Power and Citizen Deliberation: The Contingent Impacts of Interests, Ideology, and Status Differences

Abstract

Both advocates and critics of deliberative theory have regarded power relations as problems for public deliberation. Three aspects—interests, ideology and status differences—have been thought to distort deliberative processes. This article discusses a growing body of case studies that indicate that these “problems” may actually, under certain conditions, help facilitate inclusion and equality in deliberation. The crucial task is to specify the mechanisms that explain such unexpected outcomes and the conditions under which they may appear in other cases. This article specifies three such mechanisms that help explain positive outcomes in a number of case studies. The argument for focusing on mechanisms and conditions serves as a correction both to critics who find the theory of deliberation naïve and to advocates who have taken the critique against deliberative theory too lightly.

Keywords

domination, inequality, status, interests, power, deliberation

How to Cite

Holdo M., (2019) “Power and Citizen Deliberation: The Contingent Impacts of Interests, Ideology, and Status Differences”, Journal of Public Deliberation 15(3). doi: https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.340

271

Views

143

Downloads

Share

Authors

Markus Holdo (Uppsala University)

Download

Issue

Dates

Licence

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0

Identifiers

Peer Review

This article has been peer reviewed.

File Checksums (MD5)

  • PDF: ee1e750a630b27f813ca33c9b2c7144e