The “Constructivist Turn” in Democratic Representation: A Normative Dead‐End?

Disch, Lisa

doi:10.1111/1467-8675.12201

Cited by 123 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In Latour's terminology, representation involves mediation and translation between various spokespersons and the hybrid associations of humans and nonhumans that they represent (Latour, 2004). In these respects, Latour's account complements the constructivist turn in recent work on representation by political theorists (Disch, 2015). A constructivist approach to representing nonhuman nature is more conductive to pluralist democracy than approaches based on nonnegotiable moral or scientifi c claims.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…This rethinking has included both a "representative turn" and a "constructivist turn" in democratic theory (Disch, 2015). First, according to theorists of the representative turn, political representation is not merely a pragmatic concession to the size of modern states, as many participatory democrats have assumed, but rather an inevitable component of nearly all democratic systems (Plotke, 1997;Urbinati, 2006).…”

Section: Constructivist Theories Of Representation and Nonhuman Agencymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Speaking for Nature: Hobbes, Latour, and the Democratic Representation of Nonhumans

Brown

2017

S&TS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental theorists have often considered how best to represent nature's interests. This essay develops an approach to the democratic representation of nonhuman nature by examining the relation between Bruno Latour's account of representation and that of Thomas Hobbes. Both Hobbes and Latour develop a constructivist theory of representation as an ongoing process that partly constitutes what it represents. In this respect, Latour's account complements the constructivist turn in recent democratic theory, and it suggests a promising avenue for representing nonhumans. However, Latour also follows Hobbes in viewing representation as a matter of unifying and replacing the represented. This aspect of Latour's approach obscures certain key features of representative democracy in pluralist societies. The last part of the essay takes up an aspect of Hobbes's theory neglected by Latour, the notion of representation by fi ction, which suggests a way of representing nonhumans that off ers more support for representative democracy than other approaches.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Constructivist Theories Of Representation and Nonhuman Agencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Speaking for Nature: Hobbes, Latour, and the Democratic Representation of Nonhumans

Brown

2017

S&TS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this sense, articulating standards becomes a way of identifying the standard violations and misuses of representatives' extensive powers (Rubenstein 2014). Because of our attention to contextualized power relations, our identification of standards also is compatible with Disch's (2015) citizens' perspective: we treat vulnerable groups (those worthy of scholarly attention) as contingent on context-specific power relations. Clearly, the identification of standards for good representatives is not the same as arguing that these standards should be applied in all circumstances.…”

Section: The Need For Representative Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why We Need to Return to the Ethics of Political Representation

Severs

Dovi²

2018

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"A [democracy's] prospects for survival is affected by whether actors normatively (that is, intrinsically) value democracy as a political regime." -Scott Mainwaring and Aníbal Pérez-Liñán (2003) T he survival or breakdown of democracies importantly depends on the beliefs and actions of our representatives. For democracies' representatives cannot only suspend the Constitution, arrest the opposition, restrict the activities of the media, and rig elections; they also can bolster political extremists, determine how "competitive" elections are gerrymandered, mobilize xenophobic and racist populism, and degrade civil and political liberties. Even the refusal to denounce racist, fascist, and xenophobic groups can strengthen groups actively opposed to democratic institutions. Through their words, gestures, and even silences, representatives can construct the political identities of democratic citizens in hatred-filled and democratically divisive ways. 1 The performative function of representatives can undermine "the political realm as a distinct sphere of equals" (Thaa 2016). Even more devastating to the legitimacy of democratic governance, albeit perhaps less obviously, representatives simply can prioritize popular policies over democratic norms and commitments. They can destroy democratic institutions while allegedly acting in the name of "the people." Bluntly stated, representatives can advance their careers by selling out democracies.The rise of populist and xenophobic politics illustrates why it is crucial to have good representatives-that is, good democratic representatives. In The Good Representative, Dovi (2007) offered three criteria for identifying those actors who represent democratically: good democratic representatives are fair-minded, build critical trust, and are good gatekeepers. Good representatives should be evaluated by the impact of their activities on democratic institutions. This symposium updates that understanding of good democratic representation in light of recent advancements in the empirical and theoretical literature. The question of good representation is not simply theoretical. Rather, the complexities and uncertainties facing democratic citizens point to the need to recognize and empirically investigate how representatives violate and advance important democratic norms.The symposium specifically attends to the principle of political equality. A major theme of this symposium is how representation helps and harms those who are intersectionally marginalized and vulnerable. By bringing together political theorists and empirical political scientists, it explores how normative understandings can illuminate empirical analysis and how empirical findings should inform normative assessments. As the articles show, such an encounter between theoretical and empirical analysis is not only fruitful, but it also significantly shifts how we think about and investigate good representation.

show abstract

“…In this complex interplay of practice and norms, it seems like the normative standpoint as such needs to be modified, too. As Lisa Disch (2015) argues, theorists could shift their perspective to the "citizen standpoint" as an internal standpoint from which evaluation and critique can be articulated. This might be a solution to the normativity trap, in which liberal theories are stuck, as Jaeggi points out.…”

Section: Practicing Normsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Democratic Norms Following the account of a 'citizen standpoint' (Saward 2010, Disch 2015, the following chapters shall discuss, if these practices are done "in a democratic way". As Disch points out, taking up a "citizen standpoint" as opposed to acting as "self-appointed adjudicators" (Disch 2015:2) facilitates an exploration of the conditions that have enabled citizens' judgements (ibid.).…”

Section: Political Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Doing Democracy Differently

Knappe¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The “Constructivist Turn” in Democratic Representation: A Normative Dead‐End?

Cited by 123 publications

References 11 publications

Speaking for Nature: Hobbes, Latour, and the Democratic Representation of Nonhumans

Speaking for Nature: Hobbes, Latour, and the Democratic Representation of Nonhumans

Why We Need to Return to the Ethics of Political Representation

Doing Democracy Differently

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About