In this article, Iris Young discusses the role of protests and direct action in democracy. Her strategy to evaluate arguments for and against direct action is a hypothetical dialogue between two characters, an activist and a deliberative democrat. Considering how both deal with conflicts and inequities in democracies and how they define good citizenship, she discusses limits and potentials of those theoretical approaches and practices. Revealing conflicts that cannot be bypassed and possible continuities between them, the author underlines that protests are needed in democracies as much as dialogue and persuasion. She criticises the paralyzing potencial of deliberative democracy, as it attempts to accomplish broad consensus.
activism; deliberative democracy; consensus; protests; direct action