{"title":"Can Groups Have Rights? What Postmodern Theory Tells Us About Participatory Democracy in the Era of Identity Politics","authors":"David Ingram","doi":"10.1080/10855660123331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to draw out some implications of Jean-Francois Lyotard's account of democratic legitimation for current debates about 'identity politics'. I relate Lyotard's theory to struggles over global rights and global democracy, aboriginal rights, multiculturalism (Quebec's language laws), and proportional group representation (racial redistricting in the US). I then argue that Lyotard's own conception of postmodern democratic justice wavers between a Rawlsian model of 'overlapping consensus' and a Habermasian model of 'communicative consensus'. I conclude that, although each model has distinctive advantages and disadvantages, the latter model is better equipped to bring about broad participatory democracy in the long run.","PeriodicalId":201357,"journal":{"name":"Democracy & Nature","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Democracy & Nature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10855660123331","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
The aim of this article is to draw out some implications of Jean-Francois Lyotard's account of democratic legitimation for current debates about 'identity politics'. I relate Lyotard's theory to struggles over global rights and global democracy, aboriginal rights, multiculturalism (Quebec's language laws), and proportional group representation (racial redistricting in the US). I then argue that Lyotard's own conception of postmodern democratic justice wavers between a Rawlsian model of 'overlapping consensus' and a Habermasian model of 'communicative consensus'. I conclude that, although each model has distinctive advantages and disadvantages, the latter model is better equipped to bring about broad participatory democracy in the long run.