Would democratic theory in its empirical and normative guises be in a better position without the theory of the deliberative public sphere? In this paper I explore recent theories of agonistic democracy that have answered this question in the affirmative. I question their assertionthat the theory of the public sphere should be abandoned in favor of a model of democratic politics based on political contestation. Furthermore, I explore one of the fundamental assumptionsat work in the debate about the theory of (...) the public sphere’s status, namely the assumed opposition between consensus and contestation. Questioning the rigid nature of the opposition, I go on to argue that the deliberative theory of the public sphere actually facilitates the development of the agonistic approach to democratic theory and practice. Key Words: agonistic democracy • deliberative democracy • democratic theory • Habermas • theory of the public sphere. (shrink)

Identity politics and citizenship are often envisaged in dichotomous terms, but cosmopolitan theorists believe commitments to “thin” universal values can be generated from divergent “thick” positions. Yet, they often gloss over the ways in which the nexus of thick and thin is negotiated in practice—a weak link in the cosmopolitan argument. To understand this nexus better, we turn to women’s rights organizations (WROs) in polarized Turkey to show that women affiliated with rival camps (e.g., pro-religious/pro-secular, Turkish/Kurdish, liberal/leftist) can mobilize over (...) issues like empowerment, violence against women, and education. However, thick readings of these issues inflect upon collaboration. This has spurred pro-religious and Kurdish women to develop strategies that flag their specific concerns. As such, mutual recognition along cosmopolitan lines appears possible—and is reinforced through iterative encounters—but is not necessarily negotiated between equally empowered agents and entails complex processes of contestation and concession-making. (shrink)

Citizenship issues are in the vanguard of the democratization process of the European Union. As a result, much academic debate has centred on the significance, worth, and potential of the status of European Union citizen bestowed on all member state nationals by the Maastricht Treaty. This article traces the growing debate on ‘European’ citizenship in the form of a literature review. It places the debate in the context of the EU's own evolution and argues that citizenship, whether broadly or narrowly (...) conceived, is currently in a frozen condition, since it was one of the major issues whose discussion was postponed by the member governments at the Amsterdam summit of 1997. Nonetheless, the creation of the status of EU citizen has unleashed expectations of greater inclusivity in decision making which the EU cannot afford to ignore if the democratization process is to continue. The likely result is an experiment in post‐national citizenship based on a multilevel Europolity and the separation of ethnic and political memberships. (shrink)