ABSTRACT
A deliberative system at its best, like all systems of democratic participation, helps its participants understand themselves and their environment better. It also helps them change themselves and others in ways that are better for them and better for the whole society—though sometimes these goals conflict. In the full process of citizen deliberation, the different parts of the deliberative system mutually influence one another in ways that are not easy to parse out. In social movements, new ideas—and new terms, such as "male chauvinist" or "homophobia"—enter everyday talk through an interaction between political activists and nonactivists. The activists, who for various reasons find themselves in social enclaves, discuss and try to put into practice the extensions and revisions of received ideas. Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson suggest the standards of reciprocity, publicity, and accountability as criteria for judging deliberation in a public assembly. These criteria apply in a modified manner to the larger deliberative system, including everyday talk.
