This article explores the relationship between deliberative democracy, the Internet, and systems theory’s thoughts on diversity. After introducing Habermas’s theory of deliberative democracy and how diversity fits into it, the article discusses various ideas about whether and how it could work on the Internet. Next, the article looks at research into diversity done in the field of complex adaptive systems, showing that diversity has both good and bad effects, but is clearly preferred for the purpose of survival. The article concludes with an analysis of how the results of systems theory’s study of diversity can assist society in bringing democracy to the Web.
AmmoriMarvinPelicanLuke. 2012. “Media Diversity and Online Advertising.” Albany Law Review675, 682.
3.
ArendtHannah. 1958. The Human Condition, 50. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4.
Aristotle. 1991. “Politics.” In Complete Works, edited by JonathanBarnes, Vol. 2, 29. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
5.
ArnoldiJakob. 2001. “Niklas Luhmann: An Introduction.” Theory, Culture, and Society18: 5.
6.
BenklerYochaiFarisRobertRobertsHal. 2018. Network Propaganda: Manipulation, Disinformation, and Radicalization in American Politics, 98. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7.
ChambersSimone. 2005. “Discourse and Democratic Practices.” In The Cambridge Companion to Habermas, edited by StephenK. White, 233. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Cicero. 1999. “On the Commonwealth.” In On the Commonwealth and On the Laws, edited by JamesZetzel, 75. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9.
CowlingRichardMustartPenny JLaurieHenriRichardsMichael. 1994. “Species Diversity, Functional Diversity and Functional Redundancy in Fynbos Communities.” South African Journal of Science90, no. 6: 333–37.
10.
Da SilvaMarisa Torres. 2013. “Online Forums, Audience Participation and Modes of Political Discussion: Readers’ Comments on the Brazilian Presidential Election as a Case Study.” Communication and Society26, no. 4: 188.
11.
DahbergLincoln. 2001. “The Internet and Democratic Discourse: Exploring the Prospects of Online Deliberative Forums Extending the Public Sphere.” Information, Communication & Society4, no. 4: 623.
12.
DahlbergLincoln. 2007. “The Internet, Deliberative Democracy, and Power: Radicalizing the Public Sphere.” International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics3, no. 1: 54.
13.
DahlgrenPeter. 2005. “The Internet, Public Spheres, and Political Communication: Dispersion and Deliberation.” Political Communication22, no. 2: 156.
14.
DaviesRick. 2004. “Scale, Complexity and the Representation of Theories of Change.” Evaluation10, no. 1: 104.
DunneKerill. 2009. “Cross Cutting Discussion: A Form of Online Discussion Discovered Within Local Political Online Forums.” Information Polity14, no. 3: 230.
18.
EssCharles. 2018. “Democracy and the Internet: A Retrospective.” Javnost – The Public25, no. 1–2: 95.
Ghilarov. 2000. “Ecosystem Functioning and Intrinsic Value of Biodiversity.” Oikos90, no. 2: 408–412.
21.
GimmlerAntje. 2001. “Deliberative Democracy, The Public Sphere and the Internet.” Philosophy and Social Criticism27, no. 4: 28.
22.
GriffinJohnO’GormanEoinEmmersonMarkJenkinsStuartKleinAlexandra-MariaLoreauMichaelSymstadAmy. 2009. “Biodiversity and the Stability of Ecosystem Functioning.” In Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning, and Human Wellbeing: An Ecological and Economic Perspective, edited by NaeemS.BunkerD. E.HectorA.LoreauM.PerringsC., 78–94. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23.
GrillHana. 2011. “Does Social Media Technology Promote Democracy?” New Presence: The Prague Journal of Central European Affairs28, no. 2: (Spring 2011).
24.
GrossAlan. 2006. “Habermas, Systematically Distorted Communication, and the Public Sphere.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly36, no. 3: 309–330, 320–1. Summer.
25.
HabermasJürgen. 1981. The Theory of Communicative Action Vol. 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society, 22. Boston: Beacon Press.
26.
HabermasJürgen. 1996a. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, 183–84. Cambridge: MIT Press.
27.
HabermasJürgen. 1996b. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, 205–6. Translated by BurgerThomas. Cambridge: MIT Press.
28.
Habermas. 1987. Theory of Communicative Action Vol. 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason, 312. Boston: Beacon Press.
29.
HegelG. W. F.2004. “On the English Reform Bill.” In Political Writings, edited by LaurenceDickeyNisbetH. B., 257. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30.
HernMattChaulkStu. 2000. “Roadgrading Community Culture: Why the Internet is so Dangerous to Real Democracy.” Democracy & Nature6, no. 1: 115.
LawtonBrown. 1994. “Redundancy in Ecosystems.” In Biodiversity and Ecosystem Function, edited by SchulzeE. D.MooneyH. A., Vol. 99, 255–270. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
36.
LevinSimon. 2003. “Complex Adaptive Systems: Exploring the Known, the Unknown, and the Unknowable.” American Mathematical Society1, no. 1: 3–19.
MoriAkira S.FurukawaTakuyaSasakiTakehiro, 2013. “Response Diversity Determines the Resilience of Ecosystems to Environmental Change.” Biological Reviews88, no 2: 349–64.
42.
MößnerNicolaKitcherPhilip. 2017. “Knowledge, Democracy, and the Internet.” Minerva55, no. 1: 5.
43.
NaeemShahidWrightJustin P.. 2003. “Disentangling Biodiversity Effects on Ecosystem Functioning: Deriving Solutions to a Seemingly Insurmountable Problem.” Ecology Letters6: 569–79.
44.
NegriAntonioHardtMichael. 2000. Empire, 326. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
45.
PageScott. 2010. Diversity and Complexity, 130–44. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
46.
PageScott. 2018. The Model Thinker: What You Need to Know to Make Data Work for You, 2–3. New York: Basic Books.
47.
PirannejadAli. 2017. “Can the Internet Promote Democracy? A Cross-Country Study Based on Dynamic Panel Data Models.” Information Technology for Development23, no. 2: 291–2.
48.
RashidianNushinBrownPeteHansenElizabethBellEmilyAlbrightJonathanHartstoneAbigail. 2018. Friend and Foe: The Platform Press at the Heart of Journalism, 94. New York: Columbia Journalism School.
49.
RousseauJean-Jacques. 2002. “The Social Contract.” In The Social Contract and First and Second Discourses, edited by SusanDunn, 164. New Haven: Yale University Press.
50.
StaleyKevin Michael. 2013. New Catholic Encyclopedia Supplement 2012-2013: Ethics and Philosophy, 607. Edited by FastiggiRobert L.. Gale: Detroit.
51.
ThompsonJohnDavidHeld, eds. 1982. Habermas: The Critical Debates, 264. Cambridge: MIT Press.
WebbColleenBodinÖrjan. 2008. “A Network Perspective on Modularity and Control of Flow in Robust Systems.” In Complexity Theory for a Sustainable Future, edited by NorbergJ.CummingG. S., 85–118. New York: Columbia University Press.
54.
WillhelmAnthony. 2000. Democracy in the Digital Age: Challenges to Political Life in Cyberspace. New York: Routledge.
55.
WrightScottStreetJohn. 2007. “Democracy, Deliberation and Design: The Case of Online Discussion Forums.” New Media and Society9, no. 5: 863.
