FAQ
Logo of Jagiellonian University

The Intersectional Limits to Feminist Democratic Representation in Deliberative Social Innovations

Publication date: 04.12.2024

Teoria Polityki, 2024, Nr 9/2024, pp. 125-147

https://doi.org/10.4467/25440845TP.24.019.20715

Authors

,
Mateusz Zieliński
University of Wroclaw
, Poland
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1958-3683 Orcid
Contact with author
All publications →
Wojciech Ufel
University of Wroclaw
, Poland
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7762-6349 Orcid
Contact with author
All publications →

Titles

The Intersectional Limits to Feminist Democratic Representation in Deliberative Social Innovations

Abstract

Feminist critique of democracy leads to the articulation of numerous proposals to change its institutional mechanisms to be more inclusive and emancipatory. Increasing importance is attributed not only to quantitative representation but also to the quality of public debate. In the article, we demonstrate how recent efforts to transcend the distinction between descriptive and substantive representation of women can face criticism from the perspective of intersectional theory. By analyzing the example of the ‘second-generation feminist institutional design,’ a model proposed by Karen Celis and Sarah Childs, we assess the compatibility of these ideas with deliberative theory and its practice. Ultimately, we circle back to the challenge posed by the intersectional approach to power and equality, aiming to delineate the boundaries of the emancipatory and inclusive potential of deliberative practices. The critique presented by intersectionality underscores that while such innovations might enhance equality in certain aspects, their inherent design will inadvertently perpetuate inequalities in other domains.

References

Download references

Asenbaum, H. (2022). Rethinking Democratic Innovations: A Look through the Kaleidoscope of Democratic TheoryPolitical Studies Review, 20(4), pp. 680690.

Bachtiger, A. et al. (2010). Disentangling Diversity in Deliberative Democracy: Competing Theories, Their Blind Spots and ComplementaritiesJournal of Political Philosophy, 18(1), pp. 3263. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00342.x.

Banerjee, S.B. (2022). Decolonizing Deliberative Democracy: Perspectives from BelowJournal of Business Ethics, 181(2), pp. 283299. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-021-04971-5.

Beauvoir de, S. (2011). The Second Sex. New York: Vintage Books.

Beckwith, K. (2007). Numbers and Newness: The Descriptive and Substantive Representation of WomenCanadian Journal of Political Science / Revue Canadienne de Science Politique, 40(1), pp. 2749.

Boker, M. (2017). Justification, Critique and Deliberative Legitimacy: The Limits of Mini-PublicsContemporary Political Theory, 16(1), pp. 1940. DOI: 10.1057/cpt.2016.11.

Braidotti, R. (1991). Patterns of Dissonance: A Study of Women in Contemporary Philosophy. New York: Routledge.

Butler, J. (1999). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.

Celis, K., Childs, S. (2020). Feminist Democratic Representation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Coleman, R. (2014). Inventive Feminist Theory: Representation, Materiality and Intensive TimeWomen: A Cultural Review, 25(1), pp. 2745. DOI: 10.1080/09574042.2014.901098.

Collins, P.H. (1996). Whats in a Name? Womanism, Black Feminism, and BeyondThe Black Scholar, 26(1), pp. 917.

Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist PoliticsUniversity of Chicago Legal Forum, 1, pp. 139167.

Davis, A.Y. (1983). Women, Race & Class. 1st vintage books ed. New York: Vintage Books.

Deligiaouri, A., Suiter, J. (2023). Oscillating Between Representation and Participation in Deliberative Fora and the Question of Legitimacy: Can Hybrid Representative Democracy Be the Remedy?Representation, 59(1), pp. 137153. DOI: 10.1080/00344893.2021.1950040.

Derrida, J. (1978). Writing and Difference. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Disch, L. (2015). The Constructivist Turn in Democratic Representation: A Normative Dead-End?: The Constructivist Turn in Democratic Representation: Lisa DischConstellations, 22(4), pp. 487499. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8675.12201.

Disch, L.J. (2021). Making Constituencies: Representation as Mobilization in Mass Democracy. ChicagoLondon: The University of Chicago Press.

Dovi, S. (2002). Preferable Descriptive Representatives: Will Just Any Woman, Black, or Latino Do?American Political Science Review, 96(4), pp. 729743. DOI: 10.1017/S0003055402000412.

Dovi, S.L. (2007). The Good Representative. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.

Drake, A. (2023). Deliberative Democracy and Systemic RacismCanadian Journal of Political Science / Revue Canadienne de Science Politique, 56(1), pp. 92112. DOI:10.1017/S0008423922000919.

Dryzek, J.S. (1990). Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science. CambridgeNew York: Cambridge University Press.

Dryzek, J.S. (2000). Deliberative Democracy and Beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

European Commission. Joint Research Centre et al. (2019). Understanding Our Political Nature: How to Put Knowledge and Reason at the Heart of Political Decision-Making. EU: Publications Officehttps://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/374191 (accessed: 30.12.2023).

Farrell, D.M., Stone, P. (2020). Sortition and Mini-Publics: A Different Kind of Representation. In: R. Rohrschneider, J. Thomassen (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Political Representation in Liberal Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 227246. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198825081.013.11.

Felski, R. (1997). The Doxa of DifferenceSigns: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 23(1), pp. 121. DOI: 10.1086/495231.

Flanigan, B. et al. (2021). Fair Algorithms for Selecting Citizens AssembliesNature, 596(7873), pp. 548552. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-03788-6.

Fung, A. (2003). Survey Article: Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their ConsequencesJournal of Political Philosophy, 11(3), pp. 338367. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9760.00181.

Fung, A. (2007). Minipublics: Deliberative Designs and Their Consequences. In: S.W. Rosenberg (ed.). Deliberation, Participation and Democracy. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 159183. DOI: 10.1057/9780230591080_8.

Gąsiorowska, A. (2023). Sortition and Its Principles: Evaluation of the Selection Processes of Citizens AssembliesJournal of Deliberative Democracy, 19(1). DOI: 10.16997/jdd.1310.

Griffin, J. et al. (2015). Understanding Participant Representativeness in Deliberative Events: A Case Study Comparing Probability and Non-Probability Recruitment StrategiesJournal of Deliberative Democracy, 11(1). DOI: 10.16997/jdd.221.

Gutmann, A. Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge: Belknap Press.

Habermas, J. (1987). The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Habermas, J. (1990). Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Haraway, D. (1988). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial PerspectiveFeminist Studies, 14(3), pp. 575599. DOI: 10.2307/3178066.

Hendriks, C.M., Dryzek, J.S., Hunold, C. (2007). Turning up the Heat: Partisanship in Deliberative InnovationPolitical Studies, 55(2), pp. 362383. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00667.x.

hooks, b. (1981). Aint I a Woman: Black Women and Feminism. 1st edition. Boston, MA: South End Press.

hooks, b. (2014). Talking Back: Thinking Feminist, Thinking Black. New edition. New York: Routledge.

Jackson, S.J. (2016). (Re)Imagining Intersectional Democracy from Black Feminism to Hashtag ActivismWomens Studies in Communication, 39(4), pp. 375379. DOI: 10.1080/07491409.2016.1226654.

Jacquet, V. (2017). Explaining Nonparticipation in Deliberative MinipublicsEuropean Journal of Political Research, 56(3), pp. 640659.

Juchacz, P.W. (2015). Deliberatywna filozofia publiczna: analiza instytucji wysłuchania publicznego w Sejmie Rzeczpospolitej Polskiej z perspektywy systemowego podejścia do demokracji deliberatywnej. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Instytutu Filozofii Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza.

Junius, N. (2023). From Representative to Represented Mini-Publics: How Mini-PublicsOutputs Are Shaped by RepresentationPolitical Studies Review, 22(4). DOI: 10.1177/14789299231217619.

Karpowitz, C.F., Raphael, C., Hammond, A.S. (2009). Deliberative Democracy and Inequality: Two Cheers for Enclave Deliberation among the DisempoweredPolitics & Society, 37(4), pp. 576615. DOI: 10.1177/0032329209349226.

Krook, M.L. (2010). Studying Political Representation: A Comparative-Gendered ApproachPerspectives on Politics, 8(1), pp. 233240. DOI: 10.1017/S1537592709992817.

Laclau, E. (2005). On Populist Reason. LondonNew York: Verso.

Laclau, E., Mouffe, C. (2001). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. 2nd edition. LondonNew York: Verso.

Landemore, H. (2017). Beyond the Fact of Disagreement? The Epistemic Turn in Deliberative DemocracySocial Epistemology, 31(3), pp. 277295. DOI: 10.1080/02691728.2017.1317868.

Machin, A. (2023). Democracy, Agony, and Rupture: A Critique of Climate Citizens AssembliesPolitische Vierteljahresschrift, 64(4), pp. 845864. DOI: 10.1007/s11615-023-00455-5.

Majewska, E. (2021). Feminist Antifascism: Counterpublics of the Common. London:Verso.

Malinowska, E. (2000). Feminizm europejski. Demokracja parytetowa a polski ruch kobiet. Socjologiczna analiza walki o rownouprawnienie płci. Łodź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łodzkiego.

Mansbridge, J. et al. (2012). A Systemic Approach to Deliberative Democracy. In: J. Parkinson, J. Mansbridge (eds.). Deliberative Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 126. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139178914.002.

MosaicLab (2023). When Deliberation Goes Wrong? Recruitmenthttps://www.mosaiclab.com.au/news-all-posts/deliberation-what-can-go-wrong-recruitment-in-focus (accessed: 30.12.2023).

Mouffe, C. (1991). Democratic Citizenship and the Political Community. In: Miami Theory Collective (ed.). Community at Loose Ends. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 7082. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.ctttsqk7.10 (accessed: 18.07.2022).

Mouffe, C. (1999). Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism?Social Research, 66(3), pp. 745758.

Mouffe, C. (2000). The Democratic Paradox. LondonNew York: Verso.

Nawrot-Adamczyk, I. (2021). Reakcja na wielokrotne wykluczenie. Mobilizacja kobiet indiańskich w Kanadzie w latach 19681985. Krakow: Wydawnictwo Uniwerystetu Jagiellońskiego.

Niemeyer, S., Dryzek, J.S. (2007). The Ends of Deliberation: Meta-Consensus and Inter-Subjective Rationality as Ideal OutcomesSwiss Political Science Review, 13(4), pp. 497526. DOI: 10.1002/j.1662-6370.2007.tb00087.x.

OECD. (2020). Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions: Catching the Deliberative Wave. DOI: 10.1787/339306da-en.

Peixoto, T., Spada, P. (2023). Reflections on the Representativeness of Citizens Assemblies and Similar InnovationsDemocracySpothttps://democracyspot.net/2023/02/22/reflections-on-the-representativeness-of-citizens-assemblies-and-similar-innovations/ (accessed: 30.12.2023).

Phillips, A. (1991). Engendering Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Phillips, A. (1995). The Politics of Presence. OxfordNew York: Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press.

Pitkin, H.F. (1972). The Concept of Representation. BerkeleyLos AngelesLondon: University of California Press.

Ranciere, J. (2004). Disagreement: Politics and Philosophy. First printing edition. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Saward, M. (2006). The Representative ClaimContemporary Political Theory, 5(3), pp. 297318. DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.cpt.9300234.

Severs, E. (2010). Representation as Claims-Making. Quid Responsiveness?Representation, 46(4), pp. 411423. DOI: 10.1080/00344893.2010.518081.

Severs, E., Celis, K., Meier, P. (2013). Representative Claims and Beyond: A Study of Muslim Womens Inclusion in the Flemish Headscarf DebatePolitics, Groups and Identities, 1(3), pp. 433450. DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2013.816633.

Smith, G. (2009). Democratic Innovations: Designing Institutions for Citizen Participation. CambridgeNew York: Cambridge University Press.

Smith, G. (2012). Deliberative Democracy and Mini-Publics. In: K. Newton, B. Geissel (eds.). Evaluating Democratic Innovations. London: Routledge, pp. 100121.

Stegenga, J. (2016). Three Criteria for Consensus ConferencesFoundations of Science, 21(1), pp. 3549. DOI: 10.1007/s10699-014-9374-y.

Valeriani, M., Kappler, L., Iaione, C. (2021). D8.2 EUARENAS Index (EURARI). LUISS.

Williams, M.S. (1998). Voice, Trust, and Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Wittig, M. (2013). One Is Not Born a Woman. In: C.R. McCann, S.K. Kim (eds.). Feminist Theory Reader: Local and Global Perspectives. New York: Routledge, pp. 246251.

Wojciechowska, M. (2019). Towards Intersectional Democratic InnovationsPolitical Studies, 67(4), pp. 895911. DOI: 10.1177/0032321718814165.

Young, I.M. (1990). Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Young, I.M. (1996). Communicaton and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy. In: S. Benhabib (ed.). Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 120136.

Young, I.M. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.

Zielińska, K. (2012). Feminizm a demokracja  krytyka i reinterpretacjaStudia Humanistyczne AGH, 11(2), pp. 1892. DOI: 10.7494/human.2012.11.2.81.

Information

Information: Teoria Polityki, 2024, Nr 9/2024, pp. 125-147

Article type: Original article

Authors

Published at: 04.12.2024

Article status: Open

Licence: CC BY  licence icon

Percentage share of authors:

Mateusz Zieliński (Author) - 50%
Wojciech Ufel (Author) - 50%

Information about author:

Mateusz Zieliński – PhD, is an Assistant Professor at the Institute of Political Science, University of Wrocław. His research focuses on political theory and discourse analysis. Currently, he is exploring the political representation of groups at extreme risk of socio-economic exclusion.
 

Wojciech Ufel – an assistant professor at the Institute of Political Science at the University of Wrocław and a researcher in the Horizon2020 project EUARENAS at the SWPS University. He specialises in political theory, particularly contemporary debates on participatory, deliberative, and radical democracy. In his research, he applies political philosophy based on Ludwig Wittgenstein’s approach to ‘language games’, together with postcolonial, posthumanist, and
critical theories, also to empirical research and social practice. He was a visiting researcher at The New School for Social Research, University of Brighton, University of Eastern Finland, and Charles University in Prague.

Article corrections:

-

Publication languages:

English