000			01677naa a2200181uu 4500
001			7121216502410
003			OSt
005			20190211163331.0
008			071212s2007 xx ||||gr |0|| 0 eng d
100	1		_aO'FLYNN, Ian _933340
245	1	0	_aReview article : _bdivided societies and deliberative democracy
260			_aCambridge, UK : _bCambridge University Press, _cOctober 2007
520	3		_aComparative scholars have disagreed for some time now as to whether democratic institutions in a divided society are more likely to remain stable if those institutions are premised on a concern for inclusion or on a concern for moderation. But since the empirical evidence marshalled by such scholars is often open to interpretative dispute, neither side has been able to prove its case conclusively. In order to help move this stability debate forward, this article demonstrates how inclusion and moderation can be recast as co-requirements of an underlying principle of political equality. To this end, it offers a deliberative democratic account of political equality, expressed in terms of requirements of publicity and reciprocity, that enables us to see how inclusion and moderation might be reconciled. Moreover, it shows how this deliberative reconciliation may itself provide for a more effective form of institutional stability than can be achieved under either of the two main contending comparative approaches
773	0	8	_tBritish Journal of Political Science _g37, 4, p. 731-751 _dCambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press, October 2007 _xISSN 00071234 _w
942			_cS
998			_a20071212 _b1650^b _cTiago
998			_a20081031 _b1050^b _cZailton
999			_aConvertido do Formato PHL _bPHL2MARC21 1.1 _c25306 _d25306
041			_aeng