| Peer-Reviewed

The Improvement of Democracy Trought Transparency and Its Limits

Received: 8 November 2017    Accepted: 21 November 2017    Published: 25 December 2017
Views:       Downloads:
Abstract

Contemporary democracies have been configured as observation societies, which is revealed by the meteoric rise of the demand for transparency. This article examines the limits of transparency and its side effects as well as the disadvantages of a purely ocular conception of democracy. It proposes balancing the obligations for transparency with other democratic values that should be afforded equal weight.

Published in International Journal of Philosophy (Volume 5, Issue 5)
DOI 10.11648/j.ijp.20170505.11
Page(s) 44-49
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Tranparency, Publicity, Democracy

References
[1] Rousseau, Jean Jacques (1969) “Considérations sur le Gouvernement de Pologne”, in Œuvres complètes III, Paris: Gallimard, 970-971.
[2] Rosanvallon, Pierre (2008), La légitimité démocratique. Impartialité, réflexivité, proximité, Paris: Seuil, 61.
[3] Giddens, Anthony (2002), A Runaway World, Profile: London.
[4] Bentham, Jeremy (1999), “Of Publicity”, in Michael James / Cyprian Blamires (eds.), The Collected Works of Jeremy Bentham, Political Tactics, Oxford University Press.
[5] Behn, Robert (2001), Rethinking Democratic Accountability, Washington: Brookings.
[6] Luhmann, Niklas (1995), Die Realität der Massenmedien, Opladen: Westdeutscher.
[7] Urbinati, Nadia (2014), Democracy Disfigured. Opinion, Truth, and the People, Harvard University Press, 213.
[8] Fung, Archon / Graham, Mary / Weil, David (2007), Full Disclosure, the Perils and Promise of Transparency, Cambridge University Press.
[9] Naurin, Daniel (2006), “Transparency, Publicity, Accountability – The Missing Links”, Swiss Political Science Review 12 (3), 91-92.
[10] Rosanvallon, Pierre (2008), La légitimité démocratique. Impartialité, réflexivité, proximité, Paris: Seuil, 342.
[11] Urbinati, Nadia (2013), Democrazia in diretta. Le nuove sfide alla rappresentanza, Milano: Feltrinelli, 169.
[12] Foessel, Michaël (2008), La privation de l'intime, Paris: Seuil.
[13] Green, Jeffrey Edward (2010), The Eyes of the People: Democracy in an Age of Spectatorship, Oxford University Press, 15.
[14] Urbinati, Nadia (2014), Democracy Disfigured. Opinion, Truth, and the People, Harvard University Press, 171, 85.
[15] Manin, Bernard (1997), The Principles of Representative Government, Cambridge University Press, 218.
[16] Urbinati, Nadia (2014), Democracy Disfigured. Opinion, Truth, and the People, Harvard University Press, 171.
[17] Sartori, Giavanni (1987), Theory of Democracy Revisited, 1. The Contemporary Debate, Chatham: Chatham House, 87.
Cite This Article
  • APA Style

    Daniel Innerarity. (2017). The Improvement of Democracy Trought Transparency and Its Limits. International Journal of Philosophy, 5(5), 44-49. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijp.20170505.11

    Copy | Download

    ACS Style

    Daniel Innerarity. The Improvement of Democracy Trought Transparency and Its Limits. Int. J. Philos. 2017, 5(5), 44-49. doi: 10.11648/j.ijp.20170505.11

    Copy | Download

    AMA Style

    Daniel Innerarity. The Improvement of Democracy Trought Transparency and Its Limits. Int J Philos. 2017;5(5):44-49. doi: 10.11648/j.ijp.20170505.11

    Copy | Download

  • @article{10.11648/j.ijp.20170505.11,
      author = {Daniel Innerarity},
      title = {The Improvement of Democracy Trought Transparency and Its Limits},
      journal = {International Journal of Philosophy},
      volume = {5},
      number = {5},
      pages = {44-49},
      doi = {10.11648/j.ijp.20170505.11},
      url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijp.20170505.11},
      eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijp.20170505.11},
      abstract = {Contemporary democracies have been configured as observation societies, which is revealed by the meteoric rise of the demand for transparency. This article examines the limits of transparency and its side effects as well as the disadvantages of a purely ocular conception of democracy. It proposes balancing the obligations for transparency with other democratic values that should be afforded equal weight.},
     year = {2017}
    }
    

    Copy | Download

  • TY  - JOUR
    T1  - The Improvement of Democracy Trought Transparency and Its Limits
    AU  - Daniel Innerarity
    Y1  - 2017/12/25
    PY  - 2017
    N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijp.20170505.11
    DO  - 10.11648/j.ijp.20170505.11
    T2  - International Journal of Philosophy
    JF  - International Journal of Philosophy
    JO  - International Journal of Philosophy
    SP  - 44
    EP  - 49
    PB  - Science Publishing Group
    SN  - 2330-7455
    UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijp.20170505.11
    AB  - Contemporary democracies have been configured as observation societies, which is revealed by the meteoric rise of the demand for transparency. This article examines the limits of transparency and its side effects as well as the disadvantages of a purely ocular conception of democracy. It proposes balancing the obligations for transparency with other democratic values that should be afforded equal weight.
    VL  - 5
    IS  - 5
    ER  - 

    Copy | Download

Author Information
  • Ikerbasque Foundation of Science, University of Basque Country, Saint Sebastian, Spain

  • Sections