Hostname: page-component-55f67697df-4ks9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-09T10:37:14.330Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Democratic Theory and Self-Transformation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Mark Warren
Mark Warren*
Affiliation:
Georgetown University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Democratic theories that argue for expanding the scope and domain of democracy assume that democratic experiences will transform individuals in democratic ways. Individuals are likely to become more public-spirited, tolerant, knowledgeable, and self-reflective than they would otherwise be. This assumption depends on viewing the self as socially and discursively constituted, a view that contrasts with the standard liberal-democratic view of the self as prepolitically constituted and narrowly self-interested. The importance of the social and discursive view of the self is that it highlights how standard assumptions about the self help to justify limits to democratic participation. As now conceptualized, however, the transformational assumption does not meet standard objections to expanding democracy. I sketch an approach that distinguishes classes of interests according to their potentials for democratic transformation, and strengthens—by qualifying—transformative expectations in democratic theory.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 86 , Issue 1 , March 1992 , pp. 8 - 23
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1992 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alford, Robert, and Friedland, Roger. 1985. Powers of Theory: Capitalism, the State, and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bachrach, Peter. 1975. “Interest, Participation, and Democratic Theory.” In Nomos XVI: Participation in Politics, ed. Pennock, J. Roland and Chapman, John W.. New York: Lieber–Atherton.Google Scholar
Barber, Benjamin. 1984. Strong Democracy. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Barber, Benjamin. 1988. The Conquest of Politics: Liberal Philosophy in Democratic Times. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla. 1986. Critique, Norm, and Utopia: A Study of the Foundations of Critical Theory. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla. 1989. “Autonomy, Modernity, and Community: Communitarianism and Critical Theory in Dialogue.” In Zwischenbetrachungen im Prozess der Aufkarung, ed. Honneth, Axel, McCarthy, Thomas, Offe, Claus, and Wellmer, Albrecht. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Berelson, Bernard, Lazarsfeld, Paul, and McPhee, William. 1954. Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bowles, Samuel, and Gintis, Herbert. 1986. Democracy and Capitalism: Property, Community, and the Contradictions of Modern Social Thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Braybrooke, David. 1987. Meeting Needs. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Burnheim, John. 1985. Is Democracy Possible? The Alternative to Electoral Politics. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Connolly, William. 1983. The Terms of Political Discourse. 2d ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Connolly, William. 1988. Political Theory and Modernity. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Connolly, William. 1991. Identity/Difference; Democratic Negotiations of Political Paradox. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Crozier, Michael, Huntington, Samuel, and Watanuki, Joji. 1975. The Crisis of Democracy. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Cunningham, Frank. 1987. Democratic Theory and Socialism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert. 1985. A Preface to Economic Democracy. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert. 1989. Democracy and Its Critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John. 1990. Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Gerald. 1988. The Theory and Practice of Autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1965. A Framework for Political Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Elkin, Stephen. 1985. “Economic and Political Rationality.” Polity. 18:253–71.Google Scholar
Elster, Jon. 1983. Sour Grapes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1979. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Trans. Sheridan, Alan. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Frankfurt, Harry. 1989. “Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person.” In The Inner Citadel, ed. Christman, John. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gendlin, Eugene. 1987. “A Philosophical Critique of the Concept of Narcissism.” In Pathologies of the Modern Self, ed. Levin, David M.. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Gould, Carol. 1988. Rethinking Democracy: Freedom and Social Cooperation in Politics, Economy, and Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Graham, Keith. 1986. The Battle of Democracy. Brighton: Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1975. Legitimation Crisis. Trans. McCarthy, Thomas. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1979. Communication and the Evolution of Society. Trans. McCarthy, Thomas. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1984–1987. The Theory of Communicative Action. 2 vols. Trans. McCarthy, Thomas. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Trans. Burger, Thomas. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harré, Rom. 1987. “The Social Construction of Selves.” In Self and Identity, ed. Yardley, Krysia and Honess, Terry. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Held, David. 1987. Models of Democracy. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hirsch, Fred. 1976. Social Limits to Growth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hirst, Paul Q. 1986. Law, Socialism, and Democracy. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1970. Kant's Political Writings. Ed. Reiss, Hans. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Laclau, Ernesto, and Mouffe, Chantal. 1985. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Toward a Radical Democratic Politics. Trans. Moore, Winston and Cammack, Paul. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Leiss, William. 1976. The Limits of Satisfaction: An Essay on Needs and Commodities. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Charles. 1990. Inquiry and Change: The Troubled Attempt To Understand and Change Society. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1960. Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alisdair. 1981. After Virtue. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Macpherson, C. B. 1977. The Life and Times of Liberal Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Madison, James, Hamilton, Alexander, and Jay, John. 1961. The Federalist Papers. New York: New American Library.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1980. Beyond Adversary Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1990a. “Self-Interest in Public Life.” Political Theory. 18:132–53.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1990b. “Creating Citizens: The Participatory Heritage.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Sociological Association, Boston.Google Scholar
Miller, David. 1989. Market, State, and Community: Theoretical Foundations of Market Socialism. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Offe, Claus. 1984. Contradictions of the Welfare State. Trans. Keane, John. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Offe, Claus. 1985. Disorganized Capitalism. Trans. Keane, John. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pateman, Carole. 1970. Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pitkin, Hanna Fenichel, and Shumer, Sara M.. 1982. “On Participation.” Democracy. 2:43–54.Google Scholar
Pollitt, Christopher. 1986. “Democracy and Bureaucracy.” In New Forms of Democracy, ed. by Held, David and Pollitt, Christopher. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Riker, William. 1982. Liberalism against Populism. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Sandel, Michael. 1982. Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni. 1987. The Theory of Democracy Revisited. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph. 1942. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
Scott, James. 1985. Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sirianni, Carmen. 1981. “Production and Power in a Classless Society: A Critical Analysis of the Utopian Dimensions of Marxist Theory.” Socialist Review 59:33–82.Google Scholar
Sullivan, William. 1982. Reconstructing Public Philosophy. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass. 1991. “Preferences and Politics.” Philosophy and Public Affairs. 20:3–34.Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles. 1979. Hegel and Modern Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles. 1989. Sources of the Self. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Walzer, Michael. 1983. Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Warren, Mark. 1989. “Liberal Constitutionalism As Ideology: Marx and Habermas.” Political Theory 17:511–34.Google Scholar
Warren, Mark. 1990. “Ideology and the Self.” Theory and Society. 19:599–643.Google Scholar
Warren, Mark. N.d. “Can Participatory Democracy Produce Better Selves? Psychological Dimensions of Habermas's Model of Discursive Democracy.” Political Psychology. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Xenos, Nicholas. 1987. “Liberalism and the Postulate of Scarcity.” Political Theory 15:225–43.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.