Pyramidal deliberative democracy
- Authors: Danielsen, James
- Date: 2019
- Subjects: Democracy , Information technology -- Political aspects , Internet in public administration , Political participation -- Computer network resources , World politics
- Language: English
- Type: text , Thesis , Doctoral , PhD
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/74502 , vital:30309
- Description: This dissertation has two main objectives. First, to outline an ICT-facilitated model of democracy called ‘pyramidal democracy’ that reconciles deliberative democracy with mass engagement. Second, to suggest how this model of democracy might engender the democratisation of the global economy and thus the provision of a basic level of economic security for all global citizens. At the core of the model is the pyramidal deliberative network, a means of organising citizens into small online deliberative groups and linking these groups together by means of an iterative process of delegate-selection and group-formation. The pyramidal network enables citizens to aggregate their preferences in a deliberative manner, and then project social power by authorizing the delegates at the top-tier of the pyramidal network to communicate their social demands to elected officials or to other points of authority. The envisioned outcome is the democratisation of the public sphere by means of the proliferation of deliberative networks in the government, market, and civil society spheres. Transnational pyramidal networks may make it feasible to instantiate a new citizen-based schema of global governance and, thereby, facilitate the reform of the United Nations and enable a transition towards global peace, sustainability, and distributive justice. Distributive justice might be achieved by means of implementing the six components of a democratised economy: participatory budgeting, fee-and-dividend taxes, a basic income, monetary reform, workplace democracy, and the sharing economy. Taken together, these components might enable the universal provision of a social minimum – a universal basic income sufficient for basic security and real freedom. Taken to its logical conclusion, a democratised economy may also enable a transition towards a post-scarcity economic order characterised by a maximal stock of humanmade and natural capital that would not exceed the sustainable carrying capacity of the earth.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2019
- Authors: Danielsen, James
- Date: 2019
- Subjects: Democracy , Information technology -- Political aspects , Internet in public administration , Political participation -- Computer network resources , World politics
- Language: English
- Type: text , Thesis , Doctoral , PhD
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/74502 , vital:30309
- Description: This dissertation has two main objectives. First, to outline an ICT-facilitated model of democracy called ‘pyramidal democracy’ that reconciles deliberative democracy with mass engagement. Second, to suggest how this model of democracy might engender the democratisation of the global economy and thus the provision of a basic level of economic security for all global citizens. At the core of the model is the pyramidal deliberative network, a means of organising citizens into small online deliberative groups and linking these groups together by means of an iterative process of delegate-selection and group-formation. The pyramidal network enables citizens to aggregate their preferences in a deliberative manner, and then project social power by authorizing the delegates at the top-tier of the pyramidal network to communicate their social demands to elected officials or to other points of authority. The envisioned outcome is the democratisation of the public sphere by means of the proliferation of deliberative networks in the government, market, and civil society spheres. Transnational pyramidal networks may make it feasible to instantiate a new citizen-based schema of global governance and, thereby, facilitate the reform of the United Nations and enable a transition towards global peace, sustainability, and distributive justice. Distributive justice might be achieved by means of implementing the six components of a democratised economy: participatory budgeting, fee-and-dividend taxes, a basic income, monetary reform, workplace democracy, and the sharing economy. Taken together, these components might enable the universal provision of a social minimum – a universal basic income sufficient for basic security and real freedom. Taken to its logical conclusion, a democratised economy may also enable a transition towards a post-scarcity economic order characterised by a maximal stock of humanmade and natural capital that would not exceed the sustainable carrying capacity of the earth.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2019
How the South African print media cover economics news: a study of inflation news in four newspapers, 1999-2001
- Authors: Kula, Momelezi Michael
- Date: 2004
- Subjects: Journalism, Commercial -- South Africa , Inflation (Finance) -- South Africa , South Africa -- Newspapers , Mass media -- Political aspects -- Africa , Democracy , Journalism -- Social aspects
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:3450 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1002904 , Journalism, Commercial -- South Africa , Inflation (Finance) -- South Africa , South Africa -- Newspapers , Mass media -- Political aspects -- Africa , Democracy , Journalism -- Social aspects
- Description: There is a considerable amount of literature arguing that economics and business journalism is growing. This subfield of journalism is important as economics issues impact on everyday lives of the people. Media have an important role to inform people about the economy and give them a voice to take part in public debates. The down side though is that economics journalism is criticised for not serving the public well in this aspect. Evidence suggests that economics journalism lost its critical character and that there is closer in economics debates. Using content analysis, this study examines coverage of inflation as reported by South African print media. Three major findings emerged: 1) Evidence shows that there are a variety of cases of inflation. 2) There are also similarities among newspapers on what they view as causing inflation. 3) However, media do not draw sources from all sectors of society. The elite, who are educated people and government officials, are over-accessed while the ordinary citizens - although also affected by inflation – are marginalized. Company and government sources top source lists in the media. It is argued that sources play an important role in shaping the news content. They do so by identifying problems and prescribing potential solutions. They set parameters and define terms of reference. However, media also play a mediating role. They do so by selecting sources and structuring sources in stories. They may chose to quote or report what their sources say and even comment on it. This study concludes that in South Africa ordinary citizens have no voices in economics debates. Media used bureaucratic sources only and that is a consonant agenda on inflation coverage amongst newspapers. The heavy reliance on bureaucratic sources and the exclusion of some sectors of society in sources lists raises questions about impartiality of these sources on issues relating to their organisations and institutions. These are not viable sources that could provide information that could expose abuse of power.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2004
- Authors: Kula, Momelezi Michael
- Date: 2004
- Subjects: Journalism, Commercial -- South Africa , Inflation (Finance) -- South Africa , South Africa -- Newspapers , Mass media -- Political aspects -- Africa , Democracy , Journalism -- Social aspects
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:3450 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1002904 , Journalism, Commercial -- South Africa , Inflation (Finance) -- South Africa , South Africa -- Newspapers , Mass media -- Political aspects -- Africa , Democracy , Journalism -- Social aspects
- Description: There is a considerable amount of literature arguing that economics and business journalism is growing. This subfield of journalism is important as economics issues impact on everyday lives of the people. Media have an important role to inform people about the economy and give them a voice to take part in public debates. The down side though is that economics journalism is criticised for not serving the public well in this aspect. Evidence suggests that economics journalism lost its critical character and that there is closer in economics debates. Using content analysis, this study examines coverage of inflation as reported by South African print media. Three major findings emerged: 1) Evidence shows that there are a variety of cases of inflation. 2) There are also similarities among newspapers on what they view as causing inflation. 3) However, media do not draw sources from all sectors of society. The elite, who are educated people and government officials, are over-accessed while the ordinary citizens - although also affected by inflation – are marginalized. Company and government sources top source lists in the media. It is argued that sources play an important role in shaping the news content. They do so by identifying problems and prescribing potential solutions. They set parameters and define terms of reference. However, media also play a mediating role. They do so by selecting sources and structuring sources in stories. They may chose to quote or report what their sources say and even comment on it. This study concludes that in South Africa ordinary citizens have no voices in economics debates. Media used bureaucratic sources only and that is a consonant agenda on inflation coverage amongst newspapers. The heavy reliance on bureaucratic sources and the exclusion of some sectors of society in sources lists raises questions about impartiality of these sources on issues relating to their organisations and institutions. These are not viable sources that could provide information that could expose abuse of power.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2004
Liberal aristocracy & the limits of democracy
- Authors: Wareham, Christopher
- Date: 2004
- Subjects: Plato , Aristocracy (Political science) , Liberalism , Democracy , Constitutional law , Civil rights -- Philosophy
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:2725 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1002855 , Plato , Aristocracy (Political science) , Liberalism , Democracy , Constitutional law , Civil rights -- Philosophy
- Description: I define and defend a non-democratic authority with the power to annul the decisions of democratic branches of government when such decisions infringe upon citizens’ basic rights and liberties. I refer to this non-democratic authority as Liberal Aristocracy. The argument for Liberal Aristocracy has two parts: the first part demonstrates that Liberal Aristocracy will arrive at decisions that further the moral end of sustaining citizens’ rights; the second part holds that Liberal Aristocracy is a moral means to this end. First, I discuss two existing arguments for non-democratic authorities – Platonic Aristocracy and Constitutional Court Judges. I claim that Plato’s argument is unsuccessful because it relies on controversial metaethical premises that are unlikely to provide a basis for rights. Liberal justifications of the power of Constitutional Courts are argued to be incomplete because they do not designate an authority that is qualified to decide when citizens’ rights are infringed by democratic branches of government. Nor do they show that such an authority is in fact required if citizens’ rights are to be protected. In order to supplement the liberal argument for the power of Constitutional Courts I develop an account of Liberal Aristocracy, which rests on the idea that Constitutional Court Judges should possess moral expertise. I claim that (i) moral expertise qualifies Judges to decide when citizens’ rights are violated by democratic decisions. Furthermore, I argue that (ii) decisions taken democratically will sometimes encroach on citizens’ rights. Claims (i) and (ii) are shown to justify the non-democratic authority of Liberal Aristocracy. The second part of the argument for Liberal Aristocracy examines arguments to the effect that only democratic procedures can be morally legitimate, even if other decision procedures arrive at outcomes that provide greater support for citizens’ rights. Three claims are offered in support of this idea. First, democracy is claimed to be necessary to support deliberation. Second, democracy is seen as the only procedure that can uphold the value of autonomy by securing citizens’ consent. Third, it is argued that non-democratic procedures will not recognise the equal status of citizens. I hold that these three claims are false and that Liberal Aristocratic procedures can be morally legitimate.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2004
- Authors: Wareham, Christopher
- Date: 2004
- Subjects: Plato , Aristocracy (Political science) , Liberalism , Democracy , Constitutional law , Civil rights -- Philosophy
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:2725 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1002855 , Plato , Aristocracy (Political science) , Liberalism , Democracy , Constitutional law , Civil rights -- Philosophy
- Description: I define and defend a non-democratic authority with the power to annul the decisions of democratic branches of government when such decisions infringe upon citizens’ basic rights and liberties. I refer to this non-democratic authority as Liberal Aristocracy. The argument for Liberal Aristocracy has two parts: the first part demonstrates that Liberal Aristocracy will arrive at decisions that further the moral end of sustaining citizens’ rights; the second part holds that Liberal Aristocracy is a moral means to this end. First, I discuss two existing arguments for non-democratic authorities – Platonic Aristocracy and Constitutional Court Judges. I claim that Plato’s argument is unsuccessful because it relies on controversial metaethical premises that are unlikely to provide a basis for rights. Liberal justifications of the power of Constitutional Courts are argued to be incomplete because they do not designate an authority that is qualified to decide when citizens’ rights are infringed by democratic branches of government. Nor do they show that such an authority is in fact required if citizens’ rights are to be protected. In order to supplement the liberal argument for the power of Constitutional Courts I develop an account of Liberal Aristocracy, which rests on the idea that Constitutional Court Judges should possess moral expertise. I claim that (i) moral expertise qualifies Judges to decide when citizens’ rights are violated by democratic decisions. Furthermore, I argue that (ii) decisions taken democratically will sometimes encroach on citizens’ rights. Claims (i) and (ii) are shown to justify the non-democratic authority of Liberal Aristocracy. The second part of the argument for Liberal Aristocracy examines arguments to the effect that only democratic procedures can be morally legitimate, even if other decision procedures arrive at outcomes that provide greater support for citizens’ rights. Three claims are offered in support of this idea. First, democracy is claimed to be necessary to support deliberation. Second, democracy is seen as the only procedure that can uphold the value of autonomy by securing citizens’ consent. Third, it is argued that non-democratic procedures will not recognise the equal status of citizens. I hold that these three claims are false and that Liberal Aristocratic procedures can be morally legitimate.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2004
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »