All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Freedom of Speech and Segmenting the Citizens
Unformatted Document Text:  ICA-10-10582 13 a result of some common impulse of interest that threatened the rights of the other citizens and the permanent interests of the community 2 . The existence of such factions meant that measures regarding the public good would be decided “not according to the rules of justice… but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority” (Federalist No. 10). In response to such a threat, Madison identified three possible ways, two of which he felt were unacceptable 3 , to tame these selfish interests in favor of the common good of democracy. The preferable way was to ensure that the maximal diversity of interest groups would provide checks and balances on each other (Federalist No.10). In Federalist Paper 51, Madison even more explicitly argues that the “security of civil rights” is contingent upon the existence of as “multiplicity of groups” (Madison, quoted in McWhirter, 1992, p.61). These statements by James Madison not only show how some of the Constitutions’ framers perceived the relationship between plurality, inclusiveness and deliberation that is free from bias, but they also support the claims we have made about the synergy between the liberal and republican traditions. Plurality in the public sphere does not only ensure a balancing of interests that would enable the functioning of democratic deliberation but it would also improve the participants’ access to different point of views. As Stuart Mill explains, unless the individual has the ability to refute the opinions of others, indeed unless she knows what these arguments actually are, she would have no grounds for preferring either one (1859/1989, p. 38). Public spheres, as long as they are inclusive and pluralistic, make it possible for participants to have access to a variety of people and ideas (Sunstein, 2001, p.30). This variety at the very least 2 At this point, it is important to indicate that Madison ascribed bias and self-interest as characteristics of individuals as well as factions. Hence, according to him, individuals should not be allowed to judge their own causes, because their interests would bias their judgments and threaten their integrity. For the same reasons, Madison claims, groups should not be allowed to be judges and parties of the same cause. 3 The two ways that Madison deemed unacceptable were either to limit liberty of citizens or to give them the same opinions, the same interests and the same passions (perhaps also unfeasible).

Authors: Popescu, Mihaela. and Baruh, Lemi.
first   previous   Page 14 of 26   next   last



background image
ICA-10-10582
13
a result of some common impulse of interest that threatened the rights of the other citizens
and the permanent interests of the community
2
. The existence of such factions meant that
measures regarding the public good would be decided “not according to the rules of justice…
but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority” (Federalist No. 10). In
response to such a threat, Madison identified three possible ways, two of which he felt were
unacceptable
3
, to tame these selfish interests in favor of the common good of democracy.
The preferable way was to ensure that the maximal diversity of interest groups would provide
checks and balances on each other (Federalist No.10). In Federalist Paper 51, Madison even
more explicitly argues that the “security of civil rights” is contingent upon the existence of as
“multiplicity of groups” (Madison, quoted in McWhirter, 1992, p.61). These statements by
James Madison not only show how some of the Constitutions’ framers perceived the
relationship between plurality, inclusiveness and deliberation that is free from bias, but they
also support the claims we have made about the synergy between the liberal and republican
traditions.
Plurality in the public sphere does not only ensure a balancing of interests that would
enable the functioning of democratic deliberation but it would also improve the participants’
access to different point of views. As Stuart Mill explains, unless the individual has the
ability to refute the opinions of others, indeed unless she knows what these arguments
actually are, she would have no grounds for preferring either one (1859/1989, p. 38). Public
spheres, as long as they are inclusive and pluralistic, make it possible for participants to have
access to a variety of people and ideas (Sunstein, 2001, p.30). This variety at the very least
2
At this point, it is important to indicate that Madison ascribed bias and self-interest as characteristics of
individuals as well as factions. Hence, according to him, individuals should not be allowed to judge their own
causes, because their interests would bias their judgments and threaten their integrity. For the same reasons,
Madison claims, groups should not be allowed to be judges and parties of the same cause.
3
The two ways that Madison deemed unacceptable were either to limit liberty of citizens or to give them the
same opinions, the same interests and the same passions (perhaps also unfeasible).


Convention
Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 14 of 26   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.