Democracy Today.indb - Universidade do Minho
Democracy Today.indb - Universidade do Minho
Democracy Today.indb - Universidade do Minho
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
accounts of democracy suggest that voting is meaningless if it is not<br />
accompanied by deliberation. Participation is thus justified primarily<br />
on its instrumental benefits: it brings about better governments and<br />
better decisions.<br />
This is because even if we disregard for the moment, the difference<br />
between minimalists, for whom voting plays the crucial role, and<br />
deliberative democrats, who argue that while its significance cannot<br />
be denied, it should not be overstated, it seems that for both sides,<br />
the decisive test of a democracy is participation, and participation<br />
that is egalitarian. I reject the common argument that the divergence<br />
between the two in terms of what constitutes egalitarian participation<br />
is because one is pessimistic about citizens’ capacity while the<br />
other is optimistic: there is enough evidence to suggest that the basis<br />
for limiting participation by minimalist democrats is not necessarily<br />
due to a suspicion of the competence of the masses; conversely,<br />
many deliberative democrats seem to accept the unflattering picture<br />
of citizens’ capabilities (and/or their democratic tendencies). Even if<br />
this supposed disagreement on people’s capabilities is at the centre of<br />
the two conceptions, finding ways to ‘prove’ either generalisation of<br />
people’s competence is metho<strong>do</strong>logically difficult and even if we can<br />
find a way, the evidence will be subject to fluctuations across space<br />
and time. It seems much more reasonable to regard the minimalist<br />
versus deliberative accounts as being two different ways of interpreting<br />
political equality rather than two different conceptions of humanity’s<br />
‘goodness’. In other words, the division between minimalist<br />
and deliberative democrats appears to be less about the quality of<br />
citizens themselves and more about the optimum institutional design<br />
to ensure equality. For minimalists, voting is less unequal than other<br />
forms of participation; for deliberative democrats, voting that is not<br />
preceded by deliberation is flawed.<br />
It would appear then, on both minimalist and deliberative account,<br />
the objective of democratic politics is one of influencing decision-making<br />
with the aim of securing one’s interests. In other words, participation,<br />
whether more or less, is valued because it is viewed as the optimum<br />
means of achieving good government whether this is defined as legiti-<br />
153<br />
DEMOCRATIC COMPROMISE<br />
OR COMPROMISING<br />
DEMOCRACY: RETHINKING<br />
PARTICIPATION<br />
Heidi Matisonn