Transformation of Markers of the Deliberative Democracy Theory in Modern Political Science

Abstract

The article studies the features of the transformation of markers of the theory of deliberative democracy in modern political science. It has been established that a feature of this model of democracy is the possibility of its definition as a process and form of politics aimed at transforming the individual interests of political subjects by organizing a rational discussion and reaching consensus on the problems that determine the subject field of political decisions. It is substantiated that the initial model of the theory of deliberative democracy by J. Bessett is based on the concept of institutionalized order, norms of public opinion and consensus, which are the source of the organization of the process of deliberation in a democratic political process. As one of the effective ways of making political decisions, deliberative democracy in the concept of J. Bessette functionally relies on discussion and discourse that form a space for competition of opinions and beliefs and public opinion in the status of resource support for the political course. In J. Bessette’s model of deliberative democracy, the status of the subject of discussion and discourse is assigned to politicians and experts and did not provide for the acquisition of such a status by all citizens.
It has been proved that modern versions of the theory of deliberative democracy, built around the idea of deliberation occurring with the participation of political institutions, civil society institutions and citizens, pay special attention to such markers as procedures, forms and results of deliberation. Meaning discussion, dialogue and discourse as forms of deliberation, delibe-rative democracy is modelled as a forum in which reasoning, ideas, opinions, preferences are transformed in the process of public discussion and approach rationality. According to the ideal model of deliberative democracy, political discussion (discourse, dialogue) should be oriented towards the development of a justified rational agreement on social norms. Only the result of a discussion in the form of consensus, reached in real actual political discourse, makes the social norm justified, substantiated and true. Achieving consensus in the deliberative model of democracy acts as a strategic skill based on intellectual and psychological techniques and technologies, the admissibility of which is derived from the procedures of the public political process and the virtues of political subjects. One such technique is the listening technique.
It is substantiated that discussions about the relationship between deliberation and legitimacy, which is reflected in the procedural principles of democracy (interaction and publicity; accountability; collective mind), have become an important direction in the transformation of markers of deliberative democracy. Democratic practices of relying on a deliberative model of legitimacy should take into account the vulnerability of political behaviour (participation, activity) to quasi-deliberative forms of organizing discussion and the conditional possibility of attaining consensus on the common good. Its search, not its achievement, is a resource of democracy that maintains interest and ensures inclusion in public problems that can be solved by means of politics.