Deliberative Capacity in the Political and Civic Sphere

In an evolving deliberative system, a crucial question is how deliberation of ordinary citizens differs from that of professional politicians. This study compares the deliberative capacity of citizens and political elites on exactly the same issue, namely a direct democratic initiative in Switzerland on the expulsion of criminal immigrants. In concrete, I perform a quantitative content analysis of the quality of citizen deliberation in an online poll and compare this to the quality of deliberation in representative politics, namely in the non‐public committee and public floor debates in the Swiss parliament. The findings show that political elites reach much higher levels of justification rationality than ordinary citizens, but achieve lower levels in terms of respect. I conclude that citizen deliberation, while useful as an advisory tool, cannot replace serious deliberative scrutiny in representative politics.     

Groups and Deliberation

We present a group‐based approach to the study of deliberation. Deliberation occurs in groups, yet many studies of deliberation do not take the group as a unit of analysis. We argue that group composition and the attendant social dynamics to which they give rise are an important aspect of deliberation. We offer several examples of ways to study these effects, including the interaction of gender composition and the group's decision rule in the context of an experimental study of decisions about justice, the effect of racial composition in simulated juries, and the effect of ideological composition in local meetings. We examine the consequences of these factors on a variety of outcomes, including individuals' private opinion, individuals' behaviour, and group decisions. In conclusion we discuss the implications that group effects have for empirical and normative theories of deliberation.     

Deliberation and Complexity of Thinking. Using the Integrative Complexity Scale to Assess the Deliberative Quality of Minipublics

The quality of deliberative conversations are dependent on citizens compliance with deliberative norms yet there is a lack of methods to assess norm compliance in discussions. Here, the psychological construct of complexity of thinking is claimed to conceptually correspond to the deliberative conversational ideal and adopted as a measurement of deliberative norm compliance. The hypothesis that citizens' complexity of thinking increases as a result of participation in deliberative conversations was tested in a minipublic case study in Sweden. Participants' complexity of thinking was assessed before and after deliberation by responding to an open‐ended question about the topic of debate. Manual coding was used to rate participants integrative complexity. The result confirms the hypothesis, which serves as an indicator of deliberative quality. The study also demonstrates that women get higher increases in complexity, as do highly agreeable individuals and those who hold more liberal views. The findings demonstrate the potential usefulness of integrative complexity as a measurement of deliberative quality.     

Mixing Habermas with Bayes: Methodological and Theoretical Advances in the Study of Deliberation

Two challenges stand out in the study of deliberation: the development of appropriate methodological tools and the development of more unified analytical frameworks. On the one hand, analysing deliberative processes is demanding and time‐consuming; hence we tend to have only few and non‐randomly selected cases at the group or context level. In addition, the real world of deliberation presents us with a complex matrix of nested, cross‐classified, and repeated speakers. This article shows that Bayesian multi‐level modelling provides an elegant way to tackle these methodological problems. On the other hand, we attempt to enrich comparative institutionalism with individual characteristics and psychologically relevant variables (such as group composition). Focusing on Swiss and German parliamentary debates we show that institutional factors ‐ in particular, consensus systems ‐, the gender composition of committees and plenary sessions, and age matter for the quality of deliberation. Furthermore, we also show that partisan affiliation ‐ government or opposition status of MPs ‐ affects deliberative quality and can refine institutional arguments. We conclude that a multi‐level approach to deliberation focusing on contextual and actor‐related characteristics and using Bayesian hierarchical modelling paves the way toward a more advanced understanding ‐ and methodological handling ‐ of deliberative processes.     

Why Give Reason? Measuring Arguing and Bargaining in Survey Research

This article addresses the question of how to define, operationalise and measure empirically the concepts of arguing and bargaining, which are central to the normative theories of deliberative democracy. It points at, and proposes a solution to, one particularly difficult problem with respect to operationalisation, namely the distinction between arguing and cooperative forms of bargaining. The key to capturing this distinction is to look not only at whether, but also at why, actors give reasons for their positions. Motivations partly define arguing and bargaining as types of social decision procedure and it is difficult for researchers within the “empirical turn” of deliberative democratic theory to distinguish the two without studying the motives of the actors. The most straightforward way of analysing motives is asking people about them in interviews. An illustration of how the survey method can be used in practise is given from an ongoing research project on the Council of the European Union.     

There is No Pill for Deliberation: Explaining Discourse Quality in Post‐conflict Communities

Recent experimental research suggests that ordinary citizens are capable of behaving in a democratic and deliberative way in controversial political debates, when given the right instructions. In this study, we test the potential of such instructions in contexts where levels of polarization, conflict and social marginalization are high. Using a randomized controlled experimental design, we test the effect of encouraging members of marginalized and conflict‐affected communities in Colombia to live up to the deliberative ideal, including free participation, mutual respect, justification of arguments, and contributing to the common good. Results indicate that deliberative instructions have a positive effect on intervention levels, but fail to increase discourse quality. We also find that socio‐economic differences (especially education and gender), as well as inter‐group trust dynamics, explain much of the variation in discourse quality. Promoting deliberative democracy under unfavorable conditions might therefore require a combination of short‐term policy measures aimed at increasing communal trust, long‐term efforts to improve schooling levels, and ensuring constraint‐free participation. There is, however, no treatment yet that can ensure deliberation success.     

Emile Durkheim zwischen Republikanismus und deliberativer Demokratie

Emile Durkheim has written only a few sociological texts on democracy, but they seem to remain important both for neo-republican theories and for the idea of deliberative democracy. The paper tries to explain this paradox through a reconstruction of Durkheim’s conception of political democracy, which implies three channels of communication: within the state, between the state and civil society and within civil society. The first one is the only one which rests upon deliberation, in the two meanings of this word in French (collective discussion and decision). The paternalist dimension of Durkheim’s conception clearly appears in the way he understands the typical pathologies of democracy. This paternalist dimension is also to be found in neo-republican theories. Conversely, the absence of the notion of public sphere distances Durkheim from the concept of deliberative democracy, even though he develops a non-substantialist notion of democracy and gives an important role to reflection in political communication. However, discussing Durkheim makes it possible to underline some of the problems and challenges which a conception of deliberative democracy has to face.     

Malaysia's Foreign Policy: The First Fifty Years: Alignment,Neutralism, Islamism

Abstract

What is the role of new media in driving political change in China? How do we understand the interaction of rapid increases in connectivity, regime censorship and democratic outcomes? This article seeks to assess the democratic implications of new media in China through the lens of three key and nested criteria derived from general theories of deliberative democracy: information access, rational-critical deliberation and mechanisms of vertical accountability. The key finding is that connectivity expands political opportunity. How this opportunity is exploited is up to users, who often vary widely in their political preferences, values, and norms of behaviour. The results are multiple mechanisms of change taking place simultaneously and the development of a more interactive and pluralistic public sphere. While China obviously still has to develop far more formalised and institutionalised mechanisms for managing state-society relations, political pluralism in the form of online deliberation might be considered a foundational condition for a more interactive and liberalised political order rooted in greater public deliberation and societal feedback. Moderate forms of discourse and societal feedback are tenuous and increasingly exist in a chaotic and diversified online discourse defined equally as much by new methods of authoritarian propaganda and virulent nationalist ideas.     

Referendums Are Never Merely Referendums: On the Need to Make Popular Vote Processes More Deliberative

While there is much to command about Cheneval and el‐Wakil's ( 2018 ) proposal in favor of a nuanced and fine‐grained approach to popular vote processes as well as their specific defense of optional, bottom‐up, and binding referendums as democratic supplements to our existing representative institutions, I argue that their approach does not pay sufficient attention to the pre‐voting phase of the process that has to do with the laundering of raw preferences into generalized and informed ones, namely deliberation. I offer two suggestions to render the voting occuring in referenda more deliberative, namely the pre‐voting use of what I call “open mini‐publics” and that of Citizens’ Initiative Review. I also defend the use of top‐down and mandatory referenda in the context of a more open and technologically empowered deliberative democracy.     

Conserving the Councillor: A Case for Widespread Local Officeholding

Guided by participatory and deliberative conceptions of democracy, local governments have embraced the need for increased citizen participation in decision-making. Yet, at the same time, a systematic reduction in the number of councillor seats has seen a precipitous decline in opportunities to participate in the council chamber. With specific reference to the Australian case, this paper seeks to explain this incongruity, suggesting that the answer lies in the wide adoption of democratic theorists' narrow conceptualisation of the role of the councillor. Viewed solely as representatives, whether in the corporate, mirror, or delegate mode, councillors are valued only insofar as they prove instrumental to an efficient and responsive system of governance. Their participation, itself, is not intrinsically valued. Drawing on novel and extant empirical evidence to demonstrate the participatory virtues of officeholding, this paper argues that when due regard is afforded to councillors' participatory role, a normative case for widespread — and more inclusive — officeholding emerges.     

When War Adversaries Talk: The Experimental Effect of Engagement Rules on Postconflict Deliberation

A set of discussion groups including leftist ex‐guerrillas and rightist ex‐paramilitaries in Colombia shows the limits for democratic deliberation in postconflict societies, but also points to ways that outcomes closer to the deliberative ideal might be obtained. A total of 342 ex‐combatants agreed to sit down and talk politics under a number of experimental conditions, using three different protocols of engagement. Results show that consensus rule fosters simultaneously a more reasoned and common‐good–oriented, and less self‐interested type of discussion when compared to majority rule and unstructured “free talk.” Nevertheless, while it might be desirable to promote a better quality of deliberation in divided societies, it does not necessarily prevent antagonists’ tendency to polarize.     

Scaling up Deliberation: Testing the Potential of Mini‐Publics to Enhance the Deliberative Capacity of Citizens

This paper tests the possibility of embedding the benefits of minipublic deliberation within a wider voting public. We test whether a statement such as those derived from a Citizens’ Initiative Review (CIR) can influence voters who did not participate in the pre‐referendum minipublic deliberation. This experiment was implemented in advance of the 2018 Irish referendum on blasphemy, one of a series of social‐moral referendums following the recommendations of a deliberative assembly. This is the first application of a CIR‐style voting aid in a real world minipublic and referendum outside of the US and also the first application to what is principally a moral question. We found that survey respondents exposed to information about the minipublic and its findings significantly increased their policy knowledge. Further, exposing respondents to minipublic statements in favour and against the policy measure increased their empathy for the other side of the policy debate.     

Patrolling the Boundaries of Politics: Collingwood, Political Analysis and Political Action

Debates over whether a certain thing is (or ought to be) construed as 'political' are frequent and frequently interminable. This article argues that approaches to the proper understanding, scope and application of political concepts should recognise that they are both normative and contestable and also that, because they are employed by both theorist and theorised, they can never be sharply defined. It is argued that many debates achieve no theoretical closure because the terms of discussion are confined by a certain understanding of concepts as empirical and classificatory. This article examines these issues by using the work of R.G. Collingwood to suggest that conceptual overlap is inevitable and also that the theoretical analysis of politics should distinguish between the empirical and the theoretical phase of the concept. Philosophically, politics is not a separate sphere of activity but a dimension of all activity, and the correct way to understand politics is to understand it as activity, not as substance. For certain empirical purposes we categorise some things as political and others as non-political, but in doing so we should be careful whether we are doing so philosophically, historically or through stipulative definition. This article does not seek to cover all ramifications of the debate or its later literature, but to suggest that Collingwood's approach has something to contribute to the analysis of political concepts.     

The Fairness of Media Coverage in Question: An Analysis of Referendum Campaigns on Welfare State Issues in Switzerland

Abstract: The mass media are assigned an important role in political campaigns on popular votes. This article asks how the press communicates political issues to citizens during referendum campaigns, and whether some minimal criteria for successful public deliberation are met. The press coverage of all 24 ballot votes on welfare state issues from 1995 to 2004 in Switzerland is examined, distinguishing seven criteria to judge how news coverage compares to idealized notions of the media’s role in the democratic process: coverage intensity, time for public deliberation, balance in media coverage, source independence and inclusiveness, substantive coverage, and spatial homogeneity. The results of our quantitative analysis suggest that the press does fulfil these normative requirements to a reasonable extent and that fears about biased or deceitful media treatment of ballot issues are not well‐founded. However, some potential for optimizing the coverage of referendum campaigns by the Swiss press does exist.     

The Ends of Deliberation: Meta‐consensus and Inter‐subjective Rationality as Ideal Outcomes

Normative deliberative theory has contributed much to an understanding of ideal procedural standards, but there is considerable uncertainty regarding the appropriate nature of desired deliberative outcomes. In this paper we identify two inter‐related concepts of meta‐consensus and inter‐subjective rationality as outcomes that an authentic deliberative process ought to produce. Importantly, these deliberative ends are consistent with ideal deliberative procedure. They are also empirically tractable, where preference transformation can be described in terms of underlying values, and judgments. Methods for assessing deliberative ends are provided and demonstrated using a case study.     

Deliberative democracy and the politics of traditional leadership in South Africa: A case of despotic domination or democratic deliberation?

A heated debate developed in South Africa as to the meaning of ‘deliberative democracy’. This debate is fanned by the claims of ‘traditional leaders’ that their ways of village-level deliberation and consensus-oriented decision-making are not only a superior process for the African continent as it evolves from pre-colonial tradition, but that it represents a form of democracy that is more authentic than the Western version. Proponents suggest that traditional ways of deliberation are making a come-back because imported Western models of democracy that focus on the state and state institutions miss the fact that in African societies state institutions are often seen as illegitimate or simply absent from people's daily lives. In other words, traditional leadership structures are more appropriate to African contexts than their Western rivals. Critics suggest that traditional leaders, far from being authentic democrats, are power-hungry patriarchs and authoritarians attempting to both re-invent their political, social and economic power (frequently acquired under colonial and apartheid rule) and re-assert their control over local-level resources at the expense of the larger community. In this view, the concept of deliberative democracy is being misused as a legitimating device for a politics of patriarchy and hierarchy, which is the opposite of the meaning of the term in the European and US sense. This article attempts to contextualise this debate and show how the efforts by traditional leaders to capture an intermediary position between rural populations and the state is fraught with conflicts and contradictions when it comes to forming a democratic state and society in post-apartheid South Africa.     

Contesting and negotiating religion and ethnic identity in Post-Soviet Kyrgyzstan

Post-Soviet Central Asia has inherited a set of circumstances conducive to the revitalization of religion. The renewal of Muslim awareness and identity in Central Asia may not be surprising, but the growth of Christianity is, especially in its Protestant form within indigenous Muslim communities. This article, based on qualitative field research, reviews one example of this development: the process of conversion to Protestant Christianity among Muslim Kyrgyz in Kyrgyzstan. A prominent aspect of this social movement has been the ways in which Kyrgyz Christians have entered into a dynamic process of engaging with issues of identity and what it means to be Kyrgyz – a process that has sought to locate their new Christian religious identity within, rather than on the margins of, familial and ethnic identity, and one that challenges the normative understanding of Kyrgyz identity: that to be Kyrgyz is to be Muslim. While providing the context for Kyrgyz conversion, this discussion primarily focuses on the way Kyrgyz Christians utilize a number of different discursive strategies to contest normative Kyrgyz identity constructs and to legitimize a Kyrgyz Christian identity.     

Deliberating in difficult times: lessons from public forums in Turkey in the aftermath of the Gezi protests

ABSTRACT

This study examines the prospects of public deliberation in a semi-authoritarian political context and unfavourable political cultural setting through an in-depth analysis of three public forums taking place in the aftermath of the 2013 Gezi Protests. This analysis shows that while the gains of deliberation in terms of influencing policy decision-making are limited, significant gains can still be reached in terms of creating a more civic public and a more strongly connected civil society that keeps its linkages with social movements. The study also finds that such forums can help create dialogue among distant segments of the society even though such interactions are still rather modest. These findings have implications for public deliberation in other non-deliberative settings as they open new areas of research in terms of the prospects of such forums in increasing social capital, pluralism and civicness.     

An Ignored Relationship: The Role of the Lebanese Armenian Diaspora in Conflict Resolution (1975–90)

This research examines the role of the Lebanese Armenian diaspora (LAD) during the unstructured conflict that was the second Lebanese civil war, which extended from 1975 until 1990. This research has two aims. The normative aim is to find patterns of diasporic activity in conflict such as to support positive activities and discourage negative activities. A second is to focus on an empirical case study of the LAD in order to demonstrate that the diaspora encouraged peace-making initiatives and discouraged peace-wrecking. Importantly, the LAD as a political actor in Lebanese society played a positive role in promoting dialogue, cooperation, conflict resolution and reconciliation and had a significant impact on politics in general and conflict behaviour in particular. This study concludes that it is worth studying diaspora behaviour in conflict because a diaspora could be a powerful actor in conflict resolution and peace-making.     

Introduction: German Party Membership in the 21st Century

The party membership decline experienced in Germany in the last decades raises a number of theoretical, empirical, and normative questions, a selection of which is addressed in this special issue of German Politics. In this introduction, we summarise some of the central arguments and findings presented. Although the individual articles take various perspectives and present specific insights, as a whole they allow for drawing some consequences: Firstly, party membership decline seems to be irreversible, secondly, it does neither imply an inadequate organisational linkage between society and state institutions nor, thirdly, a threat to democracy.