Abstract
In this essay I address some questions and objections brought about by the contributors to this special issue on my book Democracy without Shortcuts. First, I clarify various questions related to my criticism of deep pluralist conceptions of democracy. Second, I address the difficult question of the completeness of public reason and the practical consequences in its absence. Third, I offer various arguments against the objection that my account of public deliberation is too demanding whereas my account of citizen participation is too austere or insufficiently demanding. Fourth, I address the question of whether the proliferation of empowered minipublics could be justified under non ideal circumstances such as the lack of global democracy. I use the distinction between complementing and sustitutive shortcuts in order to show why the first can serve democratic goals whereas the second cannot both in ideal and non-ideal circumstances. Finally, I address several objections to my participatory interpretation of the democratic legitimacy of judicial review.
Translated title of the contribution | Defending Democracy as an Inclusive Dialogue without Shortcuts. Some Replies to my Critics |
---|---|
Original language | Spanish |
Pages (from-to) | 214-274 |
Number of pages | 61 |
Journal | Revista Derecho del Estado |
Issue number | 55 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 2023 |
Keywords
- Pluralism
- deliberative democracy
- democratic legitimacy
- global democracy
- judicial review
- minipublics
- participation
- public reason
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Law