This article explains how the issue of inclusion is central to Habermas’s theory of democracy and how it is deeply rooted in his conception of a political public sphere. After recalling Habermas’s views on the public sphere, I present and discuss various objections raised by other critical theorists: Oskar Negt and Alexander Kluge, Nancy Fraser, Axel Honneth and Iris Marion Young. These criticisms insist on the paradoxically excluding effects of a conception of democracy that promotes civic participation in the public debate. Negt, Kluge and Fraser develop a Marxist line of analysis that question who can participate in the public sphere. Honneth and Young criticize in various ways the excluding effect of argumentation: are unargumentative speeches excluded from the public debate? I show how Habermas’s model can provide some responses to these various objections by drawing inspiration from his treatment of the gap between religious and post-metaphysical world views.
AbensourM. (2005). Hannah Arendt contre la philosophie politique? Sens & Tonka.
2.
AdornoT. W. (2003). Gesellschaft. Erste fassung eines soziologischen exkurses [Society. First version of a sociological excurs]. In TiedemannR. (Ed.), Frankfurter Adorno Blätter (Vol. 8, pp. 143–150). edition text + kritik.
3.
AdornoT. W. (2019). Philosophical elements of a theory of society. Polity Press.
4.
AllenA. (2008). The politics of our selves: Power, autonomy, and gender in contemporary critical theory. Columbia University Press.
5.
AratoA.CohenJ. L. (1992). Civil society and political theory. The MIT Press.
6.
ArendtH. (1998). The Human condition. University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1958).
7.
BenhabibS. (1992a). Models of public space: Hannah Arendt, the liberal tradition and Jürgen Habermas. In BenhabibS. (Ed.), Situating the self (pp. 89–120). Wiley.
8.
BenhabibS. (1992b). Situating the self: Gender, community, and postmodernism in contemporary ethics. Routledge.
9.
BoucheronP.OffenstadtN. (2011). L’espace public au Moyen Âge. Débats autour de Jürgen Habermas. PUF.
10.
BourdieuP. (1980). L’opinion publique n’existe pas. In BourdieuP. (Ed.), Questions de sociologie (pp. 222–235). Les Éditions de Minuit.
11.
ChagnialP. (Ed.) (1992). Quaderni 18. Les espace publics.
12.
ChambersS.KymlickaW. (2001). Alternative conceptions of civil society. Princeton University Press.
13.
ChennoufiR. (2013). Habermas. La raison publique. Vrin.
14.
DescombesV. (2007). Le raisonnement de l'ours. Et autres essais de philosophie pratique. Seuil.
15.
DupeyrixA. (2012). Habermas. Citoyenneté et responsabilité. MSH.
16.
DrisN. (Ed.) (2016). Les espace(s) public(s) en Méditerranée[Les Cahiers d’EMAM 28]. Mobilisations, médiations & citoyenneté.
17.
ElsterJ. (2003). The market and the forum. In MatraversD.PikeJ. (Eds.), Debates in contemporary political philosophy. An anthology(chap. 20). Routledge.
18.
FerryJ. M. (1980). Habermas, critique de Hannah Arendt. Esprit, 6, 109–124.
19.
FlemingM. (1997). Emancipation and illusion. Rationality and gender in Habermas’s theory of modernity. Pennsylvania University Press.
20.
FraserN. (1985). What’s critical about critical theory? The case of Habermas and gender. New German Critique, 35, 97–131.
21.
FraserN. (1990). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text, 25/26, 56–80.
22.
GallieW. (1955). Essentially contested concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 56, 167–198.
HabermasJ. (1967). Über den Begriff der politischen Beteiligung. In HabermasJ.OehlerC.Von FriedeburgL.FriedrichW. (Eds.), Student und politik (pp. 11–56). Luchterhand Verlag. (Original work published 1961).
25.
HabermasJ. (1976). Hannah Arendt: On the concept of power. In HabermasJ. (Ed.), Philosophical-political profiles (pp. 171–187). Heinemann.
26.
HabermasJ. (1984). The theory of communicative action, volume 1. Beacon Press. (Original work published 1981).
27.
HabermasJ. (1987). The theory of communicative action, volume 2. Beacon Press. (Original work published 1981).
28.
HabermasJ. (1990). Vorwort zur Neuauflage 1990. In HabermasJ. (Ed.), Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit. Untersuchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft (pp. 11–50). Suhrkamp. (Original work published 1990).
29.
HabermasJ. (1991). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. The MIT Press. (Original work published 1962).
30.
HabermasJ. (1996). Popular sovereignty as procedure. A normative concept of the public sphere. In HabermasJ. (Ed.), Between facts and norms (pp. 463–490). The MIT Press. (Original work published 1989).
31.
HabermasJ. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a theory of law and democracy. The MIT Press. (Original work published 1992).
32.
HabermasJ. (2003). Intolerance and discrimination. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 1(1), 2–12.
33.
HabermasJ. (2008). Between naturalism and religion: Philosophical essays (pp. 114–148). Polity Press. (Original work published 2005).
34.
HabermasJ. (2006a). Religion in public sphere. European Journal of Philosophy, 14(1), 1–25.
35.
HabermasJ. (2006b). Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research.’ Communication Theory, 16(4), 411–426.
36.
HegelG. (2001). The philosophy of right. Batoche Books. (Original work published 1820).
37.
HonnethA. (1981). Moralbewusstsein und soziale Klassenherrschaft. Einige Schwierigkeiten in der Analyse normativer Handlungspotentiale. Leviathan, 9(3/4), 556–570.
38.
HonnethA. (2014). Freedom’s right. The social foundations of democratic life. Columbia University Press.
39.
HorkheimerM. (1993). Beginnings of the bourgeois philosophy of history. In HorkheimerM. (Ed.), Between philosophy and social science: Selected early writings (pp. 313–388). MIT Press. (Original work published 1970).
40.
IngramD. (2019). Contesting the public sphere: Within and against critical theory. In GordonP.BreckmanW. (Eds.), The Cambridge history of modern European thought (pp. 517–544). Cambridge University Press.
41.
InnerarityD. (2006). El nuevo Espacio Público. Espasa Calpe.
42.
KantI. (2009). An answer to the question: What is enlightenment? Penguin. (Original work published 1784).
43.
KlugeA.NegtO. (1993). Public sphere and experience: Toward an analysis of the bourgeois and proletarian public sphere. University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1972).
44.
KopperG. (Ed.) (1997). Europäische Öffentlichkeit: Entwicklung von Strukturen und Theorie. Vistas.
45.
KoselleckR. (2000). Critique and crisis: Enlightenment and the pathogenesis of modern Society. The MIT Press. (Original work published 1959).
46.
LandesJ. (1988). Women and the public sphere in the age of the French revolution. Cornell University.
47.
LuhmannN. (1982). The differentiation of society. Columbia University Press.
48.
ManinB. (1985). Volonté générale ou délibération? Esquisse d’une théorie de la délibération politique. Le Débat, 33, 72–94.
49.
MeehanJ. (Ed.) (2013). Feminists read Habermas. Gendering the subject of discourse. Routledge.
50.
MouffeC. (1992). Dimensions of radical democracy: Pluralism, citizenship, community. Verso.
51.
MouffeC. (2005). On the political. Routledge.
52.
Müller-DoohmS.Neumann-BraunK. (Eds.) (1991). Öffentlichkeit—Kultur—Massenkommunikation. Beiträge zur Medien- und Kommunikationssoziologie. University Oldenburg.
53.
NashK. (Ed.) (2014). Transnationalizing the public sphere (FraserN., Ed.). Polity Press.
54.
NegtO. (1976). Keine Demokratie ohne Sozialismus. Über den Zusammenhang von Politik, Geschichte und Moral. Suhrkamp.
NeumannF. L. (1957). The change in the function of law in modern society. In NeumannF. (Ed.), The democratic and authoritarian state. Essays in political and legal theory (pp. 159–200). Free Press.
57.
NorbergJ. (2014). Sociability and its enemies. German political theory after 1945. Northwestern University Press.
58.
PatemanC. (1988). The sexual contract. Stanford University Press.
59.
PetersB. (2007). Der Sinn von Öffentlichkeit, Suhrkamp.
60.
RancièreJ. (1995). La mésentente. Galilée.
61.
RawlsJ. (2005). Political Liberalism. Columbia University Press, expanded edition. (Original work published 1993).
62.
SellarsW. (1997). Empiricism and the philosophy of mind. Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1956).
63.
SzackaL.-C. (2008). The architectural public sphere. Multi, 2(1), 19–34.
64.
TomasF. (2001). L’espace public, un concept moribond ou en expansion?Géocarrefour, 76(1), 75–84.
65.
VoirolO. (2017). Pathologies de l’espace public et agitation fasciste: Leçons de la Théorie critique. Réseaux, 202–203(2), 123–159.
66.
YoungI. M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton University Press.
67.
YoungI. M. (2000). Inclusion and democracy. Oxford University Press.
