ABSTRACT
Deliberative democracy’s ideal of communicative equality guarantees all prospective participants a level playing fi eld upon which to propose, question, and critique courses of collective action and to have their expressed ideas recognized and engaged by others (Cohen 1989; Dryzek 2000; Gutmann and Thompson 2004; Habermas 2006). This is thought to improve the quality of political life for all. It opens up to minority groups distinctive means by which to exert infl uence within the political order, as their voice is received and responded to on its own merits, irrespective of social rank, status or role; and, by so doing, it curbs majority tendencies to suppress minority viewpoints beneath aggregates of quantitative data as found in public opinion polls, electoral results, and apportioned representational schemes (Habermas 2006). The ideal offers up for majorities as well as minorities broadened opportunities for expanded dialogue, greater deliberation of ideas, and thus enhanced prospects for informed and refl ective collective action by an enlightened public (Habermas 2006; Bohman 1996; James 2004).
