ABSTRACT
The idea of a deliberative system has been employed to demonstrate that deliberative democracy should not be limited to the give-and-take of reasons, but can also incorporate a range of apparently non-deliberative actions. Despite the appeal of this move, the inclusive spirit of the systemic turn is indicative of a general problem with its theoretical framework. The problem is that the boundaries of a deliberative system have not been drawn with sufficient precision, such that it is not possible to reach a clear determination about what is internal and what is external to the system. The article resolves this problem through suggesting that a deliberative system should only include modes of action that embody substantive norms of deliberative action. This suggests a more nuanced approach to the relationship between deliberative systems and non-deliberative action than is typically found in the existing literature, which is illustrated here through considering the case of disruptive protest.
