This article locates tensions at the heart of deliberative democracy by contrasting insights of Pierre Bourdieu and Jürgen Habermas. It argues that deliberation contains implicit presuppositions of two opposing sorts. Universalising presuppositions lead people to treat one another as equals. Differentiating ones lead people to treat one another as of greater or lesser worth in political dialogue. They undercut deliberative democracy by rendering some points of view less valuable than others. These contrary tendencies cannot be reconciled in a purely theoretical way; they are contextually specific challenges that must be negotiated in politics itself. In response, this article seeks to clarify the difficulties faced by deliberative regimes and better understand their relation to other forms of politics.
AlexyR. (1989) A Theory of Legal Argumentation: The Theory of Rational Discourse as Theory of Legal Justification.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2.
BakhtinM. (1981) The Dialogic Imagination.Austin TX: University of Texas Press.
3.
BohmanJ. (1996) Public Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity, and Democracy.Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
4.
BourdieuP. (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BourdieuP. (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste.Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
6.
BourdieuP. (1990) ‘The Uses of the “People”’, in In Other Words.Cambridge: Polity, pp. 150–5.
7.
BourdieuP. (1991) Language and Symbolic Power.Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
8.
BourdieuP. (1996) The State Nobility: Elite Schools in the Field of Power.Cambridge: Polity Press.
9.
BourdieuP. (1997) Pascalian Meditations.Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.
10.
BourdieuP. (1998) ‘Social Space and Symbolic Space,’ in Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action.London: Polity Press, pp. 1–13.
11.
FaulknerW. (1929) The Sound and the Fury.New York: Cape and Smith.
12.
FraserN. (1997) ‘Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy,’ in Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the ‘Postsocialist’ Condition.New York: Routledge, pp. 69–98.
13.
GutmannA. and ThompsonD. (1996) Democracy and Disagreement.Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
14.
HabermasJ. (1979) ‘What is Universal Pragmatics?’ in Communication and the Evolution of Society, trans. McCarthyT.. Boston MA: Beacon Press.
15.
HabermasJ. (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 1, trans. McCarthyT.. Boston MA: Beacon Press.
16.
HabermasJ. (1987) The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity.Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
17.
HabermasJ. (1990) Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action.Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
18.
HabermasJ. (1996) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans. RehgW.. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
19.
HabermasJ. (1998a) On the Pragmatics of Communication, ed. CookeM.. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
20.
HabermasJ. (1998b) The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory, ed. CroninC. and de GreiffP.. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
21.
HabermasJ. (2003) Truth and Justification, trans. FultnerB.. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
22.
HabermasJ. (2006) The Divided West, ed. and trans. CroninC.. Cambridge: Polity.
23.
HaywardC. R. (2004) ‘Doxa and Deliberation’, Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 7 (1), 14–8.
24.
HirschmanA.O. (1970) Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States.Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
25.
HonnethA. (1995) ‘The Fragmented World of Symbolic Forms: Reflections on Pierre Bourdieu's Sociology of Culture,’ in HonnethA., The Fragmented World of the Social: Essays in Social and Political Philosophy, ed. WrightC.. Albany NY: SUNY Press, pp. 184–201.
26.
KerlerouxF. (1984) ‘La langue passée aux profits et pertes’, in Collectif ‘Révoltes Logiques’ [RancièreJacques], L'Empire du Sociologue.Paris: Éditions la Découverte.
27.
KohnM. (2000) ‘Language, Power, and Persuasion: Toward a Critique of Deliberative Democracy’, Constellations, 7 (3), 409–17.
28.
McCarthyT. (1978) The Critical Theory of Jürgen Habermas.Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
29.
MarxK. and EngelsF. (1970) The German Ideology.New York: International Publishers.
30.
OlsonK. (2003) ‘Do Rights Have a Formal Basis? Habermas's Legal Theory and the Normative Foundations of the Law’, Journal of Political Philosophy, 11 (3), 273–94.
31.
OlsonK. (2006) Reflexive Democracy: Political Equality and the Welfare State.Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
32.
OlsonK. (2007) ‘Paradoxes of Constitutional Democracy’, American Journal of Political Science, 51 (2), 330–43.
33.
OlsonK. (2008) ‘Governmental Rationality and Popular Sovereignty’, Current Perspectives in Social Theory, 25, 329–52.
34.
OlsonK. (2009) ‘Reflexive Democracy as Popular Sovereignty’, in de BruinB. and ZurnC. (eds), New Waves in Political Philosophy.London: Palgrave, pp. 125–42.
35.
PhillipsA. (1995) The Politics of Presence: The Political Representation of Gender, Ethnicity, and Race.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36.
RawlsJ. (1993) Political Liberalism.New York: Columbia University Press.
37.
RosenbergS. (2007) ‘Types of Discourse and the Democracy of Deliberation’, in RosenbergS. (ed.), Deliberation, Participation, and Democracy: Can the People Govern? New York: Palgrave, pp. 130–58.
38.
StilleA. (2002) ‘Backward Runs French. Reels the Mind. Verlan, A Kind of Code Among Immigrants, Both Confuses and Intrigues’, NewYork Times, 17 August, A13, A15.
39.
TopperK. (2001) ‘Not So Trifling Nuances: Pierre Bourdieu, Symbolic Violence, and the Perversions of Democracy’, Constellations, 8 (1), 30–56.
40.
VerbaS.SchlozmanK. and BradyH. (1995) Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics.Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
41.
YoungI. (2000) Inclusion and Democracy.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
