TY - GEN
T1 - The Crisis of Democracy and the Science of Deliberation
T2 - Citizens can avoid polarization and make sound decisions
AU - DRYZEK, John
AU - Bachtiger, Andre
AU - Chambers, Simone
AU - Cohen, Joshua
AU - Druckman, James
AU - Felicetti, Andrea
AU - Fishkin, James
AU - Farrell, David
AU - Fung, Archon
AU - Gutmann, Amy
AU - Landemore, Helene
AU - Mansbridge, Jane
AU - Marien, Sophie
AU - NIEMEYER, Simon
AU - Neblo, Michael
AU - Setala, Maja
AU - Slothuus, Rune
AU - Suiter, Jane
AU - Thompson, D.
AU - Warren, Mark
N1 - Funding Information:
Financial supportwas provided bytheInternational Centerfor Cultural and Technological Studies (IZKT) of theUniversityof Stuttgart and the Australian Research Council (FL140100154). Competing interests:A.Fu.serves on the Board of Directorsof Common Cause and EverydayDemocracyand is anoccasional consultant toApple.
PY - 2019/3/15
Y1 - 2019/3/15
N2 - That there are more opportunities than ever for citizens to express their views may be, counterintuitively, a problem facing democracy—the sheer quantitative overabundance overloads policymakers and citizens, making it difficult to detect the signal amid the noise. This overload has been accompanied by marked decline in civility and argumentative complexity. Uncivil behavior by elites and pathological mass communication reinforce each other. How do we break this vicious cycle? Asking elites to behave better is futile so long as there is a public ripe to be polarized and exploited by demagogues and media manipulators. Thus, any response has to involve ordinary citizens; but are they up to the task? Social science on “deliberative democracy” offers reasons for optimism about citizens' capacity to avoid polarization and manipulation and to make sound decisions. The real world of democratic politics is currently far from the deliberative ideal, but empirical evidence shows that the gap can be closed.
AB - That there are more opportunities than ever for citizens to express their views may be, counterintuitively, a problem facing democracy—the sheer quantitative overabundance overloads policymakers and citizens, making it difficult to detect the signal amid the noise. This overload has been accompanied by marked decline in civility and argumentative complexity. Uncivil behavior by elites and pathological mass communication reinforce each other. How do we break this vicious cycle? Asking elites to behave better is futile so long as there is a public ripe to be polarized and exploited by demagogues and media manipulators. Thus, any response has to involve ordinary citizens; but are they up to the task? Social science on “deliberative democracy” offers reasons for optimism about citizens' capacity to avoid polarization and manipulation and to make sound decisions. The real world of democratic politics is currently far from the deliberative ideal, but empirical evidence shows that the gap can be closed.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062965997&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1126/scienceaaw2694
DO - 10.1126/scienceaaw2694
M3 - Article
VL - 363
SP - 1144
EP - 1146
JO - Science
JF - Science
ER -