Hearing the other side: deliberative versus participatory democracy

TLDR

Religion and politics should not be discussed in mixed company, yet fostering cross‑political dialogue remains a central concern of theorists and a current cause celebre for pundits and citizens seeking to improve American democracy, and scholars have only recently begun empirical investigations into how and what consequences arise when people interact with those holding differing views. Hearing the Other Side examines this theme in the context of the contemporary United States. The study uniquely links political theory with empirical research. The study finds that an extremely activist political culture is unlikely to be heavily deliberative.

Abstract

'Religion and politics', as the old saying goes, 'should never be discussed in mixed company.'And yet fostering discussions that cross lines of political difference has long been a central concern of political theorists. More recently, it has also become a cause celebre for pundits and civic-minded citizens wanting to improve the health of American democracy. But only recently have scholars begun empirical investigations of where and with what consequences people interact with those whose political views differ from their own. Hearing the Other Side examines this theme in the context of the contemporary United States. It is unique in its effort to link political theory with empirical research. Drawing on her empirical work, Mutz suggests that it is doubtful that an extremely activist political culture can also be a heavily deliberative one.