Discourse Theory Of Democracy Research Articles

Constitutional Patriotism as Europe’s Public Philosophy? On the Responsiveness of Post-National Law

This paper scrutinizes Jurgen Habermas's concept of constitutional patriotism—and its basis in his discourse theory of democracy and law—as the substance of a European public philosophy. Drawing on critical theorists' reception of the concept and Habermas's own contemporary writings on Europe's crisis, I reconstruct constitutional patriotism from the analytic perspective of ‘constitutional imaginaries’. A constitutional imaginary emphasizes the relation of law to the broader societal and political meanings that create and interpret it from outside formal legal institutions. This perspective ‘thickens’ our understanding of the meaning of law as an object of public commitment, as well as of the processes through which this meaning changes (constitutional politics). The paper then details the consequences of this shift for the work of the contemporary European judiciary and its constitutional discourse. In the first instance, analysis of constitutional imaginaries reveals the extent to which civic attachment to constitutional law is oriented not merely to a legal principle simpliciter but also to the historical settlement of political conflict the principle reflects. This suggests that the plurality of constitutional imaginaries in the European legal space creates additional difficulties for inspiring civic attachments post-nationally, a problem to which European judiciaries have heretofore been unresponsive. Second, an understanding of Habermas’s work in light of constitutional imaginaries opens new avenues for rethinking the interpretive and structural tasks to which Europe’s juridical institutions should be directed. In particular, the chapter highlights new forms of proceduralism to be recovered in constitutional discourse in order to establish a reflexivity of constitutional imagination adequate to post-national politics.

Hope, Critique, and Utopia

This paper assesses the extent to which the category of hope assists in preserving and redefining the vestiges of utopian thought in critical social theory. Hope has never had a systematic position among the categories of critical social theory, although it has sometimes acquired considerable prominence. It will be argued that the current philosophical and everyday interest in social hope can be traced to the limited capacity of liberal conceptions of freedom to articulate a vision of social transformation apposite to contemporary suffering and indignity. The background to these experiences is the structural changes associated with the injustices of globalisation, the mobilisation of the capitalist imaginary and the uncertainties of the risk society. The category of hope could assist in sustaining the utopianism of critical theory through con joining normative principles with a temporal orientation. Yet, the paradoxes of the current phase of capitalist modernisation have further denuded notions of progress. Since the theological background to the category of hope constitutes a major limitation, the utopian orientation of critique is clarified in relation to the antinomies of the turn to social hope and the potential of Habermas' discourse theory of democracy, law and morality. Despite Castoriadis' profound critique of the category of hope, its present usage in social analyses will be seen to have affinities with Honneth's conception of the struggle for recognition.

Democracy, Islam and Dialogue: The Case of Turkey

AbstractThe November 2002 general elections in Turkey produced an Islamic-leaning government, supported by one of the biggest majorities, bringing the relationship between Islam and democracy under scrutiny. This paper examines the nature of this relationship and the current political situation in Turkey. It argues that Turkey's long-running aspiration for democratization has now a reasonable chance of success. This argument is supported by the findings of a Q study, conducted in Turkey during the 2002 election campaign, indicating strong support for dialogue, particularly within the Turkish Muslim community. Yet, it will also argue that turning this possibility into a success depends on the implementation of the right deliberative framework. Habermas's discourse theory of democracy provides the essentials for this. However, particularly in the context of a divided society, like Turkey, it has to be complemented with a better emphasis on deliberation as a social learning process, as in Dryzek's theory of discursive democracy.

The Politics of Inclusive Agreements: Towards a Critical Discourse Theory of Democracy

This article offers a critical assessment of Jürgen Habermas's discourse theory of democracy. It suggests that the main thrust of a discursive account of legitimacy is the attempt to show how the demands of maximal democratic inclusion might be reconciled with a politics of reasoned agreements. While this aim is endorsed, the thrust of the argument is that a critical theory of democracy requires that normative frameworks that bring certain substantive features of democratic life into focus should supplement Habermas's procedural approach. First, the account of maximal inclusion has to be developed in a way that clarifies the egalitarian demands of distributive justice. Secondly, the account of a politics of reasoned agreements has to be connected to a theoretical analysis of the bonds of solidarity that could underpin such a form of political engagement. These developments contribute to a critical theory that gives a more adequate account of the motivational basis of discursive democracy.