Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T23:54:21.173Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Communication, Ideology, and Democratic Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

James F. Bohman
James F. Bohman*
Affiliation:
St. Louis University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Using Habermas' theory of communicative action and his remarks on the legitimacy of the state under modern social conditions as a starting point, I combine normative democratic theory with the critique of ideology. I first outline four necessary-but-not-sufficient conditions of communication for democratic decision making: such agreements must (1) be formally and procedurally correct, (2) be cognitively adequate, (3) concern issues on which consensus or compromise can be reached, and (4) be free of ideology. The first three conditions form the core of a normative democratic theory, one that is not purely procedural, as many have argued it is. I then discuss the fourth condition and establish the relation between ideology and democracy. Taken together, these conditions not only provide an answer to troubling questions for democratic theory but also delineate the extent to which politics is rational and political claims are “truthlike.”

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 84 , Issue 1 , March 1990 , pp. 93 - 109
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackerman, Bruce. 1980. Social Justice in the Liberal State. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Bachrach, Peter, and Baratz, Morton. 1970. Power and Poverty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bachrach, Peter, and Bergman, Elihu. 1973. Power and Choice. Lexington: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Ball, Terence. 1988. Transforming Political Discourse. London: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Barber, Benjamin. 1984. Strong Democracy. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Baynes, Kenneth. N.d. “The Liberal/Communitarian Controversy and Communicative Ethics.” Philosophy and Social Criticism. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Basil. 1967. Class, Codes, Control. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Richard. 1983. Beyond Objectivism and Relativism. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Bohman, James. 1986. “Formal Pragmatics and Social Criticism.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 11: 332–52.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert. 1985. A Preface to Economic Democracy. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John. 1987. “Discursive Designs: Critical Theory and Political Institutions.” American Journal of Political Science 31: 656–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelman, Murray. 1967. The Symbolic Uses of Politics. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Edelman, Murray. 1988. Constructing the Political Spectacle. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1961. Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit. Darmstadt: Luchterhand Verlag.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1970. “Systematically Distorted Communication.” Inquiry 13: 205–18.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1975. “Postscript to Knowledge and Human Interests.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 3: 157–89.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1978. Communication and the Evolution of Society. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1984. Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. 1. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1983. Beyond Adversary Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mead, George Herbert. 1934. On Social Psychology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Offe, Claus. 1985. Disorganized Capitalism. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Riker, William. 1982. Liberalism against Populism: A Confrontation between the Theory of Democracy and the Theory of Social Choice. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph. 1950. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Walzer, Michael. 1987. Interpretation and Social Criticism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.