Democratizing Global ‘Bodies Politic’: Collective Agency, Political Legitimacy, and the Democratic Boundary Problem
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21248/gjn.10.2.143Keywords:
global democracy, political legitimacy, collective agency, democratic boundary problem, body politicAbstract
This article outlines a new approach to answering the foundational question in democratic theory of how the boundaries of democratic political units should be delineated. Whereas democratic theorists have mostly focused on identifying the appropriate population-group – or demos – for democratic decisionmaking, it is argued here that we should also take account of considerations relating to the appropriate scope of a democratic unit’s institutionalized governance capabilities – or public power. These matter because democratically legitimate governance is produced not only through the decision-making agency of a demos, but also through the institutionally distinct sources of political agency that shape the governance capabilities of public power. To develop this argument, the article traces a new theoretical account of the normative and institutional sources of collective agency, political legitimacy, and democratic boundaries, and illustrates it through a democratic reconstruction of the classical body politic metaphor. It further shows how this theoretical account lends strong prescriptive support to pluralist institutional boundaries within democratic global governance.
References
Abizadeh, Arash. 2008. "Democratic Theory and Border Coercion: No Right to Unilaterally Control Your Own Borders." Political Theory 36 (1): 37-65.
Bäckstrand, K., 2006. Multi‐stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development: rethinking legitimacy, accountability and effectiveness. Environmental Policy and Governance, 16(5), pp.290-306.
Barry, B. 1991 ‘Is democracy special?’ In Essays in Political Theory: Democracy and Power (Vol. 1). Oxford: Clarendon Press: 24-60.
Beitz, C. 1989 Political Equality: An Essay in Democratic Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Buchanan, A. 2014. The heart of human rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Buchanan, A. & Keohane R. 2006. The legitimacy of global governance institutions. Ethics & International Affairs 20(4): 405-437.
Cerny, Philip. 2006. "Plurality, Pluralism and Power: Elements of Pluralist Analysis in an Age of Globalization," in Rainer Eisfeld (ed.). Pluralism: Developments in the Theory and Practice of Democracy. Opladen and Farmington Hills: Barbara Budrich Publishers: 81-111.
Cohen, J., 1986. An epistemic conception of democracy. Ethics, 97(1): 26-38.
Dahl, Robert A. 1970. After the Revolution? Authority in a Good Society. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
De Búrca, G., Keohane, R. & Sabel, C. 2014. "Global Experimentalist Governance." British Journal of Political Science 44(3): 477-486.
Dewey, John. 1927. The Public and Its Problems. Denver: Allen Swallow.
Dryzek, J.S. and List, C., 2003. Social choice theory and deliberative democracy: a reconciliation. British journal of political science, 33(1), pp.1-28.
Erman, E. 2015. “Global political legitimacy beyond justice and democracy?” International Theory 8(1): 29-62.
Floyd, J. 2016. Normative behaviourism and global political principles. Journal of International Political Theory 12(2): 152-168.
Geuss, R. 2009. ‘What is political judgement?’ In Bourke, R., and Geuss, R. (eds) Political Judgement: Essays for John Dunn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goodin, Robert E. 2007." Enfranchising All Affected Interests, and Its Alternatives." Philosophy & Public Affairs 35 (1): 40-68.
Goodin, Robert. 2010. "Global Democracy: In the Beginning." International Theory 2(2): 175-209.
Habermas, J., 1996. Between Facts and Norms. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Held, David. 1995. Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Held, D., 2006. Models of democracy. Polity Press.
Hirst, P., 2013. Associative democracy: New forms of economic and social governance. John Wiley & Sons.
Joas H. 1996. The Creativity of Action. University of Chicago Press.
Krisch, Nico. 2011. Beyond Constitutionalism: The Pluralist Structure of Postnational Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Krisch, N. 2017. “Liquid authority in global governance.” International Theory 9(2): 237-260.
Landemore, H., 2012. Democratic reason: Politics, collective intelligence, and the rule of the many. Princeton University Press.
List, C. and Goodin, R.E., 2001. Epistemic democracy: Generalizing the Condorcet jury theorem. Journal of Political Philosophy, 9(3), pp.277-306.
List, C. and Koenig-Archibugi, M. 2010. "Can There Be a Global Demos? An Agency-Based Approach." Philosophy & Public Affairs 38 (1): 76-110.
Macdonald, K. 2014. The politics of global supply chains. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Macdonald, Kate, and Terry Macdonald. 2010. "Democracy in a Pluralist Global Order: Corporate Power and Stakeholder Representation." Ethics & International Affairs 24 (1): 19-43.
Macdonald, T. 2018 (forthcoming). “Sovereignty, democracy, and global political legitimacy.” In Brown, C. and Eckersley, R. (eds) Oxford Handbook of International Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Macdonald, K. and Macdonald, T. 2017. “Liquid authority and political legitimacy in transnational governance.” International Theory.
Macdonald T. 2016. Institutional facts and principles of global political legitimacy. Journal of International Political Theory 12(2): 134-151.
Macdonald, T. 2015. ‘Anti-power, Agency, and the Republican Case for Global Institutional Pluralism’, in Barbara Buckinx, Jonathan Trejo-Mathys and Timothy Waligore, eds, Domination and Global Political Justice: Conceptual, Historical, and Institutional Perspectives, New York, Routledge.
Macdonald, Terry. 2008. Global Stakeholder Democracy: Power and Representation Beyond Liberal States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Miller, D., 1995. On Nationality. Clarendon Press.
Miller, David. 2009. "Democracy's Domain." Philosophy & Public Affairs 37 (3): 201-228.
Miller, David. 2010. "Against Global Democracy," in Keith Breen and Shane O'Neill (ed.). After the Nation: Critical Reflections on Post-Nationalism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan: 141-160.
Nagel, Thomas. 2005. "The Problem of Global Justice." Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (2): 113-147.
Peter, F. 2013. “Epistemic foundations of political liberalism”. Journal of Moral Philosophy 10(5): 598-620.
Philp, M. 2007. Political Conduct. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Quong, J., 2011. Liberalism without Perfection. Oxford University Press.
Rawls J. 1996. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Rhodes, R. A. W. 1996. “The new governance: governing without government.” Political studies, 44(4), 652-667.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. 1997. “Of the Social Contract”, in Victor Gourevitch (ed.). The Social Contract and Other Later Political Writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Slaughter, A.M., 2002. Global government networks, global information agencies, and disaggregated democracy. Mich. J. Int'l L., 24, p.1041.
Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (Eds) 2007. Theories of democratic network governance. London: Palgrave.
Valentini, L. 2012. "Assessing the global order: justice, legitimacy, or political justice?" Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 15(5): 593-612.
Warren, M.E., 2001. Democracy and Association. Princeton University Press.
Whelan, Frederick G. 1983. "Prologue: Democratic Theory and the Boundary Problem," in J. Roland Pennock and John W. Chapman (ed.s). Liberal Democracy. New York: New York University Press.
Williams, Bernard. 2005. In the beginning was the deed: realism and moralism in political argument. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Young, I. M. 2002. Inclusion and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric (TPR) is a peer-reviewed, open-access e-journal which publishes original research in international political theory, with special emphasis on global justice. We are particularly interested in bridging the gap between political theory, empirical research, and the study of political practices and communication. 
