Every political call for a public inquiry is an admission that the political mechanisms of accountability failed in real time.
24.02.2026 15:37 — 👍 205 🔁 41 💬 2 📌 0@delibnet.bsky.social
Promoting work on deliberative democracy
Every political call for a public inquiry is an admission that the political mechanisms of accountability failed in real time.
24.02.2026 15:37 — 👍 205 🔁 41 💬 2 📌 0The issue of accountability is crucial -- how exactly would that work? -- but to the best of my knowledge none of the lottocrats has ever provided a compelling answer. I doubt they're actually serious about this stuff, tbh. But the worry all along is that it gives people false hope.
24.02.2026 07:32 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Accountability really is the cornerstone of representative democracy. We must be able to see and appreciate the chains of reasoning on which governmental decisions (broadly understood to include cases of this sort) rest.
23.02.2026 20:08 — 👍 32 🔁 12 💬 0 📌 0What comes across here is how far away Congress is from the ideal of a deliberative democracy. Can that ideal be revived? Can it regain some of its hold or power?
www.nytimes.com/2026/02/21/u...
Pity about its source, but a clear statement all the same of the notion of deliberative democracy.
21.02.2026 12:48 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0This is phenomenal read. The opening paragraphs in particular are about as arresting (no pun intended) as you could imagine.
www.irishtimes.com/opinion/2026...
Anyone interested in deliberative democracy should probably be following this story (a great example of deliberative journalism in its own right). Freedom of the press is a cornerstone of DD. What's particularly interesting here is where the attack was coming from.
15.02.2026 17:16 — 👍 3 🔁 2 💬 0 📌 0An interesting approach to stimulating public deliberation: have each author write two essays, one setting out the pros, the other, the cons. undpress.nd.edu/978026821118...
13.02.2026 22:47 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0"What the Bangor affair underlines ... is that the right to free speech isn’t the same as the right to a free audience whenever you happen to be campaigning in the neighbourhood; and that whatever you have to say, you can’t actively make people want to listen." www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...
13.02.2026 10:25 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0This is very good. Follow the money, and the cynicism, the self-serving opportunism, and you may learn why people speak as they do. www.theguardian.com/football/202...
13.02.2026 09:08 — 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0This is one of the worst pieces of writing I've seen in a long time. Its "he said, she said" approach is both puerile and misplaced. www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...
13.02.2026 07:41 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Day after Alex Pretti killing I complained to BBC about presentation of White House statements and evidence as equivalent. Duty of balance doesn’t extend to complicity with clear lies, I said. BBC could and should report WH making false statements as a *fact of the story*. Today I got response …
12.02.2026 15:34 — 👍 1106 🔁 309 💬 35 📌 17Following in from my last post about the poisoning of public discourse ... www.bbc.co.uk/news/article... Demented.
11.02.2026 23:10 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Can't say I follow all of this (especially Elliott's comments) but, for what it's worth, I've always thought of deliberative democracy as (to adapt a phrase from Brian Barry) a fighting creed.
08.02.2026 22:19 — 👍 3 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0"Commentators note that by casting Thunberg and other critics of Big Tech as quasi‑religious enemies, he turns policy debates over emissions, data, and algorithms into a cosmic showdown between salvation through innovation and a deceptive, authoritarian environmentalism."
fortune.com/2026/02/04/p...
The mild voice of reason this is not. Closer to demented. www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...
08.02.2026 09:23 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0MLK on 'racism'.
06.02.2026 18:16 — 👍 2 🔁 2 💬 0 📌 0Make of this what you will.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...
New edited collection (well, a new collection of some classics): Models of Deliberative Democracy, edited by Antonino Palumbo: www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/1....
04.02.2026 16:17 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0‘It’s an absolute bloodbath’: Washington Post lays off hundreds of workers
04.02.2026 15:54 — 👍 147 🔁 80 💬 25 📌 12“Without debate, without criticism, no administration and no country can succeed — and no republic can survive...And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment, the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution." #JFK #FirstAmendment #PrayForAmerica
31.01.2026 15:28 — 👍 31 🔁 9 💬 0 📌 0Maija and I had the usual struggles with our paper, so it's great to be shortlisted.
31.01.2026 15:54 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Implications for public deliberation?
Some years ago, Shapiro argued against deliberative democracy on the grounds that actual politics is about power and private interests. He wasn't wrong. But what have we done about it since? Mainly, conducted a bunch of mini-publics. Groan.
New from Politics and Governance: Towards an Innovative Democracy: Institutionalizing Participation in Challenging Times (2026, Volume 14).
Edited by Irena Fiket, Gazela Drasko and Giovanni Allegretti
Complete issue: www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/issue/view/479
A clear statement of the essential relationship between representative democracy, political trust and pursuit of the public interest. Though it tends to be forgotten nowadays, this relationship was a key driver of the emergence of deliberative democracy in the 1980s. www.nytimes.com/interactive/...
21.01.2026 08:59 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Ah, yes, those pesky elections.
20.01.2026 16:17 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0"[T]he board of peace would invest considerable power in one man--Donald Trump." Sure, the current Security Council is a mess. But "'it's a space where...countries talk and discuss their policies, cooperation and, very importantly, their red lines on particular issues'."
www.rte.ie/news/analysi...
How about this for an essay title?: "Donald Trump and the Limits of Deliberative Democracy."
Might be a good time to flag this one again: journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10....