This analysis of deliberative transformative moments gives deliberative research a dynamic aspect, opening practical applications in deeply divided societies.

Deliberative democracy has been one of the main games in contemporary political theory for two decades, growing enormously in size and importance in political science and many other disciplines. The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy takes stock of deliberative democracy as a research field, in philosophy, in various research programmes in the social sciences and law, and in political practice around the globe. It provides a concise history of deliberative ideals in political thought and discusses their philosophical origins. The Handbook locates deliberation in political systems with different spaces, publics, and venues, including parliaments, courts, governance networks, protests, mini-publics, old and new media, and everyday talk. It engages with practical applications, mapping deliberation as a reform movement and as a device for conflict resolution, documenting the practice and study of deliberative democracy around the world and in global governance.

Examines the interplay between the normative and empirical aspects of the deliberative model of democracy.

Contending discourses underlie many of the worlds most intractable conflicts, producing misery and violence. This is especially true in the post-9/11 world. However, contending discourses can also open the way to greater dialogue in global civil society and across states and international organizations. This possibility holds even for the most murderous sorts of conflicts in deeply divided societies. In this timely and original book, John Dryzek examines major contemporary conflicts in terms of clashing discourses. Topics covered include the alleged clash of civilizations; societies divided by ethnicity, nationality, or religion; economic globalization versus resistance; plus an in-depth discussion of the 'war on terror'. Dryzek concludes by highlighting the limitations of current neoconservative and cosmopolitan approaches, arguing that only deliberative global politics offers unprecedented new possibilities for democratic engagement in the international system. This book will be of interest to students and scholars of international relations, politics, philosophy, and sociology.

How can societies still grappling over the common values and shared vision of their state draft a democratic constitution? This is the central puzzle of Making Constitutions in Deeply Divided Societies. While most theories discuss constitution-making in the context of a moment of revolutionary change, Hanna Lerner argues that an incrementalist approach to constitution-making can enable societies riven by deep internal disagreements to either enact a written constitution or function with an unwritten one. She illustrates the process of constitution-writing in three deeply divided societies - Israel, India and Ireland - and explores the various incrementalist strategies deployed by their drafters. These include the avoidance of clear decisions, the use of ambivalent legal language and the inclusion of contrasting provisions in the constitution. Such techniques allow the deferral of controversial choices regarding the foundational aspects of the polity to future political institutions, thus enabling the constitution to reflect a divided identity.

Deliberative democracy is a dominant paradigm in normative political philosophy. Deliberative democrats want politics to be more than a clash of contending interests, and they believe political decisions should emerge from reasoned dialogue among citizens. But can these ideals be realized in complex and unjust societies? This book brings together leading scholars who explore debates in deliberative democratic theory in four areas of practice: education, constitutions and state boundaries, indigenous-settler relations, and citizen participation and public consultation. This dynamic volume casts new light on the strengths and limitations of deliberative democratic theory, offering guidance to policy makers and to students and scholars interested in democratic justice.

Democratic Speech in Divided Times offers a comprehensive account of the norms that should govern public discourse in circumstances marked by deep and often unjust social divisions. Part I investigates what forms of democratic speech are desirable in these settings. This part shows, firstly, that some forms of public discourse that are symptomatic of division can nevertheless play a crucial democratic function. In particular, it argues that emotionally charged speech--and most notably, speech voicing deep anger--plays a fundamental role in overcoming entrenched epistemic divisions and in facilitating the exchange of shared reasons. This part also examines how, in contrast, other characteristic features of the public discourse of divided societies endanger democratic life. Here, the argument considers the proliferation of hate speech and misinformation, and examines what forms of democratic speech should be used to combat them. Part II considers how realistic the foregoing account of public discourse is. Specifically, it assesses the complications that arise from intergroup antipathy, pervasive political ignorance, and the fragmentation of the public sphere. The normative picture of public discourse that this book defends can largely withstand these problems. And, while these social conditions do qualify the value of democratic speech in some respects, they are at least as problematic for political ideals that give up on inclusive democratic speech altogether. Accordingly, while realising the ideal of democratic speech that this book outlines is challenging, we should not lose patience with this task.