Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: A central part of Jürgen Habermas’s recent political and legal philosophy is the idea that, in a constitutional democracy, constitutionalism and democracy must be co-original, that is, mutually enabling rather than constraining. Among other things, this thesis serves to make sure that the addressees of the laws can view themselves simultaneously as the authors of the laws. However, there remains a gap between constitutionalism and democracy; even if there is a relation of mutual imbrication, the two cannot be reconciled. As a result, the relationship between them is undecidable in Derrida’s sense of the term. The deconstructive reading of Habermas in this paper focuses on the ways in which Habermas seeks to circumvent the constitutive gap between constitutionalism and democracy. In addition, I consider the implications for how we think about the politics of constitutional democracy from a deconstructive perspective.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper seeks to examine modern social movements (SMs) in light of the theories of Jürgen Habermas on civil society and the public sphere. In particular, the theories of Habermas are used to consider: (1) the process of SM institutionalization and its reflection in his thought, and (2) the concepts of system and lifeworld and how their interaction helps to explain the shifting relationships between SMs and the state. These questions are addressed through a comparison of his earlier and later works, arguing that while Habermas’s earlier works retain a space for SMs as true challengers to the state, his later theories restrict the scope of SM activity to mere reform through representative democratic institutions. While it may be true that SMs are increasingly institutionalized, an unfortunate consequence of the sociological accuracy of Habermas’s later work is the normative affirmation of such institutionalization, through a democratic theory in which SMs have little hope for the realization of revolutionary agendas. Insights from these analyses allow for an examination of the extent to which there is a space for SMs in the late modern public sphere, and a normative theory is advanced in which SMs are conceptualized as counter-institutions.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This commentary traces revisions in Habermas’s normative assessments of mass culture, the mass media, and their influence on the public sphere. The early Habermas emphasized the public sphere’s critical function of holding state authority to public account. But his recent work assigns it the neutral, pragmatic functions of disseminating information and seizing public attention. Correspondingly, he has reconsidered his earlier critique by recognizing the positive political functions of mass media simplification and entertainment.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This essay criticizes Jurgen Habermas’s theory of communicative action from a pragmatist perspective. It offers an overview of the questions and problems addressed by Habermas’s project from 1962-2001. Habermas’s attempt to renew the foundations of social science on a universal theory of communicative interaction fails to free itself from Thomas Hobbes’s civil science. In failing to formulate a research program capable of empirically corroborated claims concerning social interaction, Habermas is unable to directly address the question of how we overcome Hobbes’s modeling of just interactions on contractual relations. Consequently, this raises questions as to the adequacy of his proposed social evolutionary response to the fact of pluralism.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: A rethinking of Hegel's concept of recognition in light of his pragmatist approach to truth, suggesting that Hegel offers important insights while avoiding a basic problem present in Habermas' use of recognition within his democratic theory.