Democracy, Deliberation and Exclusion. A Brief Case Study on Romanian Deliberation Regarding the Civil Partnership

Analize - Journal of Gender and Feminist Studies, No. 3 (17)

22 Pages Posted: 27 Jan 2015

See all articles by Oana Crusmac

Oana Crusmac

National University of Political Studies and Public Administration

Date Written: January 24, 2015

Abstract

The present article has its starting point in the feminist critiques directed against the theory of public reason detailed in Political Liberalism. These feminist critiques reject Rawls’ model as they consider it limits both the individual's access and also the topics and themes subjected to debate. Starting from the question how and who establishes the limits between political and non-political (and therefore the implications reasonable/unreasonable, public/private, inclusion/exclusion), this paper will analyze Rawls' model (and its reasonability restriction), Habermas' proposals (and the rational argument restriction) and those of Iris Marion Young (communicative democracy), adding in the last part Morgan-Olsen's conceptual frame. The four approaches will be then used in a short overview of the 2014 Judiciary Committee debate on legalizing civil partnership in Romania.

Keywords: exclusion, public reason, legitimacy, deliberative democracy, communicative democracy, Rawls, Habermas, Marion Young

Suggested Citation

Crusmac, Oana, Democracy, Deliberation and Exclusion. A Brief Case Study on Romanian Deliberation Regarding the Civil Partnership (January 24, 2015). Analize - Journal of Gender and Feminist Studies, No. 3 (17). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2555253 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2555253

Oana Crusmac (Contact Author)

National University of Political Studies and Public Administration ( email )

București
Romania

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
31
Abstract Views
380
PlumX Metrics