, Rhetoric, and a Theory of Social Change. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Burke, Kenneth. 1969. A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley: University of California Press. 10.1525/9780520353237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalton, Russell J. 2004. Democratic Challenges, Democratic Choices: The Erosion of Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 2010. Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Easton, David. 1965a. A Framework for Political Analysis. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1965b. A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Fischer, Frank. 2003. Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fish, Stanley Eugene. 1999. The Trouble with Principle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gunnell, John G. 1986. Between Philosophy and Politics: The Alienation of Political Theory. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
Gutmann, Amy, and Dennis, Frank Thompson. 1996. Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1985. The Theory of Communicative Action: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Malden: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1990. Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1996a. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1996b. “Three Normative Models of Democracy.” Pp. 21–30 in Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political, ed. Benhabib, Seyla. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
He, Baogang. 2014. “Deliberative Culture and Politics: The Persistence of Authoritarian Deliberation in China.” Political Theory 42 (1): 58–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, Carolyn M. 2006. “Integrated Deliberation: Reconciling Civil Society's Dual Role in Deliberative Democracy.” Political Studies 54 (3): 486–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keane, John. 2013. Democracy and Media Decadence. New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781107300767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, Adrian. 2008. Democratic Piety: Complexity, Conflict and Violence. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 10.1515/9780748633661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas. 2013. Theory of Society, Vol. 2. Redwood City: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 2011. Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, David, and Graham, Smith. 2013. Two Ideals of Deliberation? Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. SSRN Scholarly Paper. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2301672 (accessed 25 August 2014).Google Scholar
Parkinson, John, and Jane, Mansbridge. 2012. Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale. New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139178914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poster, Mark. 1990. The Mode of Information: Postructuralism and Social Context. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Poster, Mark. 2006. Information Please: Culture and Politics in the Age of Digital Machines. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Tang, Beibei, and John, S. Dryzek. 2014. “Introduction: The Continuing Search for Deliberation and Participation in China.” Journal of Chinese Political Science 19: 109–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar