IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/218853.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Emanzipation oder Reaktion: Wie konservativ ist die deliberative Demokratie?
[Emancipation or Reaction: How Conservative is Deliberative Democracy?]

Author

Listed:
  • Schäfer, Andreas
  • Merkel, Wolfgang

Abstract

Ist die deliberative Demokratie ein konservatives Modell? Beruht es auf Mechanismen, die in systematischer Weise seinen emanzipatorischen Anspruch unterminieren? Der Aufsatz beantwortet diese Frage im Anschluss an KritikerInnen der deliberativen Demokratie in Hinblick auf drei Dimensionen. Die zeitliche Dimension betreffend wird untersucht, inwieweit das deliberative Modell einen den Status quo bewahrenden Charakter hat. In der sachlichen Dimension wird eine Tendenz zur Entpolitisierung diskutiert. Für die soziale Dimension thematisiert der Aufsatz die potenzielle Exklusion bestimmter sozialer Gruppen und ihrer Perspektiven aus dem Deliberationsprozess. In Auseinandersetzung mit einschlägigen Ansätzen der deliberativen Demokratietheorie und mit Befunden der empirischen Deliberationsforschung gelangt der Aufsatz zu einem differenzierten Bild. Demnach lassen sich potenziell konservierende Tendenzen in der deliberativen Demokratie auffinden. Gleichzeitig wird argumentiert, dass diese Tendenzen vermeidbar sind, wenn einerseits das genuin kritische Potenzial deliberativer Praxis gegenüber anderen Elementen des Modells hervorgehoben und andererseits die Notwendigkeit der institutionellen Einbettung deliberativer Prozesse in Verfahren der repräsentativen Demokratie berücksichtigt wird.

Suggested Citation

  • Schäfer, Andreas & Merkel, Wolfgang, 2020. "Emanzipation oder Reaktion: Wie konservativ ist die deliberative Demokratie? [Emancipation or Reaction: How Conservative is Deliberative Democracy?]," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 61(3), pages 449-472.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:218853
    DOI: 10.1007/s11615-020-00232-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/218853/1/Full-text-article-Sch%c3%a4fer-et-al-Emanzipation-oder-Reaktion.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11615-020-00232-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pogrebinschi, Thamy & Ryan, Matt, 2018. "Moving beyond input legitimacy: When do democratic innovations affect policy making?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 57(1), pages 135-152.
    2. James N. Druckman & Kjersten R. Nelson, 2003. "Framing and Deliberation: How Citizens' Conversations Limit Elite Influence," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(4), pages 729-745, October.
    3. Merkel, Wolfgang, 2014. "Is capitalism compatible with democracy?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 8(2), pages 109-128.
    4. Claudia Landwehr, 2015. "Democratic Meta-Deliberation: Towards Reflective Institutional Design," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 63, pages 38-54, April.
    5. Marlène Gerber, 2015. "Equal Partners in Dialogue? Participation Equality in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (Europolis)," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 63, pages 110-130, April.
    6. Warren, Mark E., 2017. "A Problem-Based Approach to Democratic Theory," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 111(1), pages 39-53, February.
    7. White, Jonathan & Ypi, Lea, 2011. "On Partisan Political Justification," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(2), pages 381-396, May.
    8. Karpowitz, Christopher F. & Mendelberg, Tali & Shaker, Lee, 2012. "Gender Inequality in Deliberative Participation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(3), pages 533-547, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Scott Radnitz, 2018. "Historical narratives and post-conflict reconciliation: An experiment in Azerbaijan," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(2), pages 154-174, March.
    2. Fanni Bársony & György Lengyel & Éva Perpék, 2020. "Enclave deliberation and common-pool resources: an attempt to apply Civic Preference Forum on community gardening in Hungary," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 687-708, April.
    3. O’Brien, Diana Z. & Rickne, Johanna, 2016. "Gender Quotas and Women's Political Leadership," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 110(1), pages 112-126, February.
    4. Bloemraad, Irene & Voss, Kim & Silva, Fabiana, 2014. "Framing the Immigrant Movement as about Rights, Family, or Economics: Which Appeals Resonate and for Whom?," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt3b32w33p, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    5. Michaela Maier & Silke Adam & Jürgen Maier, 2012. "The impact of identity and economic cues on citizens’ EU support: An experimental study on the effects of party communication in the run-up to the 2009 European Parliament elections," European Union Politics, , vol. 13(4), pages 580-603, December.
    6. Justin Wedeking, 2010. "Supreme Court Litigants and Strategic Framing," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 617-631, July.
    7. Chen, Hongtao & Fang, Xiumei & Xiang, Erwei & Ji, Xiaojia & An, Maolin, 2023. "Do online media and investor attention affect corporate environmental information disclosure?Evidence from Chinese listed companies," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1022-1040.
    8. Neimanns, Erik & Blossey, Nils, 2022. "From media-party linkages to ownership concentration causes of cross-national variation in media outlets' economic positioning," MPIfG Discussion Paper 22/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    9. Stephanie Sardelis & Joshua A Drew, 2016. "Not “Pulling up the Ladder”: Women Who Organize Conference Symposia Provide Greater Opportunities for Women to Speak at Conservation Conferences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-20, July.
    10. Briguglio, Marie & Delaney, Liam & Wood, Alex, 2018. "Partisanship, priming and participation in public-good schemes," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 136-150.
    11. Nick Vlahos, 2023. "BEYOND THE TRIAGING OF NEGLECTED THINGS: Connecting Place and Participation Across an Urban System," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 563-579, July.
    12. Bodea, Cristina & Kerner, Andrew, 2022. "Fear of inflation and gender representation in central banking," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    13. David Gindis & Abraham A. Singer, 2023. "The Corporate Baby in the Bathwater: Why Proposals to Abolish Corporate Personhood Are Misguided," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(4), pages 983-997, April.
    14. De Paola, Maria & Lombardo, Rosetta & Pupo, Valeria & Scoppa, Vincenzo, 2021. "Do Women Shy Away from Public Speaking? A Field Experiment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    15. Qingjiang Yao & Zhaoxi Liu & Lowndes F. Stephens, 2020. "Exploring the dynamics in the environmental discourse: the longitudinal interaction among public opinion, presidential opinion, media coverage, policymaking in 3 decades and an integrated model of med," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 14-28, March.
    16. Meir Kalech & Moshe Koppel & Abraham Diskin & Eli Rohn & Inbal Roshanski, 2020. "Formation of Parties and Coalitions in Multiple Referendums," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 723-745, August.
    17. Manuel Bagues & Mauro Sylos-Labini & Natalia Zinovyeva, 2017. "Does the Gender Composition of Scientific Committees Matter?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1207-1238, April.
    18. Kim Strandberg & Kim Backström & Janne Berg & Thomas Karv, 2021. "Democratically Sustainable Local Development? The Outcomes of Mixed Deliberation on a Municipal Merger on Participants’ Social Trust, Political Trust, and Political Efficacy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-17, June.
    19. Rebecca J. Romsdahl, 2020. "Deliberative framing: opening up discussions for local-level public engagement on climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(2), pages 145-163, September.
    20. Ilyana Kuziemko & Michael I. Norton & Emmanuel Saez & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2015. "How Elastic Are Preferences for Redistribution? Evidence from Randomized Survey Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(4), pages 1478-1508, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:218853. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.