30 April 2019. Can citizens avoid polarisation and make sound decisions? According to a recently published article in the journal Science responding to (inter alia) ‘the decline in civility and argumentative complexity’ in contemporary politics, this should resonate solidly with every one of us, perhaps because we can acknowledge that we all contribute in some way to a ‘crisis of democracy’.
The article is inspiring, thought provoking and timely. Entitled ‘The Crisis of Democracy and the Science of Deliberation’ it presents and shows how to apply the concept of deliberative democracy.
We recognise the polarisation and manipulation of contemporary issues and their associated debates. We also recognise the huge plethora of opinions that bombard us every day, with civil society clearly undermined. Lost is complexity. The quick fix and media grab seem to dominate our lives. Opinions are formed and decisions made based on limited understanding and debate.
As Professor John Dryzek of the University of Canberra and the significant list of co-authors to this article point out, ordinary citizens can contribute to change through enacting deliberative democracy as the foundation of sound decision-making.
The fact that such a highly respected science journal published a social science work is a rare accomplishment.
“Importantly, the publication of this work gives our ideas about deliberative democracy a whole new audience,” said Professor Dryzek.
Professor Dryzek is an Australian Research Council Laureate Fellow and Centenary Professor at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance within the Institute of Governance and Policy Analysis at the University of Canberra.
UK born, Dr Dryzek moved to Australia over 20 years ago after spending some time in the United States. He moved to the University of Canberra from ANU to join the Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis because, “it promised and delivered a better environment for research and education.”
His motivation comes from a strong commitment to social change.
“The drive for research comes ultimately from deepening democracy and confronting pressing global problems, as well as simple curiosity about how the world does and can work,” he said.
This commitment has been fed by years of inquiry.
“What led me to work in this area was the promise it held for confronting severe and intractable problems more effectively. Equally important is the intrinsic value and promise of democracy, and I think deliberative democracy is the best available way to redeem this promise,” said Professor Dryzek.
Even the process of collaborative authorship appears to echo the process of deliberative democracy.
“This is because the global community of deliberative democracy scholars’ practice what they preach,” he said.
The collaboration on the article began with a workshop in Stuttgart, organised by one of the authors, André Bächtiger. In attendance were some of the contributing authors.
“We synthesised key points from the workshop discussions, which became the foundation of the article and then sought input from all the authors,” said Professor Dryzek.
Recognising the possibility for deliberative democracy, Professor Dryzek clearly articulates its significance alongside the recent events in Christchurch, New Zealand.
“We can look at the aftermath of such events through the lens of deliberative democracy and ask whether they triggered or impeded effective public deliberation on relevant issues—not just gun control, but in relationships between different communities,” he said.
“Deliberative democracy can contribute to those relationships and help provide an antidote to the exploitation of differences by demagogues. A lot depends on the choices of political leaders and what their rhetoric does for effective public deliberation.”
To imagine that social change is possible through deliberative democracy is not too difficult. But it takes a commitment to changed practices from ordinary citizens. This is not beyond our reach.
Dryzek, J. S., Bächtiger, A., Chambers, S., Cohen, J., Druckman, J. N., Felicetti, A., Fishkin, J. S., Farrell, D. M., Fung, A., Gutmann, A., Landemore, H., Mansbridge, J. Marien, S., Neblo, M. A., Niemeyer, S., Setala, M., Slothuus, R., Suiter, J., Thompson, D. & Warren, M. (2019). ‘The Crisis of Democracy and the Science of Deliberation: Citizens can Avoid Polarization and Make Sound Decisions.’ Science, 363 (6432), pp. 1144-1146. Sourced from: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/363/6432/1144.
