ABSTRACT
Deliberation by experts and policies based on an expert consensus are not a substitute for political representation. Tempting as it may be to believe that a greater role for experts and their policy-relevant knowledge is, ipso facto, a good thing, Thaa suggests that it leads to an erosion of democratic politics that relies on group representation, bargaining and compromise. Thaa's argument brings to mind the experiences of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, created by President Obama in 2010, and deliberations and dialogue, expert and political, that took place in France leading up to the 2010 reforms of that country's social security system. In these cases the outcomes represented a balance of expert and political considerations. Political philosophers are notorious for replacing the uncertainties of democratic politics with reliable and unambiguous knowledge. Plato, Hobbes, and Habermas prefer to found political decisions on truth rather than on opinion.
