POR QUE O IDEAL DELIBERATIVO JUSTIFICA A PUBLICIDADE – AINDA QUE A PUBLICIDADE POSSA COMPROMETER A DELIBERAÇÃO
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21814/eps.2.1.93Palavras-chave:
publicidade política, secretismo político, deliberação públicaResumo
Este artigo avalia, criticamente, os argumentos que, na teoria política, defendem, por razões epistémicas, o papel do secretismo na política. Desta maneira, enfatizamos alguns dos efeitos negativos que a publicidade pode ter na deliberação (designadamente: obscurecendo o processo informacional, favorecendo retóricas plebiscitárias e substituindo a discussão aberta por comportamentos conformistas e/ ou barganha). Com base na análise da Sexta Reforma do Estado Belga de 2010-2011, este artigo defende que embora a publicidade possa produzir efeitos negativos na deliberação, não se pode provar que estes efeitos são mais severos do que aqueles produzidos por uma deliberação à porta fechada. Além disso, argumentamos que uma justificação epistémica da deliberação à porta fechada não poderia ser aceite por um cidadão razoável: a justificação da publicidade não depende dos seus efeitos epistémicos positivos mas sim do facto de a avaliação e definição destes não poder ser deixada ao critério das partes em negociação.
Referências
Benhabib, Seyla (ed.) (1996). Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton: Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691234168
Blondiaux, Loïc, & Sintomer, Yves (2002). L’impératif délibératif , Politix, 57, 17-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3406/polix.2002.1205
Bohman, James (1996). Public Deliberation. Pluralism, Complexity and Democracy. Cambridge, Mass: MIT.
Bok, Sissela (1982). On the Ethics of Concealment and Revelation. New York: Pantheon.
Chambers, Simone (2004). Behind Closed Doors: Publicity, Secrecy, and the Quality of Deliberation. Journal of Political Philosophy, 12(3): 389-410. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2004.00206.x
Christiano, Thomas (1996). The Rule of the Many. Boulder: Westview Press.
Christiano, Thomas (1997). The Significance of Public Deliberation. In James Bohman & William Rehg (eds.), Deliberative Democracy; Essays on
Reason and Politics (pp. 243-278). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Cohen, Joshua (1986). An Epistemic Conception of Democracy. Ethics, 97(1): 26-38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/292815
Cohen, Joshua (1989). Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy. In Alan Hamlin & Philip Pettit, The Good Polity: Analysis of the State (pp. 342-360). New York: Blackwell.
Cohen, Joshua (1996). Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy. In Benhabib, Seyla (ed.). Democracy and Difference: Contesting the boundaries of the Political (pp. 95-119). Princeton: Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691234168-006
Elster, Jon (1994). Argumenter et négocier dans deux assemblées constituantes. Revue française de science politique, 44(2): 187-256. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3406/rfsp.1994.394826
Elster, Jon (1995). Strategic Uses of Argument. In Kenneth Arrow et al. (eds.), Barriers to Conflict Resolution (pp. 236-257). New York: Norton.
Elster, John (1997). The Market and the Forum: Three Varieties of Political Theory. In James Bohman & William Rehg (eds.) Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics (pp. 3-33). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Elster, Jon (1998). Deliberation and Constitution Making. In Jon Elster (ed.), Deliberative Democracy (pp. 97-122). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139175005.006
Estlund, David (2006). Beyond Fairness and Deliberation: the Epistemic Dimension of Democratic Authority. In Thomas Christiano (ed.), Philosophy and Democracy (pp. 69-95), New York: Oxford University Press.
Estlund, David (2002). Political Quality. In David Estlund (ed.), Democracy (pp. 173-234). Malden and Oxford: Blackwell.
Estlund, David (2003). Beyond Fairness and Deliberation. In Thomas Christiano (ed.), Philosophy and Democracy (pp. 69-95). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Estlund, David (2009). Democratic Authority: A Philosophical Framework. Princeton: Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400831548
Evans, Phillip & Wurster, Tom (1997). Strategy and the New Economics of Information, Harvard Business Review, 75(5): 71-82.
Fenster, Mark (2006). The Opacity of Transparency. Iowa Law Review, 91(3): 885-949.
Fung, Archon (2003). Recipes for Public Spheres. Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 11(3): 338-367 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9760.00181
Goodin, Robert (1992). Motivating Political Morality. Cambridge, Mass. and Oxford: Blackwell.
Gosseries, Axel (2005). Publicity. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/publicity/.
Gutmann, Amy &Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and Disagreement. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Gutmann, Amy & Thompson, D. (1999). Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Habermas, Jürgen (1986). The Theory of Communicative Action. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Habermas, Jürgen (1990). Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Habermas, Jürgen (1998). Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Hahn, Robert (2002). The False Promise of Full Disclosure'. Policy Review, 115 (October / November).
Hsee, Christopher & Hastie, Reid (2006). Decision and Experience: Why Don't We Choose What Makes Us Happy?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(1) 31-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.11.007
Jamieson, Kathleen Hall & Cappella, Joseph (2008). Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Kant, Immanuel (1970/1795). Perpetual Peace. In Hans Reiss (ed.), Kant’s Political Writings (pp. 93-130). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kerr, Norbert & MacCoun, Robert (1985). The Effects of Jury Size and Polling Method on the Process and Product of Jury Deliberation. Journal of DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.48.2.349
Personality and Social Psychology, 48(2): 349-363.
Kerr, Norbert & MacCoun, Robert (2004). Group Performance and Decision-Making. Annual Review of Psychology, 55: 623-655. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142009
Krebs, Valdis (n.d.). Divided We Stand. Retrieved from: http://www.orgnet.com/divided.html.
Luban, David (1996). The Publicity Principle. In Robert Goodin (ed.), The Theory of Institutional Design (pp. 154-198). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511558320.007
Manin, Bernard (1996). Principes du gouvernement représentatif. Paris: Flammarion.
Mansbridge, Jane (2006). Conflicts and Self-interest in Deliberation. In Samantha Besson & Jose Luis Marti (eds.), Deliberative Democracy and Its
Discontents (pp. 107-132). Burlington: Ashgate Publishing. Mansbridge, Jane, Bohman, James, Chambers, Simone, Christiano, Thomas, Fund, Archon, Parkinson, John, Thompson, Dennis & Warren, Michael (2012). A Systemic Approach to Deliberative Democracy. In John Parkinson &
Jane Mansbridge (eds.), Deliberative Systems (pp.1-26). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MacCoun, Robert (2006). Psychological Constraints on Transparency in Legal and Government Decision Making. Swiss Political Science Review, 12(3): 123-133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1662-6370.2006.tb00056.x
Meade Ellen & Stasavage, David (2008). Publicity of Debate and the Incentive to Dissent: Evidence from the US Federal Reserve. The Economic DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02138.x
Journal, 118(528): 695-717.
Mill, John Stuart (1859), On Liberty. Considerations on Representative Government, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Pestiau, Jean (2001). Mondialisation et bricolage démocratique. In Mondialisation: perspectives philosophiques: Actes du colloque Philosophie et mondialisation tenu à l'Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières les 23 et 24 févr. 2001 (pp. 35-49). Paris: L'Harmattan. Pitseys, John (2011). Un huis-clos particratique de plus en plus antidémocratique. La revue Nouvelle, 9: 50-59.
Rawls, John (1993). Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press. Rottenstreich, Yuval & Hsee, Christopher (2001). Money, Kisses and Electric Shocks: On the Affective Psychology of Risks. Psychological Science, 12(3): 185-188. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00334
Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel (1991). Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(4): 1039–1061. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2937956
Williams, Melissa (1995). Justice Toward Groups: Political Not Juridical. Political Theory, 23 (1): 67-91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591795023001005
Wilson, Thomas (2002). Strangers to Ourselves: Discovering the Adaptive Unconscious. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Young, Iris Marion (1990). Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Secção
Licença
Este trabalho encontra-se publicado com a Licença Internacional Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0.
