Page 118 [118]
OCR
116 | THe Putosopuy or Eco-Potitics togetherness in the citizens is strengthened by various associations, beyond narrow local interests. - He sees the free — today we would say horizontal — communication of the differing and independent parts with each other as the basis of development." It is therefore clear that individual freedom is not threatened by the purposeful operation of public power and not by the demand for democratic participation in it, but by the centralisation of power, the decline of associations and the limitation of open dialogue between differing interests and convictions. Bottom-up deliberative democracy would be just as effective a countermeasure for a green or any tyranny in the name of the common good as it would be for the excessive power of technocracy. According to Eckersley, the result of the deliberative procedure is “the economy of moral disagreement”, because the interest of the participants is in supporting their own views with arguments acceptable to others and in learning to consider each other’s interests. This improves the chances of a mutual understanding and, with luck, agreement, but it makes the participants more patient towards the decisions made even if consensus fails. The irreplaceable advantages of deliberation are seen primarily in its being the most suitable for increasing the spirit of tolerance and mutually taking responsibility in a pluralist society, where a people who are heterogeneous in every way has to bear the consequences of the resultant decisions together.'* The participants of the dialogue tolerate not only the presence of ways of life that differ from their own, but on occasion are also willing to learn from one another. In the deliberative process, Eckersley emphasises, there is room not only for rational arguments, but for various ways of self-expression for convincing others or arousing their sympathy. For the Habermasian ideal speech situation is not sufficient for giving the requisite weight to the perspective of groups incapable of rational argumentation, informing themselves or even participation, but nevertheless very much affected 17 T am appealing to the classic of Hungarian liberalism instead of to his sources, Constant, Montesquieu, Burke, Tocqueville and Mill, because his work, as tends to happen, receives disproportionately little attention in Hungary as well, despite being on the level of his Western peers and thinkers with similar views. 108 For the assessment of the advantages, see Nicole Curato — John S. Dryzek et al.: 12 Key Findings in Deliberative Democracy. Daedalus 146.3. 2017. Ian Saphiro’s article in the same issue points out the drawbacks of deliberation.
