No abstract

Current political theory applies the concept of reconstruction almost exclusively to methods of critique. Given this focus it is often overlooked that the concept of reconstruction also has important methodological implications regarding the empirical analysis of politics. This imbalance particularly applies to how Jürgen Habermas' discourse theory of democracy has been perceived in political theory. The aim of the article is twofold. Firstly, it offers an interpretation of discourse theory as a contribution to a "reconstructive sociology of democracy" that goes beyond the mere purpose of critique. Secondly, it seeks to illustrate the added value of Habermas' method of rational reconstruction to the empirical analysis of politics.

one of the co-authors of this article, died before its final version could be published in Constellations. He was 65 years old and died on March 31, 2020, in his hometown Lüneburg, Germany. Rainer was an inspiring political theorist who influenced a number of younger scholars in particular with his writings on Reflexive Democracy and International Political Theory. His reconstructive approach in the tradition of Critical Theory was highly regarded for bridging the gap between political theory and the various empirical subdisciplines in the social sciences. Rainer will be remembered by many of the participants of the yearly Conference on Philosophy and Social Science in Prague for the charming wit of his critical comments in discussions and by the members of the editorial group of Constellations for the seriousness of his contributions for the journal. An obituary for Rainer (in German

No abstract

In the quest for a workable ideal of democracy, the systems approach has recently shifted its perspective on deliberative democratic theory. Instead of enquiring how institutionalized decisionmaking might mirror an 'ideal deliberative procedure', it asks how democracy might be construed as a 'deliberative system'. This leads it to recommend de-emphasizing the role of parliament and focusing instead on non-institutionalized actors and communications. Though this increased emphasis is undoubtedly warranted, the importance of parliament must not be downplayed. In the debate about transnational democracy -and about EU democratization in particular -it is widely held that making democracy safe for transnational politics entails finding new, non-parliamentary ways of organizing it. Here, the deliberative systems perspective may be misunderstood as offering an alternative, non-parliamentary route to transnational democracy. This article argues that a deliberative system without a parliamentary legislature is tantamount to deliberation without democracy and that an elected parliamentary legislature is constitutive of democracy as a deliberative system -national or transnational. To substantiate this claim, the article suggests looking at Habermas' discourse theory in a new light, as a sociological-reconstructive approach that aims to explicate the cognitive dimension of modern democratic decision-making. Acknowledgement of discourse theory's sociological intent enhances our understanding of democracy as a deliberative system in two important ways. First, it helps elucidate the epistemic meaning of democracy differently from the accounts given in alternative theories. Discourse theory holds that what generates democratic legitimacy in modern democracies is a particular epistemic quality which the democratic process lends to decisions by enabling citizens to view the latter as valid outcomes of a cooperative practice of collective problem-solving among equals. From this pragmatist