La madurez de la democracia deliberativa
Fecha
2016-06-27
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Universidad EAFIT
Resumen
Descripción
Reviso tres maneras diferentes como los ideales de la democracia deliberativa han cambiado a la luz de las preocupaciones prácticas sobre su viabilidad, es decir, haciendo cada vez más importante el problema de cómo este ideal puede acercarse a sociedades caracterizadas por profundos desacuerdos, problemas sociales de enorme complejidad e instrumentos inoperantes en sus instituciones existentes. En primer lugar, las teorías de la democracia deliberativa enfatizan el proceso mismo de la deliberación, y no sus condiciones y procedimientos ideales y contrafácticos. En segundo lugar, los demócratas deliberativos se interesan cada vez más en los problemas de la institucionalización, en hacer del voto, la regla de mayorías, la representación, los tribunales y el derecho constitucional, instituciones más deliberativas, en pro de una mayor democracia directa. En tercer lugar, los deliberativistas se ocupan de examinar y comparar los diferentes escenarios y procedimientos de la deliberación, señalando problemas empíricos y obstáculos que no siempre pueden anticiparse al recurrir únicamente a argumentos conceptuales.
I will be reviewing three different ways in which the ideals of deliberative democracy have changed in light of practical concerns of feasibility, that is, by making the problem of how this ideal would be approximated increasingly central in societies characterized by deep disagreements, social problems of enormous complexity and also consider the blunt instruments of available institutions. First, theories of deliberative democracy have come to emphasize the process of deliberation itself, rather than its ideal and counterfactual conditions and procedures. Second, deliberative democrats have become increasingly interested in the problems of institutionalization, of making institutions such as voting and majority rule, representation, courts and constitutional law more deliberative rather than rejecting them for more direct democracy. Third, these aforementioned democrats are concerned with examining and comparing different settings and procedures of deliberation, pointing out empirical problems and obstacles that cannot always be anticipated by conceptual argument alone.
I will be reviewing three different ways in which the ideals of deliberative democracy have changed in light of practical concerns of feasibility, that is, by making the problem of how this ideal would be approximated increasingly central in societies characterized by deep disagreements, social problems of enormous complexity and also consider the blunt instruments of available institutions. First, theories of deliberative democracy have come to emphasize the process of deliberation itself, rather than its ideal and counterfactual conditions and procedures. Second, deliberative democrats have become increasingly interested in the problems of institutionalization, of making institutions such as voting and majority rule, representation, courts and constitutional law more deliberative rather than rejecting them for more direct democracy. Third, these aforementioned democrats are concerned with examining and comparing different settings and procedures of deliberation, pointing out empirical problems and obstacles that cannot always be anticipated by conceptual argument alone.