审议与公民利益

J. Ferejohn
{"title":"审议与公民利益","authors":"J. Ferejohn","doi":"10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780198747369.013.54","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The “folk” democratic tradition in the United States sees citizens not only as the unique source of political authorization but also as competent to pursue and protect their interests at the ballot box. Democracy’s commitment to equality requires that each person’s interests and views are entitled to equal consideration. I argue that equal concern for interests has some priority over equal respect for opinions and that plausible institutional realizations of deliberative democracy must reflect this priority. This does not mean that peoples’ opinions or votes can be ignored but that deliberation must aim to educate or “refine and enlarge” public opinion.","PeriodicalId":185217,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy","volume":"144 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deliberation and Citizen Interests\",\"authors\":\"J. Ferejohn\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780198747369.013.54\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The “folk” democratic tradition in the United States sees citizens not only as the unique source of political authorization but also as competent to pursue and protect their interests at the ballot box. Democracy’s commitment to equality requires that each person’s interests and views are entitled to equal consideration. I argue that equal concern for interests has some priority over equal respect for opinions and that plausible institutional realizations of deliberative democracy must reflect this priority. This does not mean that peoples’ opinions or votes can be ignored but that deliberation must aim to educate or “refine and enlarge” public opinion.\",\"PeriodicalId\":185217,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy\",\"volume\":\"144 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780198747369.013.54\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780198747369.013.54","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国的“民间”民主传统不仅将公民视为政治授权的独特来源,而且认为公民有能力在投票箱中追求和保护自己的利益。民主对平等的承诺要求每个人的利益和观点都有权得到平等的考虑。我认为,对利益的平等关切在某种程度上高于对意见的平等尊重,而协商民主的合理制度实现必须反映这种优先。这并不是说人们的意见或投票可以被忽视,而是说审议必须以教育或“提炼和扩大”民意为目的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Deliberation and Citizen Interests
The “folk” democratic tradition in the United States sees citizens not only as the unique source of political authorization but also as competent to pursue and protect their interests at the ballot box. Democracy’s commitment to equality requires that each person’s interests and views are entitled to equal consideration. I argue that equal concern for interests has some priority over equal respect for opinions and that plausible institutional realizations of deliberative democracy must reflect this priority. This does not mean that peoples’ opinions or votes can be ignored but that deliberation must aim to educate or “refine and enlarge” public opinion.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信