What do you think?
Rate this book
Future Publics: Democracy, Deliberation, and Future-Regarding Collective Action
Scholars have often claimed that democracies, whatever their virtues, are functionally short-sighted. The evidence is we have been unable to manage many long-term issues including climate change, nuclear waste disposal, natural disaster preparedness, infrastructure maintenance, and budget deficits. If voters and influential actors, such as interest groups and corporations, have dominant short-term interests, it may be difficult for elected politicians to act in the long-term interests of society, even if they think that it would be the right thing to do. To solve long-term problems, do we need political systems that are less democratic, or even authoritarian?
This idea, which Michael K. MacKenzie calls the "democratic myopia thesis," is a sort of conventional wisdom; it is an idea that scholars and pundits take for granted as a truth about democracy without subjecting it to adequate critical scrutiny. In Future Publics , MacKenzie challenges this conventional wisdom and articulates a deliberative, democratic theory of future-regarding collective action. Specifically, MacKenzie argues that each part of the democratic myopia problem can be addressed through democratic--rather than authoritarian--means. At a more fundamental level, once we recognize that democratic practices are world-making activities that empower us to make our shared worlds together, they should also be understood as future-making activities. Despite the short-term dynamics associated with electoral democracy, MacKenzie asserts that we need more inclusive and deliberative democracies if we are going to make shared futures that will work for us all.
This idea, which Michael K. MacKenzie calls the "democratic myopia thesis," is a sort of conventional wisdom; it is an idea that scholars and pundits take for granted as a truth about democracy without subjecting it to adequate critical scrutiny. In Future Publics , MacKenzie challenges this conventional wisdom and articulates a deliberative, democratic theory of future-regarding collective action. Specifically, MacKenzie argues that each part of the democratic myopia problem can be addressed through democratic--rather than authoritarian--means. At a more fundamental level, once we recognize that democratic practices are world-making activities that empower us to make our shared worlds together, they should also be understood as future-making activities. Despite the short-term dynamics associated with electoral democracy, MacKenzie asserts that we need more inclusive and deliberative democracies if we are going to make shared futures that will work for us all.
- GenresPolitics
240 pages, Hardcover
Published June 25, 2021
2 people are currently reading
13 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
January 19, 2024
An original, clear-headed approach to the politics-time nexus that brings some needed illumination to a body of literature that's in a sort of stalemate.
MacKenzie's argument for a political approach (over a justice-based one) to protecting the interests of future generations is innovative and convincing. MacKenzie shrewdly notes how justice is not only an inappropriate concept to apply temporally, but also the wrong guiding-line for present action - we have been made wrong by past generations, and, nevertheless, we will have to go beyond justice in our relations to future generations (supererogatory) if we are to have any chance of avoiding climate breakdown.
MacKenzie also tackles successfully the issue of including/representing non-existing persons in democratic processes and the democratic myopia problem. He does this by defending an institutional set up that promotes a future-oriented deliberative democracy. "Deliberation" is pulling a lot of weight in MacKenzie's argument, and the feasibility/desirability of some of his practical proposals (randomly selected minipublics, referendums, an extra chamber, etc.) might be questioned, but his basic idea of furthering democratic inclusion and fostering constrained reason-giving in politics is the most appealing I've found in the literature. I am also sympathetic to his (Deweyan) view of democracy as an ongoing process of collective and intentional construction, which fits quite well with a defense (like Parfit's) of temporal equality.
Surprisingly (for me, at least), MacKenzie doesn't shy way from the relationship between economics and long-term politics, and ends up advocating for some radical-leftist policy proposals (that do follow from the rest of his argument), such as workplace democracy, democratic control over investment and banking, strong action against inequality, etc.
MacKenzie's argument for a political approach (over a justice-based one) to protecting the interests of future generations is innovative and convincing. MacKenzie shrewdly notes how justice is not only an inappropriate concept to apply temporally, but also the wrong guiding-line for present action - we have been made wrong by past generations, and, nevertheless, we will have to go beyond justice in our relations to future generations (supererogatory) if we are to have any chance of avoiding climate breakdown.
MacKenzie also tackles successfully the issue of including/representing non-existing persons in democratic processes and the democratic myopia problem. He does this by defending an institutional set up that promotes a future-oriented deliberative democracy. "Deliberation" is pulling a lot of weight in MacKenzie's argument, and the feasibility/desirability of some of his practical proposals (randomly selected minipublics, referendums, an extra chamber, etc.) might be questioned, but his basic idea of furthering democratic inclusion and fostering constrained reason-giving in politics is the most appealing I've found in the literature. I am also sympathetic to his (Deweyan) view of democracy as an ongoing process of collective and intentional construction, which fits quite well with a defense (like Parfit's) of temporal equality.
Surprisingly (for me, at least), MacKenzie doesn't shy way from the relationship between economics and long-term politics, and ends up advocating for some radical-leftist policy proposals (that do follow from the rest of his argument), such as workplace democracy, democratic control over investment and banking, strong action against inequality, etc.
Displaying 1 of 1 review