INCOMMUNICATIVE ACTION: AN ESOTERIC WARNING ABOUT DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY

Abstract

Deliberative democracy is a noble project: an attempt to make citizens philosophize. Critics of deliberative democracy usually claim either that the proposed deliberation threatens an existing moral consensus or, instead, that deliberation is impossible amid power imbalances that oppress the weak. But another problem is that combining democracy and deliberation is inherently an attempt to engage publicly in a private activity—where sensitivity to each interlocutor may require a special form of address. Can this be done? Yes, in some contexts. The tradition of esoteric writing has demonstrated that it is possible to layer one's discourse in such a way that all citizens can partake at a level that suits them. But writing for a public is not really deliberation among equals; it is leadership by the writer of the readers. Genuine dialogue among equals that takes account of their differences is, in contrast, inherently a private affair.

Notes

1. Gary Remer (1999) provides an excellent account of the differences between public oratory and conversation, especially as they apply to the topic of deliberative democracy.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Geoffrey M. Vaughan

the author of Behemoth Teaches Leviathin: Thomas Hobbes on Political Education (Lexington Books, 2007)